Austin MetroBike

📝 Related papers/other publications

[1] Lee, Y., Cooverji, F., & Yuan, Y. (2025). Exploring the spatiotemporal patterns of shared bicycle usage: A case study of MetroBike in Austin, Texas. Computational Urban Science, 5(52). [Link]

MetoroBike usage pattern and accessibility

Analysis flow map

Fig 1. Analysis flow map

Usage pattern analysis using community detection method

Fig 2. Communities with similar usage patterns

Fig 3. MetroBike usage pattern by hour across communities

Using OD mobility data from MetroBike, the public bike-share system in Austin, TX, we analyzed communities with similar usage patterns. When considering all trip records, four distinct communities emerged, which were classified as residential areas, downtown, UT Austin, and leisure districts (Fig 2). The hourly usage patterns for each community are shown in Fig 3.

MetroBike accessibility and disparities

Fig 4. Accessibility score to MetroBike kiosks calculated using the 2SFCA method

Fig 5. Lorenz curve of accessibility score

Accessibility, calculated using the 2SFCA method, is relatively high around the UT Austin campus and downtown, while most other areas show low levels of accessibility (Fig. 4). The Lorenz curve, which visualizes inequality, indicates that spatial accessibility to MetroBike is highly unequal across the city (Fig 5).

📐 Two steps of 2SFCA method:

Step 1:

Step 2:

Where Sj represents the service capacity at location j; Pk denotes the population at demand location k; dij is the distance or travel time between demand location iii and service location j; d0 is the catchment threshold that defines the maximum acceptable distance or travel time; Rj is the supply-to-demand ratio calculated for each service location in Step 1; and Ai is the accessibility score at demand location i, obtained in Step 2 by summing all Rj values from service locations within the catchment area of i.

GWR analysis of socioeconomic variables influencing accessibility scores

Fig 6. Coefficient of proportion of commuters by bicycle, walking, and public transportation

Fig 7. Coefficient of employment ratio

According to the GWR results, the proportion of commuters using bicycles, walking, and public transportation (positive effect, Fig 6) and the employment ratio (negative effect, Fig 7) were identified as the factors that have relatively strong impacts on accessibility.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse