This paper proposes a systems approach for estimating investment requirements for a highway network with uncertain demands. The problem is formulated as a mathematical program with equilibrium constraints, assuming that travel demands belong to an ellipsoidal likelihood region and that traffic flows on the underlying network are in user equilibrium. The proposed algorithm obtains a solution by solving a sequence of problems. Numerical results from the nine-node and Sioux Falls networks demonstrate that the proposed approach is able to produce a solution that guarantees the future system performance without requiring an excessive amount of investment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
2004 Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance. U.S. Department of Transportation, 2006.
2.
AmekudziA. and McNeilS.Capturing Data and Model Uncertainty in Highway Performance Estimation. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 126, 2000, pp. 455–463.
3.
Highway Infrastructure: FHWA's Model for Estimating Highway Needs Is Generally Reasonable, Despite Limitations. GAO/RCED-00-133. Government Accountability Office, June 2000.
4.
The Highway Economic Requirements System–State Version: Technical Report. U.S. Department of Transportation, 2002.
5.
MadanatS. M.Optimal Infrastructure Management Decisions Under Uncertainty. Transportation Research, Part C, No. 1, 1993, pp. 77–88.
6.
ZhaoY. and KockelmanK.The Propagation of Uncertainty Through Travel Demand Models: An Exploratory Analysis. Annals of Regional Science, Vol. 36, 2002, pp. 145–163.
7.
YangH. and BellM. G. H.Models and Algorithms for Road Network Design: A Review and Some New Developments. Transport Review, Vol. 18, 1998, pp. 257–278.
8.
LuoZ.-Q.PangJ.-S. and RalphD.Mathematical Programs with Equilibrium Constraints.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1996.
9.
ChiouS.-W.Bilevel Programming for the Continuous Transport Network Design Problem. Transportation Research, Part B, Vol. 39, 2005, pp. 361–383.
10.
Ben-TalA. and NemirovskiA.Robust Optimization—Methodology and Applications. Mathematical Programming, Series B, Vol. 92, 2002, pp. 453–480.
11.
El GhaouiL.A Tutorial on Robust Optimization. Presented at the Institute of Mathematics and Its Applications, March 11, 2003. robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/elghaoui.
12.
KuhnK. D. and MadanatS. M.Model Uncertainty and the Management of a System of Infrastructure Facilities. Transportation Research, Part C, Vol. 13, 2005, pp. 391–404.
13.
Ben-TalA. and NemirovskiA.Robust Solutions to Uncertain Linear Programs. Operations Research Letters, Vol. 25, 1999, pp. 1–13.
14.
LawphongpanichS. and HearnD. W.An MPEC Approach to Second-Best Toll Pricing. Mathematical Programming, Series B, Vol. 7, 2004, pp. 33–55.
15.
YinY. and LawphongpanichS.Formulating and Solving Continuous Network Design Problems with Demand Uncertainty. Proceedings of 17th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory, Pergamon, in press.
16.
HearnD. W. and RamanaM. V.Solving Congestion Toll Pricing Models. In Equilibrium and Advanced Transportation Modeling (MarcotteP. and NguyenS., eds.), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Mass., 1998, pp. 109–124.
17.
LeBlancL. J.MorlokE. K. and PierskallaW. P.An Efficient Approach to Solving the Road Network Equilibrium Traffic Assignment Problem. Transportation Research, Vol. 9, 1975, pp. 309–318.
18.
BrookeA.KendirckD. and MeerausA.GAMS: A User's Guide.Scientific Press, South San Francisco, Calif., 1992.
19.
DrudA.A Large-Scale GRG Code. ORSA Journal on Computing, Vol. 6, 1992, pp. 207–216.
20.
MurtaghB. A. and SaunderM. A.MINOS 5.0 User's Guide.Report SOL 83-20R. Department of Operations Research, Stanford University, Palo Alto, Calif., 1983.
