Comparison of Intercity Travel Network Structure during Daily Time and Holiday in China

• Main Authors: Runze Qi, Jinghu Pan, Rong Zhang
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hindawi-Wiley 2021-01-01
• Series: Complexity
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/2193782

Intercity travel by residents promotes the regathering and dissemination of social and economic factors. Based on big data from Tencent’s location-based service, 346 cities above the prefecture level in China were chosen as study objects, with 2018 as the study time node. To construct the intercity residents’ travel network, complex network analysis and GIS spatial analysis methods were used. Furthermore, when analyzing the structural characteristics and spatial differences of Chinese residents’ intercity travel from different time perspectives (the whole year, daily, Spring Festival travel rush, and special holidays), Gephi network analysis tools and ArcGIS spatial analysis software were used. The following are the major findings: daily and the whole year intercity travel by Chinese residents, as well as intercity travel during special holidays and the Spring Festival, all exhibit the “diamond” structure, with Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou-Shenzhen, and Chengdu-Chongqing at the core. The distribution of lines in and around the “diamond” is large and concentrated from the perspective of the hierarchical nature of the residents’ intercity travel network. Significant increases in high-intensity population flow lines within the “diamond” can be seen during Spring Festival travel and holidays. The number of cities involved in the inflow line is significantly greater than that involved in the outflow line, as demonstrated by the number of residents in the first point of travel, indicating that there is a difference between the central cities flowing into and out of the network. The first flow of the central city is the most visible during the Spring Festival travel period. Most cities in the resident intercity travel network have relatively low degrees of centrality, closeness centrality, and betweenness centrality, and the number of cities with large values of the three is small, and they are concentrated in the apex and interior of the “diamond” structure.