PENGGOLONGAN

MODAL-SPLIT MODEL
A. Revealed Preference

 Murni
 Sintetis : logit
probit

B.Stated Preference

 Logit
 PEMILIHAN MODA

 PENGANTAR
 STRUKTUR MODEL
 FAKTOR2 PENGARUH
 TINGKAT PENYEDERHANAAN
 PENGGOLONGAN MODEL
 PENJELASAN PER MODEL
 TEKNIK STATED PREFERENCE
5.2 Struktur Model

Karakteristik Perjalanan
dan kondisi Sosek

Bangkitan

Pemilihan Moda Distribusi

Pembebanan
5.3 Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Pemilihan Moda

Faktor yang mempengaruhi pemilihan moda dapat dikelompokan ke dalam 3 karakteristik:

1. Karakteristik pengendara dan/atau karakteristik zona pembangkit
 pemilihan kiendaraan (jumlah, punya ?, tidak punya ?)
 pemilikan SIM
 struktur rumah tangga (jumlah anggota, pasangan dengan/tanpa anak?, jumlah pekerja/nganggur/pensiun)
 pendapatan
 kerapatan pemukiman
 jarak ke pusat kota

2. Karakteristik perjalanan
 trip length
 tujuan perjalanan
 waktu saat dilakukannya perjalanan

3. Karakteristik sistim transport

Kuantitatif:
 waktu tempuh : selama dalam kendaraan/perjalanan, di luar kendaraan (menunggu, jalan kaki, dll.)
 ongkos (tarif, bahan bakar dan biaya-biaya langsung)
 ada tidaknya tempat parkir dan ongkosnya
Kualitatif:
 kenyamanan
 keamanan
 reliability, dll
TINGKAT PENYEDERHANAAN
Brdasarkan zona : Agregat
Berdasarkan rumah tangga : (individu)

Model distribusi / p.m :

1 T 1ij exp( C1ij )

P ij  
Tij exp( C1ij )  exp( C 2 ij )
5.4 Trip-end Modal Split

Karakteristik Umum:
 banyak memakai variabel zona atau rumah-tangga, misalnya pemilikan kendaraan, kerapatan pemukiman.
 ukuran karakteristiksistem transport biasanya digeneralisasi untuk setiap tujuan, misalnya dengan menggunakan indeks
daya hubung
 per-distribusi

Contoh model aggregate:

Daya hubung zona i = A

j 1
JFIJ

dimana :
Aj = daya tarik zona j (dengan angkutan umum atau mobil)
Fij = friksi waktu tempuh dari i ke j = (1/waktu tempuh door-to-door)
n = jumlah zona.

Dengan mengguanakan dua variabel tersebut didapatkan kurva tiga dimensi (berpermukaan), yang menggambarakan
propirsi pemakaian angkutan umum seperti tertera pada Gambar 1.2. Untuk keperluan maksud perjalanan lainnya (belanja
misalnya) dapat dilakukan hal yang sama
 Tabel 1. Penyertaan Variabel Dalam Pemilihan Moda
Variable (Attribute) Trip-end model Trip-interchange model
Chicago Pittsburgh Eric Puget Southeastern Washington Twin San Buffalo London
Sound Wisconsin DC Cities Juan
Karakteristik Perjalan:
Jumlah maksud perjalan 2 3 1 4 7 2 3 2 2 3
trip length x
waktu x x
Ke arah pusat kota x
x x
Karakteristik Pengendara:
Pemilikan kendaraan x x x x z x
Kerapatan pemukiman x x x
Pendapatan x x x x
Jumlah pekerja se rumah x
Jalark ke pusat kota x
Kerapatan pekerja x

Kar. Sistem Transportasi:

Waktu tempuh x x x x x
Ongkos perjalanan x x x
Ongkos parkir x x x x
Waktu tunggu, jalan, transfer x x
Daya hubung x x x
 Tabel 2. Korelasi Penggunaan Angkutan Umum dengan Beberapa Variabel Sosek
Variabel Korelasi negatif Korelasi positif
% unit yang memiliki 2 mobil atau lebih -0,74
% unit yang tidak memiliki mobil 0,71
% total pekerja wanita 0,33
% pria yang berstatus kerja tinggi -0,74
% pengangguran 0,60
% wanita yang berstatua cerai 0,63
 Contoh Soal 1 :

Dari hasil kalibrasi diperoleh :

C = a – 0.25 x1 + 0.032 x2 – 0.015 x3

a = konstant ( moda spesific) –0.002 x4

x1 = waktu akses ()
x2 = waktu tunggu
x3 = waktu tempuh
x4 = out of pocket

Pada tahun rencana Tij = 5000orng/

Terdapat dua moda : - bus lokal ( B )
- mobil (A)
Karakteristik sistem transportnya :

x1 x2 x3 x4
mobil : 5 0 20 100
bus : 10 15 40 50

Diminta : a) modal split

b) pendapatan operator bus, bila
tiket a = $ 0.5
blia : qA = -0.12
qB = -0.56  = 1

Soal 2 :
Dengan situasi sama seperti soal 1, akan dibuat lajur bus terpadu (BT) pada i –j
yang sama.

Dari studi diperkirakan

x1 (BT) = 10 Tiket  = $ 0.7

x2 (BT) = 5 (BT)
x3 (BT) = 30 aBT = -0.41
x4 (BT) = 75 (a bus)

Diminta : a) modal split

b) pendapatan angkutan umum
c) a) tapi dengan struktur berhirarki

CONTOH KASUS TRIP INTERCHANGE MODAL SPLIT

 U
W
A V
B C
D

O/D x1 x2 x3 x4 x1 x2 x3 % mobil
A– U
B–U jalan raya Angkutan
C–U umum
D–U

A–V x1 = waktu perjalanan selama dalam kendaraan

- V x2 = waktu lain diluar kendaraan
- V x3 = biaya operasi kendaraan
D–V x4 = ongkos parkir
-W
-W
D–W

MODEL BIASA :

 % mobil = f ( C )

C = Cmobil - Cumum

Cmobil = x1 + x2 + x3 + x4

Cumum = x1 + x2 + x3

 MODEL PERILAKU :
C = a + bx1 + cx2 + dx3 + ex4

KALIBRASI LOGIT MODEL

Contoh : 2 moda

Ongkos : - Mobil : C1

- publik : C2 + 

exp( C1 )
P1 
exp( C1 )  exp   (C2   ) 
1
P1 
1  exp   (C2    C1 )
exp   (C2    C1 )
P2  1  P1 
1  exp   (C2    C1 )
P1 P 1
 1 
P2 1  P1 exp   (C2    C1

= exp { β (C2 +  - C1) }

Log (P1/1-P1) = β(C2 – C1 ) + β * 

∴ Y =aX+b
 REVEALED PREFERENCE MODE
CHOICE LOGIT MODEL

The probability that an individual i chooises

alternative j is given by

Pij = Prob (RUij > RUik for all k  j)

RUij = 1 Cj + 1 Tj + ... + Ɛij

where RU denotes ‘RANDOM UTILITY’,

taken to be a linear combination of mode
attributes PLUS on error term (here assumed
Weibull dist.), and C and T are Cost and Time
respectively.

Logit model estimation (currently

ˆ ˆ
using
 ,
BLOGIT) gives estimates 1 2
, , etc., whence
the value of time is derived as ˆˆ 2

1
2.13 of the “traveler surplus” ? (Hint : Remember that utilities Ūj are themselves defined
up a common constant).

2.14 Show that in case of the illustrative example used in the section 2.3.1, the numerical
values of the probabilities of choice (0.45)–(2.22) may be obtined as the solution of
the R.T.’s U.M. Problem (2.55)-(2.56).

2.15 Show that the avarage received utility Ŵ as specified in Formula (2.22) may be
obtained as the optimal value U * of objective function U in Problems (2.55)-(2.56).
(Hint: Simply replace the ezpression of the optimal demands in the objective function
and simflify).

2.16 Demonstrate Formula (2.40).

2.17 Show that the R.T’s U.M. Problem (2.55)-(2.56) always has a unique solution (Hint:
Evaluation the Hessian of objective function and use the fact that all the constraints
are linear).

2.18 Show that when the parameter  in logit model (2.11) is equal to 0. the probabilities
are all equal.

2.19 Show that when the parameter  in logit model (2.11) is equal to . the probabilities
are all equal to zero,except for one.

2.20 Demonstrate Formula (2.35).

APPENDIX 2.1 ESTIMATING PROBIT PROBABILITIES

This procedure is based on results due to Clark (1956), and will be illustrated in the case of
three alternatives. In this case, one may write Max (V1, V2 V3) = Max { Max (V1, V2), V3 }.
If V1and V2 are both normal variables, which in general may be correlated, then Max (V1, V2)
is approximately normal, with a mean 12 and variance 212. Furthermore, we have

12 = E {Max (V1, V2)}

1 2
 12  (12) + 12  (- 12) + (    - 2p1212)1/2  (12) (2.57)
2 2
where (x) and (x) are respectively the values of the cumulative probability distribution
and of teh probability density function for the standard normal variable, estimated at x, and
2 2
12 = (1 - 2)/(    - 2p1212)1/2 (2.58)
1 2
and
2 2
12 = E{Max2 (V1, V2)}  (Y   )(  12 )
1 1
2 2
(Y   )(  12 )  ( V1  V2 )...
2 2

These first two formulas enable one to estimate

2 2
12  12  12
(2.60)
Finally, the covariance between Max (V1, V2) and third variable is

P3 = Cov {V3, Max (V1, V2)}

{(1p13)  (12) + (1p23)  (- 12)}/ (12 - 212)1/2 (2.61)

Based on these approximations, the following probabilities may then be computed

P3 = Pr (V3 > Max (V1, V2)) = Pr (V3 – Max (V1, V2) > 0) (2.62)

in which (V3 > Max (V1, V2)) is the differece between two normally distributed ramdom
variables with known parameters, using the above formulas.
This brings us back to the case of two alternatives (see exercise 2.2). Specifically.

P3 = Pr {Z > ( 12 – U3)/( 12

2
+12

- 12 – 2p33 12 - 212))1/2} (2.63)

where Z is the standard normal variable.

For more than three alternatives, the same procedure is iterated, using the fact that

Max (V1, V2, V3, V4) = Max { Max (V1, V2, V3), V4}

so that
 P4 = Pr (V4 > Max (V1, V2, V3))

= Pr (V4 - Max (V1, V2, V3)) > 0)

The application of this procedure is illustrated in the solution to Exercise

2.3 (See Appendix B).
APPENDIX 2.2 DERVING THE LOGIT MODEL

Pj, the probability of alternative j being chosen, is equal to the probability that its random
utility is greater than any of the order alternatives’ random utilities.
It is therefore equal to the probability of the join events A1:

For a given value of ej, since the ej’s are assumed to be independent, the (conditional)
probability of this join event is equal to

Pj = k j P( e k  U j  e j Uk ; V j

Given the definition of cumulative Gumbel p.d.f. with mean zero and standard deviation,
Formula (A.58a in Appendix A) this is equal to.

Pj = k j P( e k  U j  e j Uk ; V j

where the positive value of parameter  is related to the standard deviation of the ej’s
(Formula (A.59b)). From Formula (A58a) again, the probability density function (x) for ej’
is the derivative of its cumulative probability function:

The unconditional probability Pj of the above event may then be obtained as the expected
value of the conditional probability above, with respect to the distribution of ej:

With a change of variable y = ............, and after some simple manipulations, this is equal
to

with

The value of this definete integral is equal to

thus
e Uj
Pj  ; Vj
e
k
Uk

APPENDIX 2.3 OBTAINING THE EXPECTED RECEIVED UTILITY IN THE LOGIT

CASE
To evaluate the expected received utility, we must first obtain the comulative p.d.f. of the
maximum  of the random variables j. Since the e’s are i.i.d. Gumbel with mean zero and a
common variance , using the cumulative density function specified in Formula (A.58a) we
may write

P ( V  x )  P ( Uj  e j  x ; V j )   e...teu ka harti...?
j

 
 exp 

e  x  U j E


 j 


 exp  e x  U j - E 
  
 exp  exp   x - E  In
  e U j    exp - e -.......?

 
  j 

with

1 
K  - E  In

e U j 

 j 

According to Formula (A58a), this is the expression of the general cumulative Gumbel
p.d.f. Consequently,using Formula (A59c) the expected value is equal to

  E/  K

so that expected value Ŵ is, simplification:

1
W  In e U j

APPENDIX 2.4 DERIVING THE R.T.’S DIRECT UTILIITY FUNCTION

According to Formula (A.69) in Appendix A, given the R.T.’s indirect utility NŴ,where Ŵ is
the individual indirect utility as specified in Formula (2.22) above, the corresponding direct
utility function may be derived as the solution of the minimization problem.

Min W (e j )
(e j )
such that

e Tj
j j  T0  Nb

where T0 is the amount spent on other things than travel, (numerraire), and Nb is the total
(R.T.) budget. The problem is then

 1 

e
( A j - e j )
MinNb  N In 
(ej ) 
  j 

subject to budgetary Constraint (2.67b). The other constraint on the problem is consistency
Constraint16

T j
j N

It is easy to show that problem (2.68), (2.67b), (2.69) is convez, (see section 2 of
Appendix A), and has a unique solution. With the change of variable
1 
 A j - e j j 
Which implies
e e j

1 1
ej  A -

In e ; j j

Objective function (2.68) may then be re-written as


 N 1

Min Nb 
 
In  e  j
ej
1
j  
or Min j e j, since N.b and  are constants, and Constraint (2.67b) becomes
1

1
T e  T
1
 j In j A j  T0  Nb
 j
j
j

The Lagrangean for this problem is (see section 2.1 of Appendix A)

 1 
e )   e -     T e  T
1 1 1
L( j j j In j j A j  T0  Nb
j  j j 

Setting its partial derivatives with respect to the ej’s equal to zero, we get

T j
1 1
 j
 e j

and

1 T j
e j
*

; j

or

* 1  T j 
e Aj - In   ; j
 (2.71)
j    

where Tj is as specified in Formula (2.54). Replacing these values in Constraint (2.67b), we

have at optimality, after rearranging terms

N   
- 1
Nb 

In  
 
T j
 
T j In Tj  T Aj j  T0
 j  j j

N N - 
e In  T 
1*
Nb  In  Nb 
 j
   j

j  j 
 (2.72)

The left-hand side of this equality is equal to the optimal value of objective function (2.68),
i,e. the direct utility function. Indeed, replacing e*j by its optimal value above, Formula
(2.71), we have