Tour based and supply chain modeling for freight: integrated model demonstration in Chicago

References

• Boerkamps JHK, van Binsbergen AJ, Bovy PHL. 2000. Modeling behavioral aspects of urban freight movement in supply chains, Transport. Res. Record, 1725.
   Google Scholar
• Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2011. A working demonstration of a mesoscale freight model for the Chicago region final report and user’s guide, prepared for the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, Chicago, IL, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with NuStats and Northwest Research Group. 2007. MAG internal truck travel survey and truck model development study final report, Maricopa Association of Governments, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Cavalcante R, Roorda MJ. 2010. A disaggregate urban shipment size/vehicle-type choice model, Proc. 89th Transportation Research Board Annual Meet., Washington, DC, USA, January, National Research Council, 10-3878.
   Google Scholar
• de Jong G, Ben-Akiva M. 2007. A micro-simulation model of shipment size and transport chain choice, Transport. Res. B, 41B, 950–965.
   Google Scholar
• Donnelly R, Wigan M, Thompson R. 2010. Hybrid microsimulation model of urban freight travel demand, Innovations in Freight Demand Modeling and Data Symposium, Second Strategic Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, USA, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/C20/017AHybrid.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer MJ, Outwater ML, Cheng LL, Ahanotu DN, Calix R. 2005. Innovative framework for modeling freight transportation in Los Angeles County, California, Transport. Res. Record, 1906.
   Google Scholar
• Gliebe J, Cohen O, Hunt JD. 2007. Dynamic choice model of urban commercial activity patterns of vehicles and people, Proc. 86th Transportation Research Board Annual Meet., Washington, DC, USA, January, National Research Council, 17–26.
   Google Scholar
• Holguín-Veras J, Patil GR. 2005. Observed trip chain behavior of commercial vehicles, Proc. 84th Transportation Research Board Annual Meet., Washington, DC, USA, January, National Research Council, 74–80.
   Google Scholar
• Hunt JD, Stefan KJ, Abraham JE. 2003. Modeling retail and service delivery commercial movement choice behaviour in Calgary, Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Travel behaviour research, Lucerne, Switzerland, August, 2nd edn, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
   Google Scholar
• Nepal S, Farnsworth S, Pearson D. 2007a. 2005 Amarillo area commercial vehicle survey technical summary, Report prepared for Texas Department of Transportation Travel Survey Program, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, TX, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Nepal S, Farnsworth S, Pearson D. 2007b. 2006 Austin area commercial vehicle survey technical summary, Report prepared for Texas Department of Transportation Travel Survey Program, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, TX, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Nepal S, Farnworth S, Pearson D. 2007c. 2006 San Antonio area commercial vehicle survey technical summary, Report prepared for Texas Department of Transportation Travel Survey Program, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, TX, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Prozzi J, Mani A, Harrison R. 2006. Development of sources and methods for securing truck travel data in Texas, Texas Department of Transportation report no. 0-4713-P2, Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, TX, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Prozzi J, Wong C, Harrison R. 2004. Texas truck data collection guidebook, report 0-4713-P4, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Roorda MJ, McCabe S, Kwan H. 2007a. A shipper-based survey of goods and service movements in the greater golden horseshoe (GGH), Report I: survey design and implementation, Ministry of Transportation of Ontario, Region of Peel, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Roorda MJ, McCabe S, Kwan H. 2007b. A shipper-based survey of goods and service movements in the greater golden horseshoe (GGH), Report II: preliminary analysis of results and comparison of survey techniques, Ministry of Transportation of Ontario, Region of Peel, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Ruan M, Lin J, Kawamura K. 2011. Modeling commercial vehicle daily tour chaining, Proc. 90th Transportation Research Board Annual Meet., Washington, DC, USA, January, National Research Council, paper 11–3329.
   Google Scholar
• Samimi A, Mohammadian A, Kawamura K. 2009. Behavioral freight movement modeling, resource paper W2: behavioral paradigms for modeling freight travel decision-making, in Ram M. Pendyala, Chandra R. Bhat (eds) Travel Behaviour Research in an Evolving World, Select Papers from the 12th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research, International Association for Travel Behaviour Research, 2012, pp. 147–168.
   Google Scholar
• Samimi A, Mohammadian A, Kawamura K. 2010. A behavioral freight movement microsimulation model: method and data, Transport. Lett., 2, 53–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavasszy LA, Smeenk B, Ruijgrok CJ. 1998. A DSS for modeling logistic chains in freight transport policy analysis, Int. Trans. Operat. Res., 5, (6), 447–459.
   Google Scholar
• TRB. 2003. A concept for a national freight data program, TRB special report 276, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, USA.
   Google Scholar
• TRB. 2011. How we travel: a sustainable national program for travel data, TRB special report 304, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Wang Q, Holguín-Veras J. 2009. Tour-based entropy maximization formulations of urban freight demand, Proc. 88th Transportation Research Board Annual Meet., Washington, DC, USA, January, National Research Council, paper 09–1152.
   Google Scholar
• Wisetjindawat W, Sano K. 2003. A behavioral modeling in micro-simulation for urban freight transportation, J. East. Aisa Soc. Transport. Stud., 5, 2193–2208.
   Google Scholar
• Yang CH, Chow JYJ, Regan A. 2009. State of the art of freight forecasting modeling: lessons learned and the road ahead, Proc. 88th Transportation Research Board Annual Meet., Washington, DC, USA, January, National Research Council, paper 09–3384.
   Google Scholar