Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit

<table class="table-group" id="tab8"><tr><td><table class="table"><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="4"><hr/></td></tr><tr class="thead"><td class="align_left">City</td><td class="align_center">Overlapping area (<span class="nowrap"><svg height="11.6412pt" id="M68" style="vertical-align:-0.04979992pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -11.5914 24.4235 11.6412" width="24.4235pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M667 0V28C619 34 599 43 546 100C496 154 386 277 311 372C378 440 449 512 488 547C551 605 575 615 650 622V650H410V622L433 619C478 614 479 604 449 568C404 513 337 443 282 390C254 364 234 350 212 345V520C212 609 222 616 299 622V650H41V622C120 616 128 611 128 520V128C128 41 120 34 44 28V0H304V28C221 34 212 41 212 128V318C229 321 242 318 266 291C355 185 436 87 514 0H667Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,8.658,0)"><path d="M797 0V26C739 32 732 36 732 103V296C732 394 682 449 605 449C576 449 550 437 529 423C504 407 475 389 446 366C425 418 382 449 334 449C303 449 279 437 253 421C222 403 201 385 180 371V452C135 432 85 419 41 411V388C99 379 102 374 102 310V103C102 38 93 32 27 26V0H238V26C189 32 180 38 180 103V338C210 363 250 390 289 390C351 390 377 348 377 275V103C377 37 368 32 306 26V0H520V26C465 32 456 38 456 101V296C456 314 455 326 453 338C491 369 529 390 565 390C628 390 653 345 653 274V107C653 36 642 32 583 26V0H797Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,19.377,-5.741)"><path d="M414 144C384 79 371 75 317 75H135L276 221C367 316 408 376 408 465C408 570 327 635 237 635C179 635 131 609 100 575L42 494L67 471C94 510 138 565 205 565C277 565 321 517 321 435C321 348 258 270 195 195C146 137 88 81 33 26V0H411C423 44 433 88 446 135L414 144Z"></path></g></svg>)</span></td><td class="align_center">Total area (<span class="nowrap"><svg height="11.6412pt" id="M69" style="vertical-align:-0.04979992pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -11.5914 24.4235 11.6412" width="24.4235pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M667 0V28C619 34 599 43 546 100C496 154 386 277 311 372C378 440 449 512 488 547C551 605 575 615 650 622V650H410V622L433 619C478 614 479 604 449 568C404 513 337 443 282 390C254 364 234 350 212 345V520C212 609 222 616 299 622V650H41V622C120 616 128 611 128 520V128C128 41 120 34 44 28V0H304V28C221 34 212 41 212 128V318C229 321 242 318 266 291C355 185 436 87 514 0H667Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,8.658,0)"><path d="M797 0V26C739 32 732 36 732 103V296C732 394 682 449 605 449C576 449 550 437 529 423C504 407 475 389 446 366C425 418 382 449 334 449C303 449 279 437 253 421C222 403 201 385 180 371V452C135 432 85 419 41 411V388C99 379 102 374 102 310V103C102 38 93 32 27 26V0H238V26C189 32 180 38 180 103V338C210 363 250 390 289 390C351 390 377 348 377 275V103C377 37 368 32 306 26V0H520V26C465 32 456 38 456 101V296C456 314 455 326 453 338C491 369 529 390 565 390C628 390 653 345 653 274V107C653 36 642 32 583 26V0H797Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,19.377,-5.741)"><path d="M414 144C384 79 371 75 317 75H135L276 221C367 316 408 376 408 465C408 570 327 635 237 635C179 635 131 609 100 575L42 494L67 471C94 510 138 565 205 565C277 565 321 517 321 435C321 348 258 270 195 195C146 137 88 81 33 26V0H411C423 44 433 88 446 135L414 144Z"></path></g></svg>)</span></td><td class="align_center">Overlap rate</td></tr><tr><td class="thead-hr" colspan="4"><hr/></td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">New York</td><td class="align_center">400.566</td><td class="align_center">845.704</td><td class="align_center">0.474</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">San Francisco</td><td class="align_center">3.019</td><td class="align_center">88.467</td><td class="align_center">0.034</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Chicago</td><td class="align_center">71.574</td><td class="align_center">281.44</td><td class="align_center">0.254</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Philadelphia</td><td class="align_center">24.025</td><td class="align_center">299.533</td><td class="align_center">0.08</td></tr><tr><td class="align_left">Boston</td><td class="align_center">118.149</td><td class="align_center">265.358</td><td class="align_center">0.445</td></tr><tr class="table-tr"><td colspan="4"><hr class="tbody-hr"/></td></tr></table></td></tr></table>

<div>Overlapping of station service coverage area in five cities.</div>

Journal of Advanced Transportation

tab8

Table 8

Table 8: Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit 

Table 8 | Effects of Coverage Area Treatment, Spatial Analysis Unit, and Regression Model on the Results of Station-Level Demand Modeling of Urban Rail Transit 