Using Artificial Neural Networks for Recovering the Value-of-Travel-Time Distribution

  • Sander van CranenburghEmail author
  • Marco Kouwenhoven
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11506)


The Value-of-Travel-Time (VTT) expresses travel time gains into monetary benefits. In the field of transport, this measure plays a decisive role in the Cost-Benefit Analyses of transport policies and infrastructure projects as well as in travel demand modelling. Traditionally, theory-driven discrete choice models are used to infer the VTT distribution from choice data. This study proposes an alternative data–driven method to infer the VTT distribution based on Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs). The strength of the proposed method is that it is possible to uncover the VTT distribution (and its moments) without making strong assumptions about the shape of the distribution or the error terms, while being able to incorporate covariates and account for panel effects. We apply our method to data from the 2009 Norwegian VTT study. Finally, we cross-validate our method by comparing it with a series of state-of-the-art discrete choice models and other nonparametric methods used in the VTT literature. Based on the very encouraging results we have obtained, we believe that there is a place for ANN-based methods in future VTT studies.


Artificial Neural Network Value of Travel Time Random Valuation Nonparametric methods Discrete choice modelling 


  1. 1.
    Small, K.A.: Valuation of travel time. Econ. Transp. 1, 2–14 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abrantes, P.A.L., Wardman, M.R.: Meta-analysis of UK values of travel time: an update. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 45, 1–17 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wardman, M., Chintakayala, V.P.K., de Jong, G.: Values of travel time in Europe: review and meta-analysis. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 94, 93–111 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Börjesson, M., Eliasson, J.: Experiences from the Swedish value of time study. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 59, 144–158 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ramjerdi, F., Flügel, S., Samstad, H., Killi, M.: Value of time, safety and environment in passenger transport–Time. TØI report 1053-B/2010. Institute of Transport Economics (TØI) (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hess, S., Daly, A., Dekker, T., Cabral, M.O., Batley, R.: A framework for capturing heterogeneity, heteroskedasticity, non-linearity, reference dependence and design artefacts in value of time research. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 96, 126–149 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kouwenhoven, M., et al.: New values of time and reliability in passenger transport in The Netherlands. Res. Transp. Econ. 47, 37–49 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fosgerau, M., Hjorth, K., Lyk-Jensen, S.V.: The Danish value of time study: Final Report (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fosgerau, M.: Investigating the distribution of the value of travel time savings. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 40, 688–707 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fosgerau, M.: Using nonparametrics to specify a model to measure the value of travel time. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 41, 842–856 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alwosheel, A., Van Cranenburgh, S., Chorus, C.G.: Artificial neural networks as a means to accommodate decision rules in choice models. ICMC2017, Cape Town (2017)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mohammadian, A., Miller, E.: Nested logit models and artificial neural networks for predicting household automobile choices: comparison of performance. Transp. Res. Rec.: J. Transp. Res. Board 1807, 92–100 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Omrani, H., Charif, O., Gerber, P., Awasthi, A., Trigano, P.: Prediction of individual travel mode with evidential neural network model. Transp. Res. Rec.: J. Transp. Res. Board 2399, 1–8 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wong, M., Farooq, B., Bilodeau, G.-A.: Discriminative conditional restricted Boltzmann machine for discrete choice and latent variable modelling. J. Choice Model. 29, 152–168 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sifringer, B., Lurkin, V., Alahi, A.: Enhancing discrete choice models with neural networks. In: hEART 2018–7th Symposium of the European Association for Research in Transportation Conference (2018)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cantarella, G.E., de Luca, S.: Multilayer feedforward networks for transportation mode choice analysis: an analysis and a comparison with random utility models. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 13, 121–155 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Golshani, N., Shabanpour, R., Mahmoudifard, S.M., Derrible, S., Mohammadian, A.: Modeling travel mode and timing decisions: comparison of artificial neural networks and copula-based joint model. Travel. Behav. Soc. 10, 21–32 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Karlaftis, M.G., Vlahogianni, E.I.: Statistical methods versus neural networks in transportation research: differences, similarities and some insights. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 19, 387–399 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee, D., Derrible, S., Pereira, F.C.: Comparison of four types of artificial neural network and a multinomial logit model for travel mode choice modeling. Transp. Res. Rec. 2672, 101–112 (2018). 0361198118796971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van Cranenburgh, S., Alwosheel, A.: An artificial neural network based approach to investigate travellers’ decision rules. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 98, 152–166 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Paliwal, M., Kumar, U.A.: Neural networks and statistical techniques: a review of applications. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 2–17 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Batley, R., et al.: New appraisal values of travel time saving and reliability in Great Britain. Transportation, 1–39 (2017).
  23. 23.
    HCG: The second Netherlands’ value of time study - final report (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    De Borger, B., Fosgerau, M.: The trade-off between money and travel time: a test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. J. Urban Econ. 64, 101–115 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Daly, A., Tsang, F., Rohr, C.: The value of small time savings for non-business travel. J. Transp. Econ. Policy (JTEP) 48, 205–218 (2014)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ramjerdi, F., Lindqvist Dillén, J.: Gap between willingness-to-pay (WTP) and willingness-to-accept (WTA) measures of value of travel time: evidence from Norway and Sweden. Transp. Rev. 27, 637–651 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cameron, T.A., James, M.D.: Efficient estimation methods for “closed-ended” contingent valuation surveys. Rev. Econ. Stat. 69, 269–276 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fosgerau, M., Bierlaire, M.: Discrete choice models with multiplicative error terms. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 43, 494–505 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    McFadden, D.L.: Conditional logic analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka, P. (ed.) Frontiers in Econometrics, pp. 105–142. Academic Press, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ojeda-Cabral, M., Hess, S., Batley, R.: Understanding valuation of travel time changes: are preferences different under different stated choice design settings? Transportation 45, 1–21 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fan, J., Heckman, N.E., Wand, M.P.: Local polynomial kernel regression for generalized linear models and quasi-likelihood functions. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 90, 141–150 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koster, P.R., Koster, H.R.A.: Commuters’ preferences for fast and reliable travel: a semi-parametric estimation approach. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 81, 289–301 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rouwendal, J., de Blaeij, A., Rietveld, P., Verhoef, E.: The information content of a stated choice experiment: a new method and its application to the value of a statistical life. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 44, 136–151 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fosgerau, M., Bierlaire, M.: A practical test for the choice of mixing distribution in discrete choice models. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 41, 784–794 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Alwosheel, A., van Cranenburgh, S., Chorus, C.G.: Is your dataset big enough? sample size requirements when using artificial neural networks for discrete choice analysis. J. Choice Model. 28, 167–182 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Day, B., Pinto Prades, J.-L.: Ordering anomalies in choice experiments. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 59, 271–285 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Castelvecchi, D.: Can we open the black box of AI? Nat. News 538, 20 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.SignificanceDen HaagThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations