Author Affiliations
1Northwest Land and Resource Research Center, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an 710119, China2Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China3College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, Chinashow less
Fig. 1. Differences in intercity travel networks between weekdays and Golden Week
Fig. 2. Diagram of city roles based on the method of the intra-inter group importance parameter
Fig. 3. Rank-size distribution of WDCi of intercity travel network for weekdays and Golden Week
Fig. 4. Spatial distribution of DITi and its absolute changes for weekdays and Golden Week
Fig. 5. Division of city roles on weekdays and during Golden Week
Fig. 6. Spatial distribution of the dominant flows of the intercity travel network on weekdays and during Golden Week
Fig. 7. Comparison of spatial patterns of the intercity travel network for weekdays and Golden Week
Fig. 8. City links with an advantageous connectivity index (RSL) in the intercity travel network for weekdays and Golden Week
Fig. 9. Divisions and changes of community structure for weekdays and Golden WeekNotes: (1) Different bars represent different communities and are arranged according to the PageRank value of the community city. The higher the PageRank value, the lower the position and the higher the importance and status of the community in the network. (2) The horizontal streamlines connecting different communities in the two periods indicate the changes of cities in each community between weekdays and Golden Week, and their width is directly proportional to the number of cities in each community. (3) To clearly show the changes in the communities between the two periods, the left panel highlights the changes between weekdays and Golden Week of the Beijing-Shanghai community and the Guangzhou-Shenzhen community, while the right panel highlights the changes in the other communities.
Fig. 10. Comparison of intercity travel distance between weekdays and Golden Week
Periods | Number of nodes | Number of edges | Total linked value | Average | Maximum | Minimum | CV |
---|
Weekdays | 362 | 8430 | 34 817 749 | 4130 | 191 590 | 7 | 2.22 | Golden Week | 362 | 8588 | 72 681 843 | 8463 | 263 724 | 7 | 1.94 |
|
Table 1. Descriptive statistics of intercity travel networks for weekdays and Golden Week
Region | Period | Zipf | R2 | WDCi | DITi | ODIc |
---|
Whole country | Weekdays | 1.1378 | 0.8205 | 185 200 | 3.91 | 0.84 | Golden Week | 1.0988 | 0.6418 | 386 605 | 5.09 | 0.88 | Eastern China | Weekdays | 1.2663 | 0.8494 | 305 006 | 6.48 | 0.80 | Golden Week | 1.1219 | 0.7443 | 581 193 | 7.67 | 0.85 | Central China | Weekdays | 0.8950 | 0.8172 | 130 740 | 2.72 | 0.89 | Golden Week | 0.8503 | 0.8125 | 322 530 | 4.21 | 0.91 | Western China | Weekdays | 1.1941 | 0.7860 | 126 287 | 2.65 | 0.79 | Golden Week | 1.2662 | 0.7458 | 265 015 | 3.47 | 0.83 |
|
Table 2. Statistical characteristics of intercity travel network for weekdays and Golden Week
Rank | DITi | Absolute change |
---|
Weekdays | DITi | Golden Week | DITi | Golden Week-Weekdays |
---|
1 | Beijing | 100.00 | Beijing | 100.00 | Wuhan | 10.17 | 2 | Shanghai | 78.19 | Shanghai | 75.13 | Chengdu | 10.06 | 3 | Shenzhen | 66.88 | Shenzhen | 61.44 | Xi’an | 8.57 | 4 | Guangzhou | 66.65 | Guangzhou | 61.02 | Changsha | 5.44 | 5 | Chongqing | 51.30 | Chengdu | 54.94 | Qingdao | 5.42 | 6 | Chengdu | 44.88 | Chongqing | 52.50 | Harbin | 5.31 | 7 | Dongguan | 27.72 | Hangzhou | 35.20 | Hefei | 5.27 | 8 | Hangzhou | 25.82 | Xi’an | 29.75 | Nanchang | 5.22 | 9 | Zhengzhou | 25.10 | Zhengzhou | 28.85 | Suzhou | 4.59 | 10 | Wuhan | 25.03 | Wuhan | 26.78 | Nanjing | 4.35 | 11 | Nanjing | 22.43 | Dongguan | 26.39 | Ganzhou | 4.11 | 12 | Xi’an | 21.18 | Suzhou | 25.36 | Huizhou | 4.07 | 13 | Suzhou | 20.77 | Changsha | 23.94 | Dalian | 3.98 | 14 | Changsha | 18.50 | Nanjing | 23.57 | Zhengzhou | 3.75 | 15 | Foshan | 15.91 | Tianjin | 18.52 | Hengyang | 3.68 | 16 | Nanning | 15.24 | Foshan | 17.87 | Shenyang | 3.64 | 17 | Tianjin | 15.20 | Kunming | 16.60 | Yantai | 3.53 | 18 | Jinan | 14.22 | Jinan | 16.59 | Yancheng | 3.44 | 19 | Kunming | 13.86 | Hefei | 16.44 | Qingyuan | 3.39 | 20 | Guiyang | 12.56 | Nanning | 16.30 | Tianjin | 3.32 |
|
Table 3. Statistical characteristics of the DITi values and their absolute changes for the two periods