# Analysis of Driving Behavior of Micromobility Vehicle Users at Mini-Roundabouts
## 3 Results and Discussion
The higher percentiles (90 th and 95 th percentiles) show a more dynamic behavior with an entry speed of 19.1 km/h and maximum speeds in the circulating and exit phases of 22.55 km/h and 24.1 km/h, respectively. These users have a more aggressive driving style, which could compromise the stability of the e-scooter, especially when cornering sharply or accelerating suddenly. An analysis of Figure 8b and Table 4 immediately shows that the 85 th percentile speed for bicycles during the entry phase is around 18.20 km/h, highlighting the greater confidence of cyclists compared to e-scooter users when approaching the roundabout. This result suggests that the inherent stability of bicycles allows users to maintain higher speeds even during a period of potential uncertainty. The inherent stability of bicycles, which enables higher speeds, has been documented in numerous studies addressing safety and control roundabouts [27; 34]. During the circulation phase, the 85 th percentile speed (S\({}_{85}\)) reaches about 19.25 km/h, which is a moderate increase compared to the entry phase. This confirms a uniform and consistent behavior during the circulation phase within the central island. This result is consistent with analyses suggesting that bicycles maintain higher speeds in the intermediate phases of the route as they have a greater tolerance to narrow trajectories [28; 45]. In the exit phase, the 85 th percentile speed is estimated to be 19.30 km/h, suggesting that cyclists tend to maintain relatively high but controlled speeds that fluctuate less compared to e-scooters. This observation is consistent with studies showing greater uniformity in cyclists' performance, even under conditions of terminal acceleration [27; 33]. For the lower percentiles (5 th and 10 th), the entry speeds are between 11.5 km/h and 12.5 km/h, higher than the e-scooters. This indicates that even the most cautious cyclists maintain a relatively high speed thanks to the greater stability of the bike. In the circulation phase, the most cautious cyclists reach speeds between 14 km/h and 15 km/h, which is consistent with the typical behavioral dynamics during the circulation around the central island. In the exit phase, speeds increase further, with values between 15.25 km/h and 15.75 km/h. This indicates that even the most cautious cyclists accelerate in this phase to prepare for the entry into the destination leg. The 50 th percentile speed (S\({}_{50}\)) is 15 km/h in the entry phase, a typical value that indicates safe and fluid cyclist behavior. In the circulation phase, the S\({}_{50}\) increases to 16.92 km/h, indicating a speed variation associated with the dynamics of navigating the circulatory roadway. In the exit phase, the 50 th percentile speed reaches 17.64 km/h, indicating a gradual transition to the destination branch with moderate and steady acceleration. The higher percentiles (90 th and 95 th) show that the fastest cyclists reach speeds of 19.5 km/h during entry, 21 km/h during circulation, and 20.5 km/h during exit. Although these values are high, they show less variability compared to e-scooters, reflecting a more consistent and predictable behavior. Even in the exit phase, where the e-scooters exhibit greater speed variability, the cyclists maintain high but consistent speeds, with less extreme peaks. Cyclists exhibit higher and more stable speeds than e-scooter users in all phases of the crossing maneuver, which can be attributed to the greater stability and easier control of bicycles. The 85 th percentile speed highlights safe yet dynamic behavior, while the lower percentiles show that even the most cautious cyclists maintain relatively high speeds. Studies confirm that bicycles offer greater stability due to their design and allow for more consistent and controllable speeds compared to e-scooters [46; 47]. Conversely, e-scooters exhibit greater dynamic variability, with less stable speeds and greater susceptibility to vibration, reducing user safety and predictability [12].