1
Crowdsourcing Bikeshare Transit Planning: An Empirical Analysis of Washington DC and New York City R² = 0.0042 0 5000 10000 15000 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (10 min. interval) Weekday Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region R² = 0.0135 -5000 0 5000 10000 15000 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 Vote Count Average # Bike Transactions (10 min. interval) Weekend Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region Voronoi Regions Zipcode R² = 0.2709 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (10 min. interval) Weekday Transactions vs. Votes per Zipcode R² = 0.334 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (10 min. interval) Weekend Transactions vs. Votes per Zipcode Voronoi Regions R² = 0.0235 -100 0 100 200 300 400 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval) Weekday Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region R² = 0.0002 -100 0 100 200 300 400 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval) Weekend Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region Zipcode R² = 0.0005 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval) Weekday Transactions vs. Vote Count (400m) R² = 0.1477 0 20 40 60 80 100 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 Vote Count Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval) Weekend Transactions vs. Vote Count (400m) 324 existing stations; 10,000 suggested stations; 65,000 votes 238 existing stations; 3,000 suggested stations; 11,000 votes Stations and suggestions were partitioned in different ways for analysis We studied the historical usage data for both Capital Bikeshare and CitiBike to find the answer to two questions about the effects of crowdsourcing urban planning on bikeshare systems Does bikeshare system usage reflect crowdsourced suggestions….? Does the placement of new stations reflect crowdsourced suggestions…? Findings Actual system usage by region does not strongly correlate with crowdsourced requests and suggestions Larger groupings of suggestions had stronger correlations in general with actual station usage Station placement over time does indicate an effort to respond to the crowdsourced data Human-Computer Interaction Lab Cy Neita | [email protected] Joseph Owen | [email protected] Jon Froehlich | [email protected]

Crowdsourcing Bikeshare Transit Planning: An Empirical ... · Crowdsourcing Bikeshare Transit Planning: An Empirical Analysis of Washington DC and New York City R² = 0.0042 0 5000

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    3

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Crowdsourcing Bikeshare Transit Planning: An Empirical ... · Crowdsourcing Bikeshare Transit Planning: An Empirical Analysis of Washington DC and New York City R² = 0.0042 0 5000

Crowdsourcing Bikeshare Transit Planning: An Empirical

Analysis of Washington DC and New York City

R² = 0.0042

0

5000

10000

15000

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4V

ote

Co

un

t

Average # of Bike Transactions (10 min. interval)

Weekday Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region

R² = 0.0135

-5000

0

5000

10000

15000

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # Bike Transactions (10 min. interval)

Weekend Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region

Voronoi Regions

Zipcode

R² = 0.2709

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # of Bike Transactions (10 min. interval)

Weekday Transactions vs. Votes per Zipcode

R² = 0.334

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # of Bike Transactions (10 min. interval)

Weekend Transactions vs. Votes per Zipcode

Voronoi Regions

R² = 0.0235

-100

0

100

200

300

400

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval)

Weekday Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region

R² = 0.0002

-100

0

100

200

300

400

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval)

Weekend Transactions vs. Votes per Voronoi Region

Zipcode

R² = 0.0005

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval)

Weekday Transactions vs. Vote Count (400m)

R² = 0.1477

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

Vo

te C

ou

nt

Average # of Bike Transactions (2 min. interval)

Weekend Transactions vs. Vote Count (400m)

324 existing stations; 10,000 suggested stations; 65,000 votes238 existing stations; 3,000 suggested stations; 11,000 votes

Stations and suggestions were partitioned in different ways for analysis

We studied the historical usage data for both Capital Bikeshare and CitiBike to find the answer to

two questions about the effects of crowdsourcing urban planning on bikeshare systems

Does bikeshare system usage reflect crowdsourced suggestions….?

Does the placement of new stations reflect crowdsourced suggestions…?

FindingsActual system usage by region does not strongly correlate with crowdsourced requests and suggestions

Larger groupings of suggestions had stronger correlations in general with actual station usage

Station placement over time does indicate an effort to respond to the crowdsourced data

Human-Computer

Interaction Lab

Cy Neita | [email protected]

Joseph Owen | [email protected]

Jon Froehlich | [email protected]