search

byu-transpolab / abm_illustration

An analysis of trip-based and activity-based model scenarios
https://byu-transpolab.github.io/abm_illustration/
0 stars 0 forks source link

We need a better description of the model run times #2

Open gregmacfarlane opened 16 hours ago

gregmacfarlane commented 16 hours ago

Reviewer 1 says:

I was quite surprised that the demand components of the trip based model took 10 hours, that seems very long. However, the flow chart shows that an assignment is part of each iteration which is somewhat more reasonable, but still quite long. But, this is not an even comparison with the ActivitySim that does not include any network initialization, building, or skimming steps. A better comparison could be a component by component or a comparison of the number of computations.

I think I agree with this criticism. Can we get a breakdown of the WFRC model run time by:

This is of course made more difficult by the fact that the WFRC model does mode choice AFTER assignment has converged. But can we get a log and build a schedule?

Would be nice to get an apples-to-apples (one run of ActivitySim, one run of the demand components of the WFRC model)

gregmacfarlane commented 16 hours ago

ActivitySim log is here: https://byu.app.box.com/file/1292154340611 WFRC log is here: https://byu.app.box.com/file/1405569820101

gregmacfarlane commented 16 hours ago

Perhaps we can build a figure that has better details of the execution at each step, removing feedback loops.

gregmacfarlane commented 16 hours ago

Actually, let's use the activitySim log at C:\projects\wfrc_asim_scenario\activitysim\output\base_2019_mp_3 on Beast