An automatic tuning strategy for local fuzzy logic ramp metering algorithm using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)

Freeway systems are becoming more congested each day. One contribution to freeway traffic congestion comprises platoons of on-ramp traffic merging into freeway mainlines. As a relatively low-cost countermeasure to the problem, ramp meters are being deployed in both directions of an 11-mile section of I-95 in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The local Fuzzy Logic (FL) ramp metering algorithm implemented in Seattle, Washington, has been selected for deployment. The FL ramp metering algorithm is powered by the Fuzzy Logic Controller (FLC). The FLC depends on a series of parameters that can significantly alter the behavior of the controller, thus affecting the performance of ramp meters. However, the most suitable values for these parameters are often difficult to determine, as they vary with current traffic conditions. Thus, for optimum performance, the parameter values must be fine-tuned. This research presents a new method of fine tuning the FLC parameters using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). PSO attempts to optimize several important parameters of the FLC. The objective function of the optimization model incorporates the METANET macroscopic traffic flow model to minimize delay time, subject to the constraints of reasonable ranges of ramp metering rates and FLC parameters. To further improve the performance, a short-term traffic forecasting module using a discrete Kalman filter was incorporated to predict the downstream freeway mainline occupancy. This helps to detect the presence of downstream bottlenecks. The CORSIM microscopic simulation model was selected as the platform to evaluate the performance of the proposed PSO tuning strategy. The ramp-metering algorithm incorporating the tuning strategy was implemented using CORSIM's run-time extension (RTE) and was tested on the aforementioned I-95 corridor. The performance of the FLC with PSO tuning was compared with the performance of the existing FLC without PSO tuning. The results show that the FLC with PSO tuning outperforms the existing FL metering, fixed-time metering, and existing conditions without metering in terms of total travel time savings, average speed, and system-wide throughput.

Indirect Cost Factors In Menu Pricing

In the discussion - Indirect Cost Factors in Menu Pricing – by David V. Pavesic, Associate Professor, Hotel, Restaurant and Travel Administration at Georgia State University, Associate Professor Pavesic initially states: “Rational pricing methodologies have traditionally employed quantitative factors to mark up food and beverage or food and labor because these costs can be isolated and allocated to specific menu items. There are, however, a number of indirect costs that can influence the price charged because they provide added value to the customer or are affected by supply/demand factors. The author discusses these costs and factors that must be taken into account in pricing decisions. Professor Pavesic offers as a given that menu pricing should cover costs, return a profit, reflect a value for the customer, and in the long run, attract customers and market the establishment. “Prices that are too high will drive customers away, and prices that are too low will sacrifice profit,” Professor Pavesic puts it succinctly. To dovetail with this premise the author provides that although food costs measure markedly into menu pricing, other factors such as equipment utilization, popularity/demand, and marketing are but a few of the parenthetic factors also to be considered. “… there is no single method that can be used to mark up every item on any given restaurant menu. One must employ a combination of methodologies and theories,” says Professor Pavesic. “Therefore, when properly carried out, prices will reflect food cost percentages, individual and/or weighted contribution margins, price points, and desired check averages, as well as factors driven by intuition, competition, and demand.” Additionally, Professor Pavesic wants you to know that value, as opposed to maximizing revenue, should be a primary motivating factor when designing menu pricing. This philosophy does come with certain caveats, and he explains them to you. Generically speaking, Professor Pavesic says, “The market ultimately determines the price one can charge.” But, in fine-tuning that decree he further offers, “Lower prices do not automatically translate into value and bargain in the minds of the customers. Having the lowest prices in your market may not bring customers or profit. “Too often operators engage in price wars through discount promotions and find that profits fall and their image in the marketplace is lowered,” Professor Pavesic warns. In reference to intangibles that influence menu pricing, service is at the top of the list. Ambience, location, amenities, product [i.e. food] presentation, and price elasticity are discussed as well. Be aware of price-value perception; Professor Pavesic explains this concept to you. Professor Pavesic closes with a brief overview of a la carte pricing; its pros and cons.