A comparison of SUMO’s count based and countless demand generation tools
summary
Comparison tests use a Wildau SUMO scenario built from OpenStreetMap, city counts and some manual counts and try random trips, route sampler, DF/flow routers, MATSim, CADETS and manual Excel routing. Route sampler calibrated a random-trips route set and matches counts far better than MATSim or random activity, while MATSim produces almost no external commutes. Network coverage reaches ~100% with random trips/route sampler; RMSE for most tools exceeds 200 vehicles making them unusable for peak-hour counts.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (10)
- 0:00Intro
- 2:36Small Scenario
- 4:00Input Data
- 6:16How did students start
- 7:27Random Trips
- 11:39Saga
- 12:42cadets
- 13:34Results
- 15:10Network coverage
- 16:18Conclusion
related talks
21mDevelopment, calibration, and validation of a large-scale traffic simulation model: Belgium network
16mTopology-Preserving Simplification of OpenStreetMap Network Data for Large-scale Simulation in SUMO
13mUtilizing Vehicle Trajectory Data to Characterize Performance Measures of a Highway Corridors
24mTowards Smarter Intersections Through Digital Twins - The Coupling of SUMO and SCENIMINI
19mSimulation-based origin destination matrix reduction: a case study of Helsinki city area
19mCycle-Level Distribution-Based Calibration of Microscopic Intersection Models Using UAV Trajectories
57mSmarter Tools for (Citi)Bike-Sharing
16mTidy Transit: Real Life Data Modeling for Public Transportation