Figure 2
From: Unraveling the hidden organisation of urban systems and their mobility flows
Structural vs Functional organisation of cities measured by means of Segregation and Integration. (a) Structural Integration vs Segregation. Analysing the measures of segregation (\(Q^{\ast }\)) and Integration (GCE) for the topological un-directed network describing the road structure of cities we observe a very strong anti-correlation (Pearson \(r=-0.92\)). (b) Functional Integration vs Segregation. The same measures of the weighted network describing the mobility flows display clear deviations from the anti-correlation of integration and segregation, in particular for the city of Los Angeles. (c) Structural vs Functional Segregation. The measures of segregation for the two types of networks are strongly correlated (Pearson \(r=0.91\)) but differ in value. (d) Structural vs Functional Integration. The measures of integration for the two types of networks deviate from perfect correlation (again due to the deviation of Los Angeles) but are very similar in value. In all panels, the dimensions of the circle is proportional to the size of the area considered