Skip to content

2026-08-04 Product/Community Team #126

Description

@joecastiglione

Agenda

  • TRB Papers?
  • Telecommuting Frequency Model Update
    • Confirmation of next steps (MWCOG, RSG)
  • 2-Zone Model Work-Based Tour Bug / SANDAG assistance request
  • Ancillary model inclusion
  • Technical
    • Shadow pricing / simulation constraint issues
      • Confirmation and validation of methods
      • Investigation of results
      • Usability improvements and documentation
  • Admin
    • RFQ Finalization
    • Phase 12 prioritization process
      • Issue creation & population

Notes

TRB Papers

  • No one reported submitting an ActivitySim-related TRB paper this cycle; the EET (explicit telecommute) work and its sensitivity-testing deep-dive were suggested as a strong future paper topic.
  • Modeling Mobility Conference confirmed for April 2027 in Tempe, AZ (ASU) — another promotion opportunity once the call for papers opens (expected within ~2 months).

Telecommute Frequency Model — MWCOG Coordination

  • David Hensle will send Ray, Joel, and MWCOG staff the SANDAG telecommute frequency results, including the TransLink logsum term (larger/more significant than SANDAG's).
  • MWCOG (Feng Xie) can either use their existing spec plus a borrowed logsum coefficient, or adapt the full TransLink or SANDAG spec — the former is the lowest-effort path given occupation-term mismatches.
  • Joel will hold off on further re-estimation until MWCOG's feedback is received.
  • Target: wrap up in ~4 weeks (~early September).

Action items:

  • David Hensle: send options email to Ray/Joel/MWCOG (nearly complete at meeting time).
  • Feng Xie/MWCOG: review options, test against their own spec.

Example Model Cleanup — Ancillary Models (Airport, Cross-Border, Student)

  • Jeff Newman is cleaning up the SANDAG example repo (AI-assisted), which surfaced untested/unused components — an external student model and an "airport returns" extension with no configs or tests.
  • Consensus: remove the external student model.
  • Broader question: should the consortium repo stay focused solely on resident travel, or take on ancillary models (airport, visitor, cross-border, commercial vehicle) that many agencies build anyway?
    • Jeff Newman: airport models are near-universal, a good candidate for future scope; cross-border is more agency-specific.
    • Joel Freedman: agencies can already use SANDAG's public repo directly — the real question is whether the consortium takes on maintenance cost and possible focus dilution.
    • Joe Castiglione: favors framing ActivitySim as a platform supporting a broader suite of models; cited PopSim as precedent.
    • No final decision; flagged for the roadmap update and Phase 12 planning.

Action item: Jeff Newman to remove the external student model code; broader scope question to be revisited during roadmap/Phase 12 discussions.

Phase 12 Prioritization Process

  • Some agencies felt they lacked enough information in past rounds to make informed prioritization decisions, though the overall rubric wasn't seen as broken.
  • Discussion of improving issue consistency/templates (echoing the Engineering Team's effort) so issues are easier to compare across contributors.
  • David Hensle raised whether consultants should again submit a prioritized list with brief write-ups and effort estimates, as done for Phase 11B/EET.
  • Bo Wen: suggested effort/cost "quotes" come from consultants at the issue level, since agencies can't easily judge effort; noted past estimates varied widely across reviewers.
  • Joe Castiglione: leaning toward ranges rather than single-point estimates, since these numbers mainly gauge relative importance/investment rather than precise cost.
  • Jeff Newman: recommended separating "product" concerns (what agencies need) from "engineering" concerns; prioritization should start with a small product-focused review, since AI has changed feasible effort levels for many tasks. The roadmap needs revisiting as a living document given how much has changed (memory constraints, shadow pricing, telecommute needs).
  • No resolution reached — Joe will memorialize the discussion and continue it at a future meeting.

Action item: Joe Castiglione to continue this discussion at a future meeting; members encouraged to share further thoughts in the meantime.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    meetingMeeting notes.

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions