Cited by 95Transportation and Mobility InnovationsTransportation Planning and OptimizationTraffic control and management

Anticipating the regional impacts of connected and automated vehicle travel in Austin, Texas

Zhao, Yong, Kockelman, Kara M.·2018·Journal of Urban Planning and Development

Abstract

Automated vehicles are undergoing very rapid development and have potential to revolutionize the existing transportation system. This paper investigates the impacts of connected automated vehicles (CAVs) and shared automated vehicles (SAVs) using a conventional travel-demand model for the Austin, Texas, region. A series of eight test scenarios run in the year 2020 setting suggests that the introduction of CAVs and SAVs will add 20% or greater demand for new vehicle-kilometers traveled (VKT) to the six-county region’s roadway network. Relatively low values of travel time for passengers of automated vehicles and competitive pricing assumptions of SAV use result in greater demand for longer distance travel and reduced transit system use. Empty-vehicle travel for self-parking vehicles and SAVs will add to the network’s VKT, presumably increasing roadway congestion further, unless rides can be shared, traffic flows smoothed, and intervehicle headways tightened. The scenario simulations are sensitive to parking cost and vehicle operating cost assumptions. Policymakers, transportation planners, system operators, and designers may do well to simulate additional scenarios.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1061/(asce)up.1943-5444.0000463

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Car-sharing systems are found to increase congestion.

    “On one hand, car-sharing systems are found to increase congestion (Alam & Habib, 2018;Zhao & Kockelman, 2018)”

    From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Zhao & Kockelman, 2018

  • Zhao & Kockelman (2018) validated around 45 pairs of hypothesized relationships in their survey of 507 participants.

    “It captures behavioural antecedents, including latent socio-psychological and sociodemographic factors, to predict autonomous vehicle ownership and sharing, by validating around 45 pairs of hypothesized relationships.”

    From Shared autonomous vehicle services: A comprehensive review (2020) · cites this paper as Zhao & Kockelman (2018)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhao, Y., & Kockelman, K. M.
Affiliations
  • Senior Transportation Planner, Strategic Consulting Division, Jacobs Engineering Group, 2705 Bee Cave Rd., Suite 300, Austin, TX 78746.
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Kockelman, Kara M.
Venue
Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Published
2018-12
Volume
144
Issue
4
ISSN
  • 0733-9488 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-5444
OpenAlex
W2884758455
Cited by
95
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
6.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Urban Planning and Development (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Traffic control and management
Keywords
connected and automated vehicles, shared automated vehicles, travel demand modeling, vehicle kilometers traveled, transit ridership, traffic congestion, parking costs, vehicle operating costs, scenario simulation, Austin, Texas

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review