Table 1 Fitting parameters for the USA commuting data, considering the models given by equations (6), (7), (8), (3) and (16). The \(R^{2}\) values and fitted curves suggests that the FJM and GM models performs better than the simple RM, RMwS, or TCORM model. For the FJM model \(a=7/4\) was fixed
From: Commuting patterns: the flow and jump model and supporting data
RM | RMwS | TCORM | GM | FJM | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
μ | μ | q | μ | λ | α | β | μ | |
USA data | 0.0000308 | 0.0000308 | 1.0 | 0.000119 | 0.0056 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 0.000062 |
\(\mathbf{R}^{2}\) | 0.971 | 0.971 | 0.992 | 0.993 | 0.993 | |||