This paper proves that in traffic flow model calibration and validation the cumulative sum of a variable has to be preferred to the variable itself as a measure of performance. As shown through analytical relationships, model residuals dynamics are preserved if discrep- ancy measures of a model against reality are calculated on a cumulative variable, rather than on the variable itself. Keeping memory of model residuals occurrence times is es- sential in traffic flow modelling where the ability of reproducing the dynamics of a phe- nomenon –as a bottleneck evolution or a vehicle deceleration profile –may count as much as the ability of reproducing its order of magnitude. According to the aforesaid finding, in a car-following models context, calibration on travelled space is more robust than calibra- tion on speed or acceleration. Similarly in case of macroscopic traffic flow models valida- tion and calibration, cumulative flows are to be preferred to flows. Actually, the findings above hold for any dynamic model.

Speed or spacing? Cumulative variables, and convolution of model errors and time in traffic flow models validation and calibration / Punzo, Vincenzo; Montanino, Marcello. - In: TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART B-METHODOLOGICAL. - ISSN 0191-2615. - 91:(2016), pp. 21-33. [10.1016/j.trb.2016.04.012]

Speed or spacing? Cumulative variables, and convolution of model errors and time in traffic flow models validation and calibration

PUNZO, VINCENZO;MONTANINO, MARCELLO
2016

Abstract

This paper proves that in traffic flow model calibration and validation the cumulative sum of a variable has to be preferred to the variable itself as a measure of performance. As shown through analytical relationships, model residuals dynamics are preserved if discrep- ancy measures of a model against reality are calculated on a cumulative variable, rather than on the variable itself. Keeping memory of model residuals occurrence times is es- sential in traffic flow modelling where the ability of reproducing the dynamics of a phe- nomenon –as a bottleneck evolution or a vehicle deceleration profile –may count as much as the ability of reproducing its order of magnitude. According to the aforesaid finding, in a car-following models context, calibration on travelled space is more robust than calibra- tion on speed or acceleration. Similarly in case of macroscopic traffic flow models valida- tion and calibration, cumulative flows are to be preferred to flows. Actually, the findings above hold for any dynamic model.
2016
Speed or spacing? Cumulative variables, and convolution of model errors and time in traffic flow models validation and calibration / Punzo, Vincenzo; Montanino, Marcello. - In: TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART B-METHODOLOGICAL. - ISSN 0191-2615. - 91:(2016), pp. 21-33. [10.1016/j.trb.2016.04.012]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Manuscript_9.pdf

solo utenti autorizzati

Tipologia: Documento in Post-print
Licenza: Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 747.84 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
747.84 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11588/656864
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 63
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 55
social impact