Decision Models in Skiable Areas - EPFL

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6 MODEL OF DEMAND IN A SKIABLE AREA 14 6.1.4 Second Approach Figure 5: Procedure of improvement of the Basic Model In this section we start anew from the Basic Model. First, a neglected problem in the Basic Model is corrected. The problem is the following: Two lifts succeeding one another have not a way of ski slopes between. In the Basic Model, it is assumed that the corresponding attributes Maxmax and Minmax have the fictive values 2 and 0 respectively. This mistake is corrected in this model. For a fixed lift LD, where the skier is at the end at, and for each succeeding lift LO the attributes Maxmax and Minmax are eliminated from the deterministic term and a constant is added. This constant corresponds to the combination of LD and LO. The result is illustrated in Figure 6. As you can remark, the constants corresponding to ”Col des Gentianes- Mont-Fort” and ”Jumbo-Mont-Fort” are fixed to zero. This is due to the missing of data in this part of the domain. There are five constants which are not significant. More precisely, the hypothesis that this constants are significant has to be rejected. But because the model will be still developed, the constants will be kept and at the end all not significant constants will be eliminated (after a possible changing of significance). As next step, the possibility to avoid the hypothesis that a black ski slope is two times more difficult than a red one is presented. For each attribute Maxmax D O , MinmaxD O , MaxD and MinD, here noted as Attribute D O , two new attributes Attribute redD O and
6 MODEL OF DEMAND IN A SKIABLE AREA 15 Name Value Std err t-test Attelas 2 Mont-Gelé -29.82 2242151.20 0.00 * Mayentzet Combe 1 2.97 0.46 6.44 Combe 1 Attelas 2 1.09 0.25 4.27 Combe 1 Combe 2 0.76 0.16 4.77 Combe 1 Attelas 1 0.56 0.16 3.47 Attelas 3 Mont-Gelé -31.34 4773961.90 0.00 * Col des Gentianes Mont-Fort 0.00 fixed Lac des Vaux 1 Mont-Gelé -1.97 1.02 -1.93 * Jumbo Mont-Fort 0.00 fixed Medran 1 Attelas 2 4.42 1.06 4.17 Medran 1 Combe 2 -27.89 1643908.90 0.00 * Medran 1 Attelas 1 1.00 1.23 0.82 * Medran 2 Attelas 2 1.86 0.16 11.50 Medran 2 Combe 2 -2.78 0.42 -6.68 Medran 2 Attelas 1 1.70 0.10 17.03 Attelas 1 Mont-Gelé -2.25 1.02 -2.20 Max 0.10 0.04 2.87 Maxmax -0.79 0.03 -22.72 Min -1.71 0.10 -17.10 Minmax -1.61 0.03 -47.99 Protection 0.43 0.05 9.30 Seats 1.92 0.12 15.70 Figure 6: Results of the model with constants for succeeding lifts. The star (*) means that the corresponding coefficient fails the significance test. Attribute black D O replace the old one. They are defined as follows: Attribute red D � 1 O = 0 D if AttributeO = 1 otherwise (red level ski slope) Attribute black D � 1 O = 0 D if AttributeO = 2 otherwise (black level ski slope) This introduces also eight new coefficients (and four are eliminated). The new random term becomes VLD (xLD ) = Maxmax redMaxmax redD O + Maxmax black · Maxmax black D O + Minmax red · Minmax red D O + Minmax black · Minmax black D O + Max red · Max redLD + Max black · Max blackLD + Min red · Min redLD + Min black · Min blackLD + P rot · P rotLD + Seats · SeatsLD A first analysis shows that the attributes Maxmax red D O , Minmax blackD O , Max redD and Min blackD are not significant and are eliminated from the model. This Model leads to the results illustrated in Figure 7. For reason of calculus time the constants has been reduced. A further analysis of this model, assuming that the attributes are random variables, shows that in the case of the attributes Max blackD, Minmax red D O , Min redD and SeatsD the hypothesis that they are random variables has to be rejected. For the other two attributes, the hypothesis that they are random variables is accepted. They are supposed to be normal distributed.
Page 1 and 2: Decision Models in Skiable Areas Se
Page 3 and 4: 1 INTRODUCTION 3 1 Introduction Thi
Page 5 and 6: 3 METHODOLOGY - DISCRETE CHOICE MOD
Page 7 and 8: 3 METHODOLOGY - DISCRETE CHOICE MOD
Page 9 and 10: 6 MODEL OF DEMAND IN A SKIABLE AREA
Page 13: 6 MODEL OF DEMAND IN A SKIABLE AREA
Page 19 and 20: 7 CONCLUSIONS 19 • the alternativ
Page 21 and 22: REFERENCES 21 References [1] Bierla
Page 23 and 24: REFERENCES 23 Appendix B: Detailed
Page 25: REFERENCES 25 Numéro Nom Capacité

Decision Models in Skiable Areas - EPFL

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?