Straightness of rectilinear vs. radio-concentric networks: modeling simulation and comparison

TL;DR

This paper compares the straightness of rectilinear and radio-concentric urban networks through mathematical analysis and simulations, finding that radio-concentric networks generally exhibit better straightness, which could influence future urban planning.

Contribution

It introduces a comparative analysis of straightness in rectilinear and radio-concentric networks using both theoretical models and simulations, highlighting the advantages of radio-concentric designs.

Findings

Radio-concentric networks generally have higher straightness than rectilinear networks.

Mathematical analysis confirms the superior straightness of radio-concentric networks.

Simulations support the theoretical findings across multiple origin-destination paths.

Abstract

This paper proposes a comparison between rectilinear and radio-concentric networks. Indeed, those networks are often observed in urban areas, in several cities all over the world. One of the interesting properties of such networks is described by the \textit{straightness} measure from graph theory, which assesses how much moving from one node to another along the network links departs from the network-independent straightforward path. We study this property in both rectilinear and radio-concentric networks, first by analyzing mathematically routes from the center to peripheral locations in a theoretical framework with perfect topology, then using simulations for multiple origin-destination paths. We show that in most of the cases, radio-concentric networks have a better straightness than rectilinear ones. How may this property be used in the future for urban networks?