4.4 Article

Explaining Heterogeneity in Pavement Deterioration: Clusterwise Linear Regression Model

期刊

JOURNAL OF INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS
卷 20, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000182

关键词

Clusterwise regression; Clustering methods; Infrastructure performance modeling; Heterogeneity

资金

  1. National Science Foundation
  2. Infrastructure Technology Institute at Northwestern University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A clusterwise linear regression model of pavement deterioration is presented. The model provides a framework to simultaneously segment a population and to describe performance with a set of regression models, one for each segment. Instead of relying on observed criteria, the objective in the segmentation is to maximize within-segment variation explained by a set of commonly specified regression models. To illustrate the methodology, performance models were estimated for a panel of 131 pavements from the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) road test. Pavements in different segments display systematic but unobserved differences in their responses, i.e.,unobserved heterogeneity, which manifests itself in segment-level coefficients that differ in their magnitude and sign. This is radically different than other approaches in the literature that explain such differences with individual-level error/intercept terms, but that rely on the assumption of constant and homogeneous coefficients capturing the effect of explanatory variables across the population. How segment-level effects can be used to support tailored management policies, e.g.,maintenance and repair, or setting weight restrictions is discussed. Finally, a rigorous assessment is conducted of the proposed model that includes comparison with a population-level regression model and to a clusterwise model that relies on observed factors from the original experimental design: the loop-lane, i.e.,the design-loading, configuration. (C) 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据