OPTIMIZATION MODELS FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECT PROGRAMMING PROCESS

被引:8
作者
NIEMEIER, DA
ZABINSKY, ZB
ZENG, ZH
RUTHERFORD, GS
机构
[1] Dept Of Civ. And Envir. Engrg., Univ. Of California, Davis, CA, 95616
[2] Univ. Of Washington, Seattle, WA
[3] Univ. Of Washington, Seattle, WA
[4] Dept Of Civ. Engrg., Univ. Of Washington, Seattle, WA
来源
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING-ASCE | 1995年 / 121卷 / 01期
关键词
D O I
10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
Five optimization models are constructed for selecting an optimal subset of projects submitted for a statewide programming process. Our approach develops models that are consistent with user needs and appropriate for the assumptions used in the project prioritization process. Each of the models builds on a basic linear-programming formulation in which a maximization of benefits and minimization of costs is desired. The five models include the following: a priority index that provides a ranking of projects but does not directly facilitate trade-offs between project costs and the ranks (model 1); a model that incorporates a formal approach to making trade-offs between rank and cost (model 2); a model that explicitly includes policy objectives by setting a fixed goal for each objective (model 3); a model that includes a strict budget constraint in addition to requiring that funded projects equal or exceed a fixed goal for each policy objective (model 4); and finally, a model that combines the relative rankings and a budgetary constraint (model 5). Models 2-5 are developed in both a continuous and integer variable format, thus generating nine optimization approaches. Models 4 and 5 also introduce a method for determining the improvement in the overall transportation-system performance, given the current budget and decision-maker objectives.
引用
收藏
页码:14 / 26
页数:13
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
Dasarathy B.V., SMART: Similarity measure for anchored ranking technique for the analysis of multidimensional data analysis, IEEE Transp. On Systems Mgmt. And Cybernetics, SMC, 6, 10, pp. 708-711, (1976)
[2]  
Humphrey T., Summary of findings, issues in statewide transportation planning, Special Rep, 146, pp. 91-98, (1974)
[3]  
Hwang C.-L., Yoon K., Multiple attribute decision making: Methods and applications, a state of the art survey, Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, (1981)
[4]  
Ignizio J.P., An introduction to goal programming with applications in urban systems., Comp.. Envir., and Urban Systems, 5, pp. 15-33, (1980)
[5]  
Lee S.M., Goal Programming for Decision Analysis, (1972)
[6]  
Martel J., Aouni B., Incorporating the decision-maker’s preferences in the goal programming model, J. Opl. Res. Soc, 41, 12, pp. 1121-1132, (1990)
[7]  
Mc farland W., Memmott J., Ranking highway construction projects: Comparison of benefit-cost analysis with other techniques, Transp. Res. Record, 1116, pp. 1-9, (1987)
[8]  
Melinyshyn W., Transportation planning improvement priorities: Development of a methodology, Hwy. Res. Record, 458, pp. 1-12, (1971)
[9]  
Murty K.G., Linear Programming, (1983)
[10]  
Muthusubramanyam M., Sinha K., Optimization approach in highway system analysis and programming, Transp. Res. Record, 867, pp. 12-19, (1982)