| id |
caadria2021_056 |
| authors |
Yang, Chunxia, Xu, Chen, Lyu, Chengzhe and Zhan, Ming |
| year |
2021 |
| title |
Differences between Behavior Simulation and Space Syntax in the Study of Urban Texture - Considering the Street System and Property Right Plots |
| doi |
https://doi.org/10.52842/conf.caadria.2021.2.367
|
| source |
A. Globa, J. van Ameijde, A. Fingrut, N. Kim, T.T.S. Lo (eds.), PROJECTIONS - Proceedings of the 26th CAADRIA Conference - Volume 2, The Chinese University of Hong Kong and Online, Hong Kong, 29 March - 1 April 2021, pp. 367-376 |
| summary |
The study applies two methods of behavioral simulation and space syntax to study waterfront accessibility from the urban texture levels of street system and property plot, exploring two methods differences, advantages and disadvantages in terms of simulation principle, fitting precision, and calculating results. The North Bund area of Shanghai is selected as the research sample. And the software of AnyLogic and Depthmap which are mostly used in the fields of behavior simulation and space syntax are used. The results are:Behavior simulation can visually reflect the usage condition of specific spaces through micro behavior data such as pedestrian flow, walking time, etc. But it has limitation in precision and stability of calculation, and the model need much time to construct and run if the site is large. Space syntax is more mature in accessibility analysis with high precise indexes such as choice and integration degree. However, the fitting precision between the output and real situation is lower than behavior simulation, and it cant directly evaluate the capacity and service level of the urban space. In general, both behavior simulation and space syntax can be applied to urban space research and have their own advantages and disadvantages, and complementary in between. |
| keywords |
behavior simulation; space syntax; method comparison; urban texture; waterfront |
| series |
CAADRIA |
| email |
|
| full text |
 file.pdf (6,859,436 bytes) |
| references |
Content-type: text/plain
|
Chen, MZ and Zheng, Y (2019)
 Research on the Walkability Evaluation of Historical Urban Area
, Proceedings of ISSS 2019, pp. 9-15
|
|
|
|
|
Chen, Y and He, N (2012)
Analysis of walkable environment and influential factors in rail transit station areas: case study of 12 neighborhoods in Shanghai
, Urban Planning Forum, 06, pp. 96-104
|
|
|
|
|
Conzen, MRG (1960)
Alnwick NorthumberlandA Study in TownPlan Analysis
, ORGE PHILIP & SON, LTD
|
|
|
|
|
Ewing, R and Handy, S (2009)
Measuring the Unmeasurable: Urban Design Qualities Related to Walkability
, Journal of Urban Design, 14(1), pp. 65-84
|
|
|
|
|
F, YG and Liu, JS (2008)
Urban fabric organization based on complex system theory
, City Planning Review, 10, pp. 32-37
|
|
|
|
|
Kropf, Karl (1996)
Urban tissue and the character of towns
, Urban Design international, 1, pp. 247-263
|
|
|
|
|
Lee, S, Yoo, C and Seo, KW (2020)
Determinant Factors of Pedestrian Volume in Different Land-Use Zones: Combining Space Syntax Metrics with GIS-Based Built-Environment Measures
, Sustainability, 12, pp. 1-15
|
|
|
|
|
Marzot, Nicola (2002)
The study of urban from in Italy
, Urban Morphology, 2, pp. 59-73
|
|
|
|
|
Wang, ZZ (2018)
WALKING SPACE DESIGN STRATEGIES BASED ON PEDESTRIAN SIMULATION
, Master's Thesis, Harbin Institute of Technology
|
|
|
|
|
Xie, JG and Li, Q (2020)
Promote the modernization of urban construction and governance in the new era under the guidance of the important concepts of the people's city
, PARTY&GOVERNMENT FORUM, 07, pp. 4-6
|
|
|
|
|
Yang, Chunxia, Shi, Min and Geng, Huizhi (2018)
Study on the pedestrian accessibility of waterfront area based on an understanding of urban fabric level: Taking the estuary area of Suzhou River in Shanghai as an example
, City Planning Review, 42(02), pp. 104-114
|
|
|
|
| last changed |
2022/06/07 07:57 |
|
