## 2 Literature Review  
The \"commuting time paradox\" hypothesis suggests that the average commuting times tend to remain relatively constant across different time periods, despite changes in urban development, transportation infrastructure, and population dynamics. This phenomenon raises questions about the relationship between commuting behavior and urban growth, as well as the implications for urban planning and policy. The commuting time paradox is examined through various theoretical frameworks. The Time Allocation Theory posits that individuals maintain a fixed amount of time for commuting, even as urban areas expand and living locations change, which results in stable commuting durations [19]. Behavioral Economics emphasizes the psychological aspects of commuting decisions, proposing that individuals adhere to a mental \"travel time budget\" that they are hesitant to exceed, further contributing to the stabilization of the average commuting times [20]. Together, these theories illustrate how various factors interplay to maintain consistent commuting durations despite changes in urban dynamics. The methodologies used to study the commuting time paradox hypothesis are diverse, encompassing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method approaches [10; 11; 18]. Quantitative methodologies are predominant in the study of the commuting time paradox, allowing researchers to analyze large datasets and identify trends over time. While aggregate studies primarily utilize descriptive analysis techniques, disaggregate studies employ methodologies such as linear regression, structural equation modeling, and survival analysis [11; 12; 13]. The studies inspired by Travel Time Budget (TTB) generally posit that the commuting time is stable. [PERSON] [5] used household travel surveys conducted in 1965, 1985, and 1990 to compare travel characteristics in the San Francisco Bay Area. The results showed that the average travel time per person per weekday increased from 52 min to 65 min between 1965 and 1981 but declined to 62 min in 1990 and that the average commuting time increased from 25.8 min in 1965 to 26.6 in 1981 and to 29.2 in 1990. Since the authors focused on testing the TTB hypothesis, they only examined the reasons for the change in total travel time, but did not investigate the factors influencing the commuting time. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [4] analyzed the travel time by mode and trip purpose with 1968 and 1988 household surveys in the Washington metropolitan region. The results showed that travel time and commuting time did not increase between 1968 and 1988, even though there was an increase in travel distance and commuting distance. They argued that this was caused by the \"rational locator\", which meant that rational households and firms would adjust locations to maintain tolerable commuting time when they faced increasing traffic congestion and long travel distance. Furthermore, the commuting paradox has also been studied globally, and it was found that the average commuting time tends to remain constant across Europe, Asia, and Central America, even with urban expansion and enhanced public transport options [9; 14; 21; 22]. Such aggregate studies generally support the concept of TTB [10; 11; 23] and concluded that the commuting time was also stable, but little work was done to investigate factors influencing the commuting time. In addition, most of these studies used household travel surveys conducted in different years, as the data collection methods evolved over time. Since there has been a marked transition in survey methodologies in the past decades [24], the difference in data collection of these surveys might affect the validity of these studies. For example, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [25] used the 1968 and 1988 household surveys in the Washington metropolitan region and found there was a marked increase in travel time for working people.