Nested Logit Models Which Are You Using?

Author(s):  
Frank S. Koppelman ◽  
Chieh-Hua Wen

The adoption of disaggregate analysis in transportation and other fields has led to widespread use of choice models to describe the influence of the characteristics of decision makers and the attributes of alternatives and choices. The multinomial logit model (MNL) is the most used because of its relative simplicity, the potential to add new alternatives, its ease of estimation, and the wide availability of estimation software. However, concerns about the restrictive assumptions of the MNL (independent and identical distribution of error terms) and its properties have led to a search for more robust model structures. The nested logit model has become widely used in a variety of contexts because of its ability to represent similarities (covariance of error terms) among groups of alternatives. It is not widely recognized that there are two forms of the nested logit model. These different models, the utility maximization nested logit (UMNL) and the nonnormalized nested logit (NNNL), have very different properties, which produce different estimation results, behavioral interpretations, and forecasts. The use of nested logit estimation requires a thoughtful choice from these model structures. Model structure and properties of the UMNL and NNNL models are described and compared, and the differences between them are illustrated analytically and empirically. Although the selection of a structure is a matter of judgment, the UMNL model is preferred because it is based on utility maximization and it has intuitively reasonable elasticity relationships and interpretation of utility parameters across alternatives.

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (02) ◽  
pp. 2050008
Author(s):  
Farhad Etebari

Recent developments of information technology have increased market’s competitive pressure and products’ prices turned to be paramount factor for customers’ choices. These challenges influence traditional revenue management models and force them to shift from quantity-based to price-based techniques and incorporate individuals’ decisions within optimization models during pricing process. Multinomial logit model is the simplest and most popular discrete choice model, which suffers from an independence of irrelevant alternatives limitation. Empirical results demonstrate inadequacy of this model for capturing choice probability in the itinerary share models. The nested logit model, which appeared a few years after the multinomial logit, incorporates more realistic substitution pattern by relaxing this limitation. In this paper, a model of game theory is developed for two firms which customers choose according to the nested logit model. It is assumed that the real-time inventory levels of all firms are public information and the existence of Nash equilibrium is demonstrated. The firms adapt their prices by market conditions in this competition. The numerical experiments indicate decreasing firm’s price level simultaneously with increasing correlation among alternatives’ utilities error terms in the nests.


Author(s):  
J. N. Prashker ◽  
S. Bekhor

The network loading process of stochastic traffic assignment is investigated. A central issue in the assignment problem is the behavioral assumption governing route choice, which concerns the definition of available routes and the choice model. These two problems are addressed and reviewed. Although the multinomial logit model can be implemented efficiently in stochastic network loading algorithms, the model suffers from theoretical drawbacks, some of them arising from the independence of irrelevant alternatives property. As a result, the stochastic loading on routes that share common links is overloaded at the overlapping parts of the routes. Other logit-family models recently have been proposed to overcome some of the theoretical problems while maintaining the convenient analytical structure. Three such models are investigated: the C-logit model, which was specifically defined for route choice; and two general discrete-choice models, the cross-nested logit model and the paired combinatorial logit model. The two latter models are adapted to route choice, and simple network examples are presented to illustrate the performance of the models with respect to the overlapping problem. The results indicate that all three models perform better than does the multinomial logit model. The cross-nested logit model has an advantage over the two other generalized models because it enables performing stochastic loading without route enumeration. The integration of this model with the stochastic equilibrium problem is discussed, and a specific algorithm using the cross-nest logit model is presented for the stochastic loading phase.


2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 88-98
Author(s):  
Nicolas Couderc

How do managers set financial policy? The aim of this paper is to document the driving factors of the financial policy choice and to evaluate the relevance of two alternative theories, the trade-off theory and the pecking order theory. We use a database of 3,659 firms, over the period 1991-2002; our study relies upon the estimation of two qualitative variable models, a multinomial logit model and a nested logit model. We show that trade-off models are more pertinent than pecking-order models so as to explain the financial policy choice of a firm, but none of these models are sufficient to explain all our results


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Alfred Galichon

In this paper, we give a two-line proof of a long-standing conjecture of Ben-Akiva in his 1973 PhD thesis regarding the random utility representation of the nested logit model, thus providing a renewed and straightforward textbook treatment of that model. As an application, we provide a closed-form formula for the correlation between two Fréchet random variables coupled by a Gumbel copula.


2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
GEORGE R. PARSONS ◽  
JAMES L. ANDERSON

2021 ◽  
Vol 145 ◽  
pp. 324-341
Author(s):  
Sepehr Ghader ◽  
Carlos Carrion ◽  
Liang Tang ◽  
Arash Asadabadi ◽  
Lei Zhang

2021 ◽  
Vol 291 (3) ◽  
pp. 830-845
Author(s):  
Laurent Alfandari ◽  
Alborz Hassanzadeh ◽  
Ivana Ljubić

2014 ◽  
Vol 60 (10) ◽  
pp. 2583-2601 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillermo Gallego ◽  
Huseyin Topaloglu

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document