RE: UrbanSim 3 vs. 4

I have the same concern for OPUS4 as you. However, it is hard to get
data and define the transition types to get the coefficient for
developer model of UrbanSim3. At least from our application (about
9000square miles, both 1mile 150 meter grid cell sizes). The
consistency checker of UrbanSim3 is actually useful for first time
implementation.

Ke Li (luke)

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Arizona State
University

1711 S. Rural Rd.,

Tempe, AZ, 85287-5306

PH: 480-965-3171

-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces_at_urbansim.org [mailto:users-bounces_at_urbansim.org] On
Behalf Of Jennifer C. Duthie
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2006 8:44 AM
To: users_at_urbansim.org
Subject: UrbanSim 3 vs. 4

Hi,

I'm working on a research project for TxDOT looking at what type of land

use model is best for each type of region (defined by size, resources,
need, ...) depending on a variety of factors. I had been trying to get
UrbanSim 4 running for awhile and was having some of the same problems
as Zachary, so I just this week switched to UrbanSim 3.
Although there are many advantages to UrbanSim 4 (as listed
http://www.urbansim.org/news/index.shtml#opus), we're worried that there

are still some bugs in the code and the documentation has not yet been
ironed out. Also, it is very helpful to have the Eugene test database
running for the earlier version. As we're looking for general
conclusions about types of models, we feel this should suffice. My only

concern is that the Java version is no longer being maintained, so if we

do have a problem it may be more difficult to get it resolved.

I just wanted to see if anyone on this list had any convincing arguments

as to why we shouldn't use the Java version for our research...

Thanks!
Jen Duthie
PhD Candidate
Transportation Engineering
University of Texas, Austin
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users_at_urbansim.org
http://www.urbansim.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Received on Fri Oct 27 2006 - 08:54:10 PDT