Examining Built Environment Effects on Metro Ridership at Station-to-Station Level considering Circle Heterogeneity: A Case Study from Xi’an, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transit-oriented development is described as a geographic unit with multicircle structures. Most studies have analysed the impact of the built environment within station catchment areas on metro passenger flows from a macro perspective and have lacked analysis of the circle heterogeneity. Few relevant studies have independently investigated the impact of the built environment on the passenger flow in each circle and indeed neglected the systematic interaction between inner circles and circles in the TOD area. In this study, the 800 m buffer from the station was equally divided into four circles. Based on the gravity model, the representative built environment features around the metro stations on both sides were extracted using the block attention module (BAM). Subsequently, Shapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) was used to explore the influence of different built environment variables on passenger flow at each circle between the origin and destination stations. The results indicate the following: (1) the station-to-station passenger flow is significantly affected by the availability of transfers and the distance between the origin and destination stations; (2) the impact of different built environments on ridership significantly varies within different circles; and (3) the built environment has a similar impact on average daily passenger flow on both sides. Therefore, this study proposes strategies to optimize the metro passenger flow by developing different land use in different circles and updating the urban spatial structure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".