Hägerstrand’s original framework of time geography and the subsequent time–space prism computational methods form the foundation of a new computational method for potential path areas (PPA) in a realistic representation of dynamic urban environments. In this paper the time–space prism framework is used to assess sensitivity of PPA size to different parameters and to build choice sets for regional destination choice models. We explain the implication of different parameters to choice set formation in a step-wise manner and illustrate not only the complexity of the idea and the high computational demand but also behavioral realism. In this context, this paper tests the feasibility of using constraint-based time–space prism to find the choice sets for a large-scale destination choice model, and identifies a variety of implementation issues. Computational demand is estimated based on a household travel survey for the Southern California Association of Government, and the feasibility of using time–space prisms for destination choice models is assessed with different levels of information on the network and destinations available. The implications of time of day effects and flexibility in scheduling on choice set development due to varying level of service on the network and availability of activity opportunities are discussed and numerically assessed.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Auld, J., Mohammadian, A.: Planning constrained destination choice in the ADAPTS activity-based model. Paper presented at the 90th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2011)
Bierlaire, M., Hurtubia, R., Flötteröd, G.: An analysis of the implicit choice set generation using the constrained multinomial logit model. Paper presented at the 88th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2009)
Black, W.C.: Choice set definition in patronage modeling. J. Retail. 60, 63–85 (1984)
Bowman, J., Bradley, M.: Activity based travel forcasting model for SACOG. Intermediate stop location models. Technical Memo (2006)
Cascetta, E., Pagliara, F., Axhausen, K.: Dominance attributes for alternatives’ perception in choice set formation: an application to spatial choices. Paper presented at the 86th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2007)
Chen, Y., Ravulaparthy, S., Deutsch, K.E., Dalal, P., Yoon, S.Y., Lei, T., Goulias, K.G., Pendyala, R.M., Bhat, C.R., Hu, H.-H.: Development of opportunity-based accessibility indicators. Transp. Res. Rec. 2255, 58–68 (2011)
Deutsch, K.E., Yoon, S.Y., Goulias, K.G.: Modeling sense of place using a structural equation model. Paper presented at the 90th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2011)
Hägerstrand, T.: What about people in regional science? Pap. Proc. Regional Sci. Assoc. 24, 7–24 (1970)
Kim, H.-M., Kwan, M.-P.: Space-time accessibility measures: a geocomputational algorithm with focus on the feasible opportunity set and possible activity duration. J. Geogr. Syst. 5, 71–91 (2003)
Kwan, M.-P.: Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: a comparative analysis using a point-based framework. Geogr. Anal. 30, 191–217 (1998)
Kwan, M., Hong, X.: Network-based constraints-oriented choice set formation using GIS. Geogr. Syst. 5, 139–162 (1998)
Lee, B.H.Y., Waddell, P., Wang, L., Pendyala, R.M.: Operationalizing time-space prism accessibility in a building-level residential choice model: empirical results from the puget sound region. Paper presented at the 88th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2009)
Manski, C.: The structure of random utility models. Theor. Decis. 8, 229–254 (1977)
Miller, E.J., O’Kelly, M.E.: Estimating shopping destination models from travel diary data. Prof. Geogr. 35, 440–449 (1983)
Miller, H.J.: Modeling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Syst. 5, 287–301 (1991)
Scott, D.M.: Constrained destination choice set generation: a comparison of GIS-based approaches. Paper presented at the 85th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2006)
Termansen, M., Mcclean, C.J., Skov-Petersen, H.: Recreational site choice modelling using high-resolution spatial data. Environ. Plan. A. 36, 1085–1099 (2004)
Thill, J.C.: Choice set formation for destination choice modeling. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 16, 361–382 (1992)
Yoon, S.Y., Goulias, K.G.: Impact of time–space prism accessibility on time use behavior and its propagation through intra-household interaction. Transp. Lett. 2, 245–260 (2010)
Weber, J., Kwan, M.-P.: Bringing time back in: a study on the influence of travel time variations and facility opening hours on individual accessibility. Prof. Geogr. 54(2), 226–240 (2002)
Zheng, J., Guo, J.: A destination choice model incorporating choice set formation. Paper presented at the 87th annual transportation research board meeting, Washington DC (2008)
Funding for this project was provided by the University of California Transportation Center, the United States Department of Transportation Eisenhower Fellowship program, the University of California Office of the President UC Lab Fees Program, the University of California Office of the President Multicampus Research Program Initiative Sustainable Transportation, and the Southern California Association of Governments. The contents of this paper do not constitute a policy at any level of government.
About this article
Cite this article
Yoon, S.Y., Deutsch, K., Chen, Y. et al. Feasibility of using time–space prism to represent available opportunities and choice sets for destination choice models in the context of dynamic urban environments. Transportation 39, 807–823 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9407-8
- Time–space prism
- Choice set building
- Location choice
- Flexibility in scheduling
- Dynamic urban environment