Journals / Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 2

AN ANALYSIS FOR MODE CHOICE PREFERENCES BETWEEN ANKARA AND ISTANBUL

Pages
727–739
Publication Date
2021-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Also a contribution for the related literature via a case-study is another aim of this work.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study we conduct a survey which asks the respondents to evaluate the transportation modes based on “trip time”, “trip cost”, “comfort”, “reliability” variables whether they use or not the mode.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It is assumed that the choices made based on “utility theory” and Multinomial Logit Model (MLM) incorporated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Also a contribution for the related literature via a case-study is another aim of this work.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:High speed rail · transportation mode choice · modal distribution

Abstract

In this study we conduct a survey which asks the respondents to evaluate the transportation modes based on “trip time”, “trip cost”, “comfort”, “reliability” variables whether they use or not the mode. It is assumed that the choices made based on “utility theory” and Multinomial Logit Model (MLM) incorporated. Utility functions for all modes (air, intercity bus, rail and private car) that serve between Ankara and Istanbul incorporated to the model presented. The weights of variables that effects choice probabilities used in utility function are calculated and then aimed modal distributions with required probability expressions. Finally modal distribution percentages are calculated for HSR (High Speed Rail System) in-operation as well as other three modes. Calculated modal distribution percentages are 51,91 % for intercity bus, 20,70 % for private car, 19,96 % for air and 7,43 % for HSR. With this study, we aimed that decision makers will be able to make more realistic projections and to develop a useful tool to help them made best possible transportation investments. Also a contribution for the related literature via a case-study is another aim of this work.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜRSOY, M., GÜNDOĞAR, S. Ş. K., TANRIVERDİ, S. C., ALÇURA, G. A. (2021). AN ANALYSIS FOR MODE CHOICE PREFERENCES BETWEEN ANKARA AND ISTANBUL. Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 2, 727–739. https://ajindex.com/articles/418948

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Turkish State Railways Website, http://www.tcdd.gov.tr/content/57 (Accessed: July 27, 2017)
  2. Dell’Olio, L., A. Ibeas, and P. Cecı´n. Modelling user perception of bus transit quality. Transport Policy, Vol. 17, No. 6, 2010, pp.388–397
  3. Kızıltaş, M. Ç. Yüksek hızlı demiryolları mevcut durum, gelişme eğilimleri, Türkiye ve Dünyadaki örneklerin değerlendirilmesi, İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Yüksek lisans tezi,2013
  4. Givoni, M. Development and Impact of the Modern High‐speed Train: A Review. Transport reviews. Vol 26, No. 5, pp.593-611
  5. Roth, D.L. State of the art practices in high speed rail ridership forecasting. High speed rail in the US: super trains for the new millennium. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Gordon & Breech, pp.52-80
  6. Cohen, G., Erlbaum, N.S. and Hartgen, D.T. Intercity rail travel models. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 673, 1978, pp. 21-25
  7. Brand, D., Parody, T.E., Hsu, P.S. and Tierney, K. Forecasting high-speed rail ridership. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1342, 1992, pp. 12-18
  8. Marwick, P. Florida high speed and intercity rail market and ridership study: final report. KPMG in association with ICF Kaiser Engineers, Inc., Midwest System Sciences, Resource Systems Group, Comsis Corporation and Transportation Consulting Group, Florida Department of Transportation, 1993
  9. Chu, C. and Chen, X. Forecasting the patronage of high speed rail in Southern California Proceedings of the 8th REAAA conference, 1995, pp. 377-382
  10. Charles River Associates. Independent ridership and passenger revenue projections for high speed rail alternatives in California. Prepared for the California high-speed rail authority, Parsons Brinckerhoff Cambridge Systematics Systra, 2000
  11. Grayson, A. Disaggregate model of mode choice in intercity travel. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 835, 1981, pp. 36-42
  12. TMS/Benesch High Speed Rail Consultants. Tri-state study of high speed rail service: Chicago-Milwaukee-Twin cities corridor. Illinois, Minnesota, and Wisconsin Departments of Transportation., 1991
  13. Forinash, C. and Koppelman, F.S. Application and interpretation of nested logit models of intercity mode choice. Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1413, 1993, pp. 98-106
  14. Bhat, C.R. A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 29, No.6, 1995, pp. 471-483
  15. Bhat, C.R. An endogenous segmentation mode choice model with an application to intercit