Loading…

Optimization Models for Transportation Project Programming Process

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 buil...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of transportation engineering 1995-01, Vol.121 (1), p.14-26
Main Authors: Niemeier, Debbie A, Zabinsky, Zelda B, Zeng, Zhaohui, Rutherford, G. Scott
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593
container_end_page 26
container_issue 1
container_start_page 14
container_title Journal of transportation engineering
container_volume 121
creator Niemeier, Debbie A
Zabinsky, Zelda B
Zeng, Zhaohui
Rutherford, G. Scott
description 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_25946368</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>25946368</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEQgIMoWKv_oQeR9rCayWMfgoda64tKBSt6C2k2KVt2NzXZHvTXm3W1RxPIDOSbyeRD6AzwOeAYLobjl8l0hBNKo4wl70PIMj4CApcwBDbaQz3IGI04o_E-6u2wQ3Tk_RpjYAkmPXQ93zRFVXzJprD14MnmuvQDY91g4WTtN9Y13c2zs2utmjaunKyqol61udLeH6MDI0uvT35jH73eTheT-2g2v3uYjGeRZDhuoliDyaiOaczzJWeEpCqlTOklSzlZ6lzmCWiSEWY4SGwkM2mieI51rlNieEb76Kzru3H2Y6t9I6rCK12WstZ26wXhGQvd0wBedaBy1nunjdi4opLuUwAWrTohWnWidSJaJ6JVJ4I6ETYL9ae_D0mvZGmCCVX4XRPKMAVOAvbWYYHSYm23rg7fF4-L5-nNAw6GCeB2_ZzAuvxvgn8H-AbsdYhA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>25946368</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Optimization Models for Transportation Project Programming Process</title><source>ASCE library</source><creator>Niemeier, Debbie A ; Zabinsky, Zelda B ; Zeng, Zhaohui ; Rutherford, G. Scott</creator><creatorcontrib>Niemeier, Debbie A ; Zabinsky, Zelda B ; Zeng, Zhaohui ; Rutherford, G. Scott</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0733-947X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-5436</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JTPEDI</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; Exact sciences and technology ; Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction ; TECHNICAL PAPERS ; Transportation planning, management and economics</subject><ispartof>Journal of transportation engineering, 1995-01, Vol.121 (1), p.14-26</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 1995 American Society of Civil Engineers</rights><rights>1995 INIST-CNRS</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)$$EPDF$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)$$EHTML$$P50$$Gasce$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3252,4024,10068,27923,27924,27925,76191,76199</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=3403152$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Niemeier, Debbie A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zabinsky, Zelda B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeng, Zhaohui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutherford, G. Scott</creatorcontrib><title>Optimization Models for Transportation Project Programming Process</title><title>Journal of transportation engineering</title><description>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.</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction</subject><subject>TECHNICAL PAPERS</subject><subject>Transportation planning, management and economics</subject><issn>0733-947X</issn><issn>1943-5436</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1995</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEQgIMoWKv_oQeR9rCayWMfgoda64tKBSt6C2k2KVt2NzXZHvTXm3W1RxPIDOSbyeRD6AzwOeAYLobjl8l0hBNKo4wl70PIMj4CApcwBDbaQz3IGI04o_E-6u2wQ3Tk_RpjYAkmPXQ93zRFVXzJprD14MnmuvQDY91g4WTtN9Y13c2zs2utmjaunKyqol61udLeH6MDI0uvT35jH73eTheT-2g2v3uYjGeRZDhuoliDyaiOaczzJWeEpCqlTOklSzlZ6lzmCWiSEWY4SGwkM2mieI51rlNieEb76Kzru3H2Y6t9I6rCK12WstZ26wXhGQvd0wBedaBy1nunjdi4opLuUwAWrTohWnWidSJaJ6JVJ4I6ETYL9ae_D0mvZGmCCVX4XRPKMAVOAvbWYYHSYm23rg7fF4-L5-nNAw6GCeB2_ZzAuvxvgn8H-AbsdYhA</recordid><startdate>199501</startdate><enddate>199501</enddate><creator>Niemeier, Debbie A</creator><creator>Zabinsky, Zelda B</creator><creator>Zeng, Zhaohui</creator><creator>Rutherford, G. Scott</creator><general>American Society of Civil Engineers</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199501</creationdate><title>Optimization Models for Transportation Project Programming Process</title><author>Niemeier, Debbie A ; Zabinsky, Zelda B ; Zeng, Zhaohui ; Rutherford, G. Scott</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1995</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction</topic><topic>TECHNICAL PAPERS</topic><topic>Transportation planning, management and economics</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Niemeier, Debbie A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zabinsky, Zelda B</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeng, Zhaohui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rutherford, G. Scott</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of transportation engineering</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Niemeier, Debbie A</au><au>Zabinsky, Zelda B</au><au>Zeng, Zhaohui</au><au>Rutherford, G. Scott</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Optimization Models for Transportation Project Programming Process</atitle><jtitle>Journal of transportation engineering</jtitle><date>1995-01</date><risdate>1995</risdate><volume>121</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>14</spage><epage>26</epage><pages>14-26</pages><issn>0733-947X</issn><eissn>1943-5436</eissn><coden>JTPEDI</coden><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Reston, VA</cop><pub>American Society of Civil Engineers</pub><doi>10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0733-947X
ispartof Journal of transportation engineering, 1995-01, Vol.121 (1), p.14-26
issn 0733-947X
1943-5436
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_25946368
source ASCE library
subjects Applied sciences
Exact sciences and technology
Ground, air and sea transportation, marine construction
TECHNICAL PAPERS
Transportation planning, management and economics
title Optimization Models for Transportation Project Programming Process
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T21%3A42%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Optimization%20Models%20for%20Transportation%20Project%20Programming%20Process&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20transportation%20engineering&rft.au=Niemeier,%20Debbie%20A&rft.date=1995-01&rft.volume=121&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=14&rft.epage=26&rft.pages=14-26&rft.issn=0733-947X&rft.eissn=1943-5436&rft.coden=JTPEDI&rft_id=info:doi/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(1995)121:1(14)&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E25946368%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a406t-6e1f93e6365db54228c834ceb4852bedad71e2924f51a0fa4f87c5d0ede82f593%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=25946368&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true