|
419 | 419 |
|
420 | 420 | where: |
421 | 421 |
|
422 | | -- (d\_{\text{network}}) — distance or travel length along the actual transport network |
423 | | -- (d\_{\text{euclidean}}) — straight-line (Euclidean) distance between the same points |
| 422 | +- $d_{network}$ — distance or travel length along the actual transport network |
| 423 | +- $d_{euclidean}$ — straight-line (Euclidean) distance between the same points |
424 | 424 |
|
425 | | -A circuity value of **1** indicates a perfectly direct route (*as the crow flies*), while higher values indicate more detoured paths due to network layout, barriers, or design. |
| 425 | +A circuity value of **1** indicates a perfectly direct route (*as the crow flies*), while higher values indicate more detoured paths due to **network layout, barriers, or design**. |
426 | 426 |
|
427 | 427 | In this exercise, circuity will be estimated separately for **car, walking, cycling, and public transport** networks, allowing comparison of how each mode’s infrastructure shapes travel efficiency and accessibility. |
428 | 428 |
|
@@ -513,21 +513,35 @@ DISTANCES = DISTANCES |> |
513 | 513 | circ_bike = bike_dist / distance) |
514 | 514 | ``` |
515 | 515 |
|
| 516 | +```{r} |
| 517 | +summary(DISTANCES$circ_walk) |
| 518 | +``` |
| 519 | + |
516 | 520 | ``` |
517 | | -> summary(DISTANCES$circ_walk) |
518 | 521 | Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max. NA's |
519 | 522 | 1.018 1.131 1.186 1.252 1.302 4.024 757 |
520 | 523 | |
521 | | -> summary(DISTANCES$circ_car) |
522 | | - Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max. NA's |
| 524 | +``` |
| 525 | + |
| 526 | +```{r} |
| 527 | +summary(DISTANCES$circ_car) |
| 528 | +``` |
| 529 | + |
| 530 | +``` |
| 531 | + Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max. NA's |
523 | 532 | 0.04975 1.36537 1.59976 1.90545 1.96105 51.04878 3 |
524 | | - |
525 | | -> summary(DISTANCES$circ_bike) |
| 533 | +``` |
| 534 | + |
| 535 | +```{r} |
| 536 | +summary(DISTANCES$circ_bike) |
| 537 | +``` |
| 538 | + |
| 539 | +``` |
526 | 540 | Min. 1st Qu. Median Mean 3rd Qu. Max. NA's |
527 | 541 | 1.059 1.252 1.320 1.383 1.446 4.780 1 |
528 | 542 | ``` |
529 | 543 |
|
530 | | -- Circuity \>1 indicates that network routes are longer than straight-line distances. |
| 544 | +> Circuity \>1 indicates that network routes are longer than straight-line distances. |
531 | 545 |
|
532 | 546 | ```{r} |
533 | 547 | #| code-fold: true |
@@ -644,18 +658,15 @@ We learned to: |
644 | 658 | - Adjust routing parameters such as: |
645 | 659 |
|
646 | 660 | - `departure_datetime` |
647 | | - |
648 | 661 | - `max_trip_duration` |
649 | | - |
650 | 662 | - `max_lts` (Level of Traffic Stress) |
651 | | - |
652 | 663 | - `max_rides`, `mode_egress`, and `max_walk_time` for public transport |
653 | 664 |
|
654 | 665 | - Extract **detailed itineraries** with `detailed_itineraries()` to understand trip segments, modes, distances, and durations. |
655 | 666 |
|
656 | 667 | - Compare **Euclidean** and **network distances**, and compute **circuity** to quantify the efficiency of different travel modes |
657 | 668 |
|
658 | | -Finally, we visualized and aggregated routes using **`stplanr::overline()`**, combining spatial and population data to identify segments with potentially higher travel demand. |
| 669 | +Finally, we visualized and aggregated routes using `stplanr::overline()`, combining spatial and population data to identify segments with potentially **higher travel demand**. |
659 | 670 |
|
660 | 671 | ## Stop |
661 | 672 |
|
|
0 commit comments