Advertisement

A Game-Theoretic Approach to the Analysis of Traffic Assignment

  • Caixia Li
  • Sreenatha G. Anavatti
  • Tapabrata Ray
  • Hyungbo Shim
Conference paper
Part of the Proceedings in Adaptation, Learning and Optimization book series (PALO, volume 8)

Abstract

In order to improve the cooperation between traffic management and travellers, traffic assignment is the key component. In terms of the traffic assignment, it can be classified into two models based on the behavior assumption governing route choices: the User Equilibrium (UE) and System Optimum (SO) traffic assignment. By the definition of UE and SO traffic assignment, traffic users usually competitively choose the least cost routes to minimize their own travel cost, while system optimum traffic assignment requires traffic users work cooperatively to minimize overall cost in road network. Thus, the paradox of benefits between UE and SO makes both of them are not practical. Thus, a solution technique needs to be proposed to balance between UE and SO models, which can compromise both sides and give more feasible traffic assignments. In this paper, Stackelberg game theory is introduced to the traffic assignment, which can achieve the trade-off process between traffic management and travellers. Since the traditional traffic assignments have low convergence rates, the gradient projection algorithm is proposed to improve the efficiency of the traffic assignment.

Keywords

Traffic management Traffic assignment Route choices Stakelberg game theory 

References

  1. 1.
    Wardrop, J. G.: Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research. In ICE Proceedings: Engineering Divisions, volume 1, pages 325–362. Thomas Telford. Road paper (1952).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haurie, A., and Marcotte, P.: On the relationship between nashcournot and wardrop equilibria. Networks, vol. 15 (3), pp. 295–308 (1985).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harker, T.P.,: Multiple equilibrium behaviours on networks, Transportation Science, 22(1), pp. 39–46, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vuren, T. V., Vliet, D. V. and Smith, M. J.: Combined equilibrium in a network with partial route guidance. In Traffic control methods. Proceedings of the fifth NG foundation conference, California. (1990).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wie, B.-W.: A differential game model of nash equilibrium on a congested traffic network. Networks, vol. 23(6), pp. 557–565 (1993).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wie, B.-W.: A differential game approach to the dynamic mixed behavior traffic network equilibrium problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 83(1), pp. 117–136 (1995).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friez, T.L., Mookherjee, R., and Yao, T.,: Securitizing congestion: the congestion call option, Transportation Research, Part B: Methodological, 42(5), pp. 407–437, 2008.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kumar, A. and Peeta, S.: Strategies to Enhance the Performance of Path-Based Static Traffic Assignment Algorithms, Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, 29:5, pp. 330–341 (2014).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Korilis, A.Y., Lazar, A.A., and Orda, A.: Achieving network optima using Stackelberg routing strategies, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 5(1), pp. 161–173, 1997.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Altman, E., Basar, T and Srikant, R.: Nash equilibria for combined flow control and routing in networks: Asymptotic behavior for a large number of users. Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, 47(6), pp. 917–930 (2002).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    La, R. J. and Anantharam, V.: Optimal routing control: Repeated game approach. Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, 47(3), pp. 437–450 (2002).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sislak, D., Volf, P. and Pechoucek, M.: Agent-based cooperative decentralized airplane-collision avoidance. Intelligent Transportation Systems, IEEE, 12(1), pp. 36–46 (2011).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tong, C. O. and Wong, S. C.: A predictive dynamic traffic assignment model in congested capacity-constrained road networks. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 34(8), pp. 625–644 (2000).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Altman, E., Basar, T, Jimenez, T and Shimkin, N.: Competitive routing in networks with polynomial costs. Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on, 47(1), pp. 92–96 (2002).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Huang, H. J. and Lam, W. H.: Modeling and solving the dynamic user equilibrium route and departure time choice problem in network with queues. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 36(3), pp. 253–273 (2002).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caixia Li
    • 1
  • Sreenatha G. Anavatti
    • 1
  • Tapabrata Ray
    • 1
  • Hyungbo Shim
    • 2
  1. 1.UNSW CanberraCampbellAustralia
  2. 2.Seoul National UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations