Image: Wikimedia Commons/Sameboat
-
Why Is the Penis Shaped Like That?
Why do testicles hang the way they do? Is there an adaptive function to the female orgasm? What does it feel like to want to kill yourself? Does “free will”...
Read More »
No two subway systems have the same design. New York City’s haphazard rail system differs markedly from the highly organized Moscow Metro (above), or the tangled spaghetti of Tokyo’s subway network. Each system’s design is the result of many factors, including local geography, the city’s layout and traffic distribution, politics, culture and degree of urban planning.
“There’s an endless list of possible parameters that can influence the shape of a subway network,” says Marc Barthelemy, a theoretical physicist at France's Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission.
But Barthelemy isn’t interested in the differences between subway systems—he wants to find out what they all have in common. In a paper published May 16 in the Journal of the Royal Society Interface, he and his co-authors concluded that the geometries of large subway networks are guided by simple, universal rules.
Some scientists think that subway networks are an emergent phenomenon of large cities; each network is the product of hundreds of rational but uncoordinated decisions that take place over many years. And whereas small cities rarely have subway networks, 25 percent of medium-sized cities (with populations between one million and two million) do have them. And all the world's megacities—those with populations of 10 million or more—have subway systems.
If subways are emergent properties of cities, Barthelemy says, “you can forget about details.” And that’s exactly what he did in this new study. His team analyzed the geometry of all of the subway networks in the world that possess more than 100 stations—including Barcelona, Beijing, Berlin, Chicago, London, Madrid, Mexico, Moscow, New York City, Osaka, Paris, Seoul, Shanghai, and Tokyo— without trying to control for differences in politics, population density, or planning. If subway development is governed by emergent properties, then those details are already encoded within the structures, he says.
To look at how each network evolved over time, the researchers compared the geometry of each fledgling system with its modern-day setup. The analysis reveals that “as these systems get larger and more mature, they converge on a similar topology,” says David Levinson, a transportation engineer at the University of Minnesota, who was not involved in the study.
The researchers uncovered three simple features that make subway system topologies similar all around the world.
First, subway networks can be divided into a core and branches, like a spider with many legs. The “core” typically sits beneath the city’s center, and its stations usually form a ring shape. The branches, which are more linear, extend outward from the core in many directions.
Second, the branches tend to be about twice as long as the width of the core. The wider the core, the longer the branches. And subway systems with more stations tend to have more branches. The number of branches corresponds roughly with the square root of the number of stations.
Last, an average of 20 percent of the stations in the core link two or more subway lines, allowing people to make transfers.
Barthelemy says his team does not know which factors are guiding subway networks to follow these general rules; perhaps the rules maximize efficiency. For example, too many branches or connections would be redundant and unnecessarily costly. In contrast, having too few branches would reduce the range of areas that the network services, and having too few connecting points would reduce travel efficiency.
Rights & Permissions
See what we're tweeting about
7 Comments
Add CommentI knew there was something odd about Toronto's network...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was very leery of this report until the authors provided a way to falsify their conclusions. I hope a followup article here reports their hypothesis' survival.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI suspect that the topological similarities they find are due to inevitable similarities in the way cities (that need subways) evolve into similar topologies based on the way humans use cities, modulo local geography.
To me, this is pseudoscience...sort of like observing that most flying birds have wings. It's an emergent characteristic of birds.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"No two subway systems have the same design."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey're SNOWFLAKES!!!
"Understanding how subway networks grow and evolve might one day help to design better systems....."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYeah ..... and it might not...
Anyway it looks like all the action is now going on above ground with light railways -- take a look at the London Docklands--
I don't find the conclusions and their explanations convincing. A single sample from a random set can appear to be deterministic. There is no mention of the time at which any subway began to take shape or the economic circumstance at the time, etc. . The author (B.) jumped the gun in submitting.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"And all the world's megacities—those with populations of 10 million or more—have subway systems."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFalse.
Dhaka does not yet have one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhaka#Transport
Jakarta does not yet have one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakarta_Mass_Rapid_Transit
Karachi does not yet have one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi#Rail
Lagos does not yet have one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagos#Rail