Parking Choice Analysis of Automated Vehicle Users: Comparing Nested Logit and Random Forest Approaches
Résumé fourni par la source
Parking shortages and high costs in Chinese central business districts (CBDs) remain major urban challenges. Emerging automated vehicles (AVs) are expected to diversify parking options and mitigate these problems. However, AV users’ parking preferences and their influencing factors within existing urban zoning frameworks remain unclear. This study examines Nanjing as a representative case, proposing six distinct AV parking modes. Using survey data from 4644 responses collected from 1634 potential users, we employed nested logit models and random forest algorithms to analyze parking choice behavior. Results indicate that diversified AV parking modes would significantly reduce CBD parking demand. Users with medium- to long-term needs prefer home-parking, while short-term users favor CBD proximity. Key influencing factors include parking service satisfaction, duration, congestion time, AV punctuality, and individual characteristics, with satisfaction attributes showing the greatest impact across all modes. Comparative analysis reveals that random forest algorithms provide superior predictive accuracy for parking mode importance, while nested logit models better explain causal relationships between choices and influencing factors. This study establishes a dual analytical framework combining interpretability and predictive accuracy for urban AV parking research, providing valuable insights for transportation management and future metropolitan studies.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Parking Choice Analysis of Automated Vehicle Users: Comparing Nested Logit and Random Forest Approaches
- Date Crossref
- 10/10/2025
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.