产品特征与群体偏好协同下进港航班旅客接续方式选择行为

doi:10.16097/j.cnki.1009-6744.2025.05.014

交通运输系统工程与信息 ›› 2025, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (5): 158-168.DOI: 10.16097/j.cnki.1009-6744.2025.05.014

• 综合交通运输体系论坛 • 上一篇下一篇

产品特征与群体偏好协同下进港航班旅客接续方式选择行为

武笑宇^1a,2，张小强^*1a,1b,1c,2，陈宇凌^1a,2

1. 西南交通大学，a.交通运输与物流学院，b.综合交通大数据应用技术国家工程实验室，c. 综合交通运输智能化国家地方联合工程实验室，成都611756；2.天府绛溪实验室，成都641419

收稿日期:2025-05-06 修回日期:2025-06-03 接受日期:2025-06-11 出版日期:2025-10-25 发布日期:2025-10-25
作者简介:武笑宇(1996—)，男，天津人，博士生。
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金联合基金(U2368212)；中国铁路南宁局集团有限公司科技研究开发计划(K23-2)。

Choice Behavior of Connecting Transportation Modes for Arriving Air Passengers Under Synergy Between Product Attributes and Group Preferences

WU Xiaoyu^1a,2, ZHANG Xiaoqiang^*1a,1b,1c,2, CHEN Yuling^1a,2

1a. School of Transportation and Logistics, 1b. National Engineering Laboratory of Integrated Transportation Big Data Application Technology, 1c. National United Engineering Laboratory of Integrated and Intelligent Transportation, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 611756, China; 2. Tianfu Jiangxi Laboratory, Chengdu 641419, China

Received:2025-05-06 Revised:2025-06-03 Accepted:2025-06-11 Online:2025-10-25 Published:2025-10-25
Supported by:
Joint Fund of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (U2368212)；Science and Technology Research and Development Programof China Railway Nanning Group Co., Ltd. (K23-2)。

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 经过个人信息脱敏后的跨平台客票数据，无法直接还原进港航班旅客的接续方式选择决策结果。为揭示旅客在抵离航空枢纽过程中的接续方式选择行为机理，引入运输产品特征与旅客群体偏好的协同机制，利用进港航班产品的广义费用特征，确定对应航班旅客群体的异质性选择偏好。建立进港航班和接续方式的广义费用函数，包含快捷性、经济性、可靠性和安全性这4个评价指标，并通过Sobol'指数进行影响因素的灵敏度分析；利用改进的K-Means聚类算法对航班产品划分类别，通过主成分分析计算特征权重，进而将对应的购票旅客群体命名为经济型、效率型和体验型；代入广义费用值计算每类旅客对不同接续方式的前景效用，考虑在非完全理性决策情境下引入无差异感知效用阈值，寻优至多项Logit模型的最佳拟合效果，最终确定航班旅客的接续方式选择概率。以南宁市吴圩机场进港航班到达旅客前往南宁站作为案例，以2024年1月—12月航空和高铁客票数据为验证集。结果表明：通过模型拟合无差异感知效用最优阈值为0.54，平均绝对误差(MAE)为12.32，均方根误差(RMSE)为15.35，平均绝对百分比误差(MAPE)为8.9%；该区段单日接续方式平均分担率中，高铁占20.04%，大巴占23.15%，出租车占26.25%，私家车占30.56%。本文可为综合交通枢纽规划与运营优化提供参考。

关键词: 综合运输, 接续方式选择, 广义费用, 进港航班旅客, 产品特征, 群体偏好

Abstract: Cross-platform passenger ticket data, after personal information desensitization, cannot directly reveal the decision-making outcomes of connecting transportation modes for arriving airport passengers. To uncover the behavioral mechanisms behind passengers mode choices during airport arrival and departure processes, this paper introduces a synergy mechanism integrating transport product attributes and passenger group preferences. Generalized cost characteristics of inbound flight products are utilized to identify heterogeneous choice preferences across passenger groups. Generalized cost functions for inbound flights and connecting modes are established, incorporating four evaluation metrics: efficiency, economy, reliability, and safety. Sensitivity analysis of influencing factors is performed using Sobol' indices. An improved K-Means clustering algorithm categorizes flight products, while principal component analysis computes feature weights, classifying passengers into three typical groups: economy-oriented, efficiency-oriented, and experience-oriented. Prospect utilities of connecting modes for each passenger group are calculated using generalized cost values. An indifference perception utility threshold is introduced to account for bounded rationality in decision-making, optimized via multinomial Logit model fitting. The final model determines choice probabilities of connecting modes. A case study of passengers arriving at Nanning Wuxi Airport traveling to Nanning Railway Station is conducted using 2024 air and high-speed rail ticket data (January to December). Results show an optimal indifference perception utility threshold of 0.54, with model performance metrics: Mean Absolute Error (MAE) is 12.32, Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) is 15.35, and Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) is 8.9%. Daily mode share rates are 20.04% (high-speed rail), 23.15% (bus), 26.25% (taxi), and 30.56% (private vehicles). This study provides references for integrated transportation hubs planning and operation optimizations.

Key words: integrated transportation, connection mode choice, generalized cost, inbound flight passengers, product attributes; group preferences

中图分类号:

武笑宇, 张小强, 陈宇凌. 产品特征与群体偏好协同下进港航班旅客接续方式选择行为[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(5): 158-168.

WU Xiaoyu, ZHANG Xiaoqiang, CHEN Yuling. Choice Behavior of Connecting Transportation Modes for Arriving Air Passengers Under Synergy Between Product Attributes and Group Preferences[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2025, 25(5): 158-168.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: http://www.tseit.org.cn/CN/10.16097/j.cnki.1009-6744.2025.05.014

http://www.tseit.org.cn/CN/Y2025/V25/I5/158

参考文献

[1] 陈琳,姚恩建,杨扬,等.联程中转旅客的城市枢纽间换乘行为建模[J]. 北京交通大学学报, 2021, 45(4): 79-88. [CHEN L, YAO E J, YANG Y, et al. Modeling of transfer behavior between urban hubs of intermodal passengers[J]. Journal of Beijing Jiaotong University, 2021, 45(4): 79-88.]

[2] KEUMI C, MURAKAMI H. The role of schedule delays on passengers' choice of access modes: A case study of Japan's international hub airports[J]. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 2012, 48(5): 1023-1031.

[3] TORABI F K, ARAGHI Y, VANOORT N, et al. Passengers preferences for using emerging modes as first/last mile transport to and from a multimodal hub case study Delft Campus railway station[J]. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2022, 10(1): 300-314.

[4] 王子甲,贾慧慧,朱亚迪,等.基于智能卡数据的轨道与公交复合网络通勤方式选择行为研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2022, 22(1): 67-73. [WANG Z J, JIA H H, ZHU Y D, et al. Commuting mode choice behavior in rail and bus composite network based on smart card data [J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2022, 22(1): 67-73.]

[5] GAO J J, WANG Y L, ZHOU J C, et al. Combination model of urban tourism transportation based on nested Logit model[J]. Systems Science & Control Engineering, 2022, 10(1): 865-876.

[6] 姚恩建,陈伟迪,卢天伟,等.考虑出行者选择偏好的出行方式选择模型[J]. 北京交通大学学报, 2020, 44 (1): 42-48. [YAO E J, CHEN W D, LU T W, et al. Transportation mode selection model considering traveler's personal preferences[J]. Journal of Beijing Jiaotong University, 2020, 44(1): 42-48.]

[7] 郇宁,姚恩建.城际组合出行行为建模及应用研究进展[J]. 清华大学学报(自然科学版), 2022, 62(7): 1112-1120. [HUAN N, YAO E J. Advances in intermodal travel behaviour modelling[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University(Science and Technology), 2022, 62(7): 1112-1120.]

[8] 韦凌翔,陈红,蒋金亮,等.基于广义费用函数的高铁票价双层规划模型研究[J]. 铁路科学与工程学报, 2015, 12(2): 250-256. [WEI L X, CHEN H, JIANG J L, et al. Study on bi-level programming model of high-speed rail farebased on generalized cost function[J]. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 2015, 12(2): 250-256.]

[9] FOLKARD S, TUCKER P. Shift work, safety and productivity[J]. Occupational Medicine-Oxford, 2003, 53(2): 95-101.

[10] MOHLER S R, DILLE J R, GIBBONS H L. The time zone and circadian rhythms in relation to aircraft occupants taking long-distance flights[J]. American Journal of Public Health and the Nation's Health, 1968, 58(8): 1404-1409.

[11] SOBOL I M. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates[J]. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, 2001, 55(1/3): 271-280.

[12] 朱文忠, 颜颖,聂磊,等.显性差异特征的铁路客运产品谱系设计研究 [J]. 铁道运输与经济, 2022, 44(1): 36-43. [ZHU W Z, YAN Y, NIE L, et al. Pedigree design of railway passenger transport product with dominant differentiation characteristics[J]. Railway Transport and Economy, 2022, 44(1): 36-43.]

[13] 胡心磊, 史峰, 秦进. 面向票价票额综合优化的高速铁路客票分类定价策略 [J]. 铁道学报, 2022, 44(7): 1-10. [HU X L, SHI F, QIN J. Pricing strategy by category for joint optimization of pricing and seat allocation problem in high-speed rail networks[J]. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2022, 44(7): 1-10.]

[14] 郑宣传,魏运,秦勇,等.一种改进K-means模型的城市轨道交通突发事件分级方法 [J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2019, 19(3): 134-140. [ZHENG X C, WEI Y, QIN Y, et al. Classification method of urban rail transit emergencies based on improved K-means algorithm[J]. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and Information Technology, 2019, 19(3): 134-140.]

[15] AVINERI E, BOVY P H L. Identification of parameters for a prospect theory model for travel choice analysis[J]. Transportation Research Record, 2008(2082): 141-147.

[16] 丁天贵, 谭衢霖,王雪甜,等.基于云模型和累积前景理论的山区铁路绿色低碳线路优选 [J]. 铁道科学与工程学报, 2024, 21(9): 3822-3830. [DING T G, TAN Q L, WANG X T, et al. Optimal comparison and selection of green and low-carbon railways routes in mountain areas based on cloud model and cumulative prospect theory[J]. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 2024, 21(9): 3822-3830.]

产品特征与群体偏好协同下进港航班旅客接续方式选择行为

Choice Behavior of Connecting Transportation Modes for Arriving Air Passengers Under Synergy Between Product Attributes and Group Preferences

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	蒋军, 黄昊然, 李火梅, 付晓娜, 欧阳帆. 西部陆海新通道集装箱货流多因素均衡分配模型及应用[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(5): 114-123.
[2]	王彦, 王则恺, 宋美霞, 方力萱. 中转时间不确定下冷藏集装箱多式联运路径优化研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(5): 124-134.
[3]	田帅辉, 陈安琪, 孙家正, 王柯杰, 张恒博. 考虑枢纽点失效的多分配多式联运快递网络优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(5): 145-157.
[4]	杜鹏. “一带一路”与区域经济发展——“交通7+1论坛”第六十一次会议[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(3): 1-4.
[5]	张小强, 周慧萱, 武笑宇. 聚焦旅客出行行为的空铁联程运输研究文献综述[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(3): 5-21.
[6]	郭姝娟, 许骁, 刘智, 董彦鹭, 华梦颖, 彭康真. 考虑东北海陆大通道的中欧多式联运路径选择研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(3): 32-43.
[7]	胡自强, 魏玉光, 安然, 李晨, 李琦. 复杂网络结构与环境下多式联运网络路径优化与流量分配[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(3): 44-60.
[8]	刘振国, 齐崇楷, 王江锋, 王亚飞. 数据驱动的城市群综合运输通道识别算法与特征分析[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(3): 73-84.
[9]	马千里, 朱琳, 周屹恒, 万民. 制冷中断和请车响应不确定下易腐货物多式联运路径优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(3): 85-95.
[10]	万民, 匡海波, 贾鹏, 余方平, 马千里, 张益阁, 赵素娥. 考虑损耗的粮食装载方式与运输路径联合优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2025, 25(1): 15-23.
[11]	杨华龙, 于果. 碳交易价格不确定下冷链多式联运路径优化[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2024, 24(6): 5-14.
[12]	冯芬玲, 董开云, 张泽, 方源. 基于级联失效的西部陆海新通道网络脆弱性分析[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2024, 24(6): 15-29.
[13]	梁辉, 景云, 孙国锋, 宋琦. 考虑过轨运营模式的市域铁路时刻表优化研究[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2024, 24(6): 126-134.
[14]	周金龙, 张英贵, 肖杨, 王娟. 不确定时间下多式联运多目标路径优化模型与算法[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2024, 24(6): 193-205.
[15]	姜晓红, 陈庆炜, 严亚丹, 韩兵, 李家伟. 基于规则判别的末端配送停留点识别与出行链特征[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2024, 24(6): 232-241.