Impact of Aggregation and Deterrence Function Choice on the Parameters of Gravity Model

  • Asma Sbai
  • Fattehallah Ghadi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 37)


Mobility is part of our everyday lives. Modeling transport must take in consideration economical, social and environmental aspects of a city. The main purpose of this paper is to present a comprehensive presentation of different formulas of gravity models to estimate origin destination matrix (ODM) using the most used deterrence functions to provide parameters of calibration of trip distribution model. Network managers need an accurate ODM to operate their activities such as failure management, anomaly detection, design and traffic engineering. Thus, to improve the network management, it’s a prerequisite to model the traffic between different zones through the estimation of OD matrix. We will discuss in detail the gravity-entropy model and the generation of this model using entropy maximization approach and we will focus on the calibration process using Hyman methods for three different deterrence functions using a practical application on Moroccan national mobility. We also demonstrate that changing the level of aggregation of data is significantly influencing the parameters values of ODM estimation.


Origin destination matrix Gravity model Estimation Interurban mobility Deterrence function Calibration 


  1. 1.
    Mathew, T.V., Krishna Rao, K.V.: Introduction to Transportation Engineering. NPTEL, 7 May 2007Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hensher, D.A., Button, K.J.: Handbook of Transport Modelling. Pergamon, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wilson, A.G.A.: Statistical theory of spatial distribution models. Transp. Res. 1, 253–269 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Casey, H.J.: Applications to traffic engineering of the law of retail gravitation. Quarterly 100, 23–35 (1955)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wilson, A.G.: Entropy in Urban and Regional Modelling. Pion Limited, London (1970)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fotheringham, A.S.: A new set of spatial-interaction models: the theory of competing destinations. Environment and Planning A 15, 15–36 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Grange, L., Fernández, E., de Cea, J.: A consolidated model of trip distribution. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 46(1), 61–75 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thorsen, I., Gitlesen, J.P.: Empirical evaluation of alternative model specifications to predict commuting flows. J. Regional Sci. 38(2), 273–292 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fang, S.C., Tsao, S.J.: Linearly-constrained entropy maximization problem with quadratic cost and its applications to transportation planning problems. Transp. Sci. 29(4), 353–365 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gonçalves, M.B., Bez, E.T.: A study about calibration methods of some trip distribution modelsGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Abdel-Aal, M.M.M.: Calibrating a trip distribution gravity model stratified by the trip purposes for the city of Alexandria. Alex. Eng. J. 53(3), 677–689 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Delgado, J.C., Bonnel, P.: Level of aggregation of zoning and temporal transferability of the gravity distribution model: the case of Lyon. J. Transp. Geogr. 51, 17–26 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Williams, I.: A comparison of some calibration techniques for doubly constrained models with an exponential cost function. Transp. Res. 10(2), 91–104 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hyman, G.M.: The calibration of trip distribution models. Environ. Plan. A 1(1), 105–112 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Smith, D.P., Hutchinson, B.G.: Goodness of fit statistics for trip distribution models. Transp. Res. Part A Gen. 15(4), 295–303 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Constantinos, A., Balakrishna, R., Koutsopoulos, H.N.: A synthesis of emerging data collection technologies and their impact on traffic management applications. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 3(3), 139–148 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Morimura, T., Kato, S.: Statistical origin-destination generation with multiple sources. In: 2012 21st International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), pp. 3443–3446. IEEE, November 2012Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ye, P., Wen, D.: Optimal traffic sensor location for origin-destination estimation using a compressed sensing framework. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 18, 1857–1866 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kim, C., Choi, C.G., Cho, S., Kim, D.: A comparative study of aggregate and disaggregate gravity models using Seoul metropolitan subway trip data. Transp. Plan. Technol. 32(1), 59–70 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Science Engineering, Faculty of ScienceIbn Zohr UniversityAgadirMorocco

Personalised recommendations