Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published online January 1, 2017

Sensor Location Decision Model for Truck Flow Measurement

Abstract

Timely and reliable truck activity data are of importance for transportation planning and investment analysis, traffic management, environmental and safety analyses, and operation and maintenance of infrastructure. Therefore, state and regional agencies have used various types of sensors to obtain truck flows. To measure accurate traffic flows with the use of sensors, considerable effort has been made to determine optimal sensor locations. The most common approach has been to focus on capturing the maximum number of origin–destinations (O-Ds) and routes at the sensor locations; this approach is referred to as the observability problem. However, when the long travel distances of trucks are considered, sensor locations that seek observability of O-Ds and routes may not acquire meaningful proportions of truck movements in a large-size truck network when budgets are limited. Therefore, this study provides a decision model that optimally locates sensors to capture the maximum O-D and route flow. A goal-programming approach with different weights that prioritize O-Ds or route flow, depending on a prior objective, was investigated. The proposed model was implemented in a real network in Los Angeles, California, with actual truck flow data obtained from sampled truck GPS trajectories. Results showed that significantly larger numbers of O-Ds and route flows were captured by the proposed flow-capturing model than with conventional observability approaches. In addition, trade-offs between O-D and route flow capturing depended on the applied weights and budgets. Particularly in the Los Angeles truck network, equally applied weight provided balanced capturing of O-D and route flow when sufficient numbers of sensors were located in the network. The proposed goal-programming approach can provide insights for researchers and practitioners for alternative sensor location solutions.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Ogden K. W. Truck Movement and Access in Urban Areas. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 117, No. 1, 1991, pp. 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1991)117:1(71).
2. Srour F. J., and Newton D. Freight-Specific Data Derived from Intelligent Transportation Systems: Potential Uses in Planning Freight Improvement Projects. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1957, 2006, pp. 66–74. https://doi.org/10.3141/1957-10.
3. Jeng S. T., and Chu L. Tracking Heavy Vehicles Based on Weigh-in-Motion and Inductive Loop Signature Technologies. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2015, pp. 632–641.
4. Hyun K., Tok A., and Ritchie S. G. Long-Distance Truck Tracking from Advanced Point Detectors Using Selective Weighted Bayesian Model. Presented at 95th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2016.
5. Gentili M., and Mirchandani P. B. Locating Active Sensors on Traffic Networks. Annals of Operations Research, Vol. 136, No. 1, 2005, pp. 229–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-005-2047-z.
6. Castillo E., Gallego I., Menéndez J. M., and Rivas A. Optimal Use of Plate-Scanning Resources for Route Flow Estimation in Traffic Networks. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 11, No. 2, 2010, pp. 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2010.2042958.
7. Cerrone C., Cerulli R., and Gentili M. Vehicle-ID Sensor Location for Route Flow Recognition: Models and Algorithms. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 247, No. 2, 2015, pp. 618–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2015.05.070.
8. Viti F., Rinaldi M., Corman F., and C. M. Tampère. Assessing Partial Observability in Network Sensor Location Problems. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 70, 2014, pp. 65–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2014.08.002.
9. Research and Innovative Technology Administration. National Transportation Statistics. 2011. http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/national_transportation_statistics/index.html.
10. Roorda M. Data Collection Strategies for Benchmarking Urban Goods Movement Across Canada. Transportation Letters, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2011, pp. 175–199. https://doi.org/10.3328/TL.2011.03.03.175-199.
11. Hodgson M. J. A Flow-Capturing Location-Allocation Model. Geographical Analysis, Vol. 22, No. 3, 1990, pp. 270–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1990.tb00210.x.
12. Teodorovic D., Van Aerde M., Zhu F., and Dion F. Genetic Algorithms Approach to the Problem of the Automated Vehicle Identification Equipment Locations. Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol. 36, No. 1, 2002, pp. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/atr.5670360102.
13. Chen A., Chootinan P., and Pravinvongvuth S. Multiobjective Model for Locating Automatic Vehicle Identification Readers. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1886, 2004, pp. 49–58. https://doi.org/10.3141/1886-07.
14. Chen A., Pravinvongvuth S., and Chootinan P. Scenario-Based Multi-Objective AVI Reader Location Models under Different Travel Demand Patterns. Transportmetrica, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2010, pp. 53–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/18128600902929617.
15. Mirchandani P. B., Gentili M., and He Y. Location of Vehicle Identification Sensors to Monitor Travel-Time Performance. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2009, pp. 289–303. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-its.2008.0074.
16. Mínguez R., Sánchez-Cambronero S., Castillo E., and Jiménez P. Optimal Traffic Plate Scanning Location for O-D Trip Matrix and Route Estimation in Road Networks. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 44, No. 2, 2010, pp. 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2009.07.008.
17. Castillo E., Menéndez J. M., and Jiménez P. Trip Matrix and Route Flow Reconstruction and Estimation Based on Plate Scanning and Link Observations. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 42, No. 5, 2008, pp. 455–481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2007.09.004.
18. Hwang C. L., and Masud A. S. M. Multiple Objective Decision Making—Methods and Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin and Heidelberg, Germany, 2012.
19. Charnes A., and Cooper W. W. Goal Programming and Multiple Objective Optimizations: Part 1. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1977, pp. 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(77)81007-2.
20. Tamiz M., Jones D., and Romero C. Goal Programming for Decision Making: An Overview of the Current State-of-the-Art. European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 111, No. 3, 1998, pp. 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00317-2.
21. Gurobi Optimization, Inc. Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual. 2012. http://www.gurobi.com/.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published online: January 1, 2017
Issue published: January 2017

Rights and permissions

© 2017 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Kyung (Kate) Hyun
Anteater Instruction and Research Building, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697
Stephen G. Ritchie
Anteater Instruction and Research Building, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697

Notes

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 32

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 2

  1. Determining optimal sensor locations under uncertainty for a truck act...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Towards Deriving Freight Traffic Measures from Truck Movement Data for...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub