박사

지역간 도로 네트워크의 수요가중 접근성 평가모형 = An Evaluation Model for Demand-weighted Accessibility(DA) of Interregional Road Network

설유진 2015년
논문상세정보
' 지역간 도로 네트워크의 수요가중 접근성 평가모형 = An Evaluation Model for Demand-weighted Accessibility(DA) of Interregional Road Network' 의 주제별 논문영향력
논문영향력 선정 방법
논문영향력 요약
주제
  • 간선도로망
  • 공간분포
  • 도로네트워크
  • 수요가중
  • 접근성
  • 지역간 도로
  • 통행패턴
동일주제 총논문수 논문피인용 총횟수 주제별 논문영향력의 평균
453 0

0.0%

' 지역간 도로 네트워크의 수요가중 접근성 평가모형 = An Evaluation Model for Demand-weighted Accessibility(DA) of Interregional Road Network' 의 참고문헌

  • 접근성의 개념과 측정치
    김광식 대한교통학회지, 제6권, pp. 33-46 [1987]
  • 엔터테인먼트형 복합상업시설이 광역적∙ 국지적 상권 구조에 미치는 영향-영등포 타임스퀘어를 중심으로
    최막중 한국도시설계학회지, 제13권 제3호, p93-107 [2012]
  • 도시교통망 이론Ⅰ
    최기주 청문각 [2004]
  • 도시 교통체계의 지속가능성 평가를 위한 도시 접근성 지표
    신성일 대한교통학회지 제23권 제8호, p31-42 [2005]
  • 도로교통망의 이동성 분석지표 개발 – 서울시 도심도로교통체계 개편 을 중심으로
    이청원 서울시정개발연구원 [2003]
  • 대도시 교통혼잡도 산정에 관한 연구, 대한토목학회지
    여혁진 제25권 제5D호, p635-642 [2005]
  • 국토공간의 효율적 활용을 위한 도로망체계의 구축방안 연구
    조남건 국토연구원 [2002]
  • 국가균형발전을 위한 교통접근성 제고방안 – 형평성 분석을 중심으로
    김찬성 한 국교통연구원 [2006]
  • 교통투자를 위한 네트워크 접근성 평가모형, 박사학위논문
    백주현 서울대학교 [2011]
  • 교통망분석론
    임강원 임용택 서울대학교 출반부 [2003]
  • 공정한 사회를 위한 인프라 정책의 사회적 형평성 제고방안 ?교통정책의 형평성을 중심으로
    정일호 국토연구원 [2013]
  • Schrank D, Lomax T(2002), The 2002 Urban Mobility Report, Texas TransportationInstitute, Texas A&M University
  • Savigear, F.(1967), A Quantitative Measure of Accessibility, Town Plαnning Review,38, 64-72.
  • Rietveld, Peter and Bruinsma, Frank(1998), Is Transport Infrastructure Effective?,Transport Infrastructure and Accessibility ; Impacts on the space economy,Springer, Verlag Berlin.
  • Riddell, R.(1986), Regional Development Policy, Gower Publishing Company.
  • Nguyen, S., Dupuis, C., 1984. An efficient method for computing traffic equilibria innetworks with asymmetric transportation costs. Transportation Science 18, 185?202.
  • Muraco, W. A.(1972), Intraurban Accessibility, Economic Geography, 48, 388-405.
  • Litman, T. (2010). Evaluating Transportation Equity. Victoria Transport PolicyLinton C. Freeman. (1997), A set of Measures of Centrality Based on Betweenness.Sociometry, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 35-41.
  • Litman, T. (2010). Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs Best PracticesGuidebook. Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
  • Linton C. Freeman., Stephen P Borgatti. & Douglas R. White. (1991), Centrality invalued graphs: A measure of betweenness based on network flow. SocialNetworks, Vol. 13, pp. 141-154.
  • Linton C. Freeman. (1978/79), Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification.Social Networks, Vol. 1, pp. 215-239.
  • Linneker, B. J., and Spence, N. A.(1992), An Accessibility Analysis of the Impact ofthe M25 London Orbital Motorway on Britain, Regional Studies, 26(1), 31-47.
  • Levinson, D., and Kumar, A.(1994), Multimodal trip distribution: structureandapplication, Transportation Research Record 1466, 124-131.
  • Leake, G. R., and Huzayyin, A. S.(1979), Accessibility Measures and Their Suitability forUse in Trip Generation Models, Traffic Engineering and Control, 20(12), 566-572.
  • Kirby (1976), Accessibility Indices for Abstract Road Networks, Regional Studies , Vol 10, pp 479-482
  • Keemin Sohn., Hyunjin Shim. (2010), Factors generating boarding at Metro stations inthe Seoul metropolitanarea,Cities, Vol. 27, pp. 358-368.
  • Keemin Sohn., Daehyun Kim. (2010), Zonal centrality measures and the neighborhoodeffect. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 44, No. 9, pp. 733-743.
  • Karst T. Geurs., Bert van Wee. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use andtransport strategies. Journal of Transport Geography, 12, pp. 127?140.
  • Izquierdo, R. and Monzon, A.(1993), Infrastructure capacity and network access,European Conference of Ministers of Transport, 12th International Symposiumof theory and practice in trasnsport economics, pp231-269.
  • Ingram, D. R.(1971), The Concept of Accessibility: A Search for an Operational Form,Regional Studies, 5, 101-107.
  • Hansen, W. G. (1959), How accessibility shapes land use, Journal of the AmericanInstitute of Planners, pp. 73-76.
  • Handy, S.(1992), Regional Versus Local Accessibility: Variations in Suburban Formand the Effects on Nonwork Travel, unpublished dissertation, University ofCalifornia at Berkeley.
  • Guy, C. M.(1983), The Assessment of Access to Local Shopping Opportunities: AComparison of Accessibility Measures“, Environment and Planning B: Planningand Design, 10, 219-238.
  • Fitzgerald, J. and N. G. Leigh(2002), Economic Revitalization: Cases and Strategies forCity and Suburb, SAGE Publications.
  • David, S. and Tim, L. (2002), The 2002 Urban Mobility Report, Texas TransportationInstitute, Texas A&M University.
  • Bhat, C. R., Govindarajan, A., and Pulugurta, V.(1998) Disaggregate Attraction-EndChoice Modeling, Transportation Research Record, Vol. 1645, 60-68.
  • Bhat, C. R., Carini, J. P., and Misra, R.(1999), Modeling the Generation andOrganization of Household Activity Stops, Transportation Research Record,Vol. 1676, 153-161.
  • Allen, W. B., Liu, D., and Singer, S.(1993), Accessibility Measures of U.S.Metropolitan Areas, Transportation Research B, 27B, 439-449