# Using Neural Networks for Bicycle Route Planning
## 4 Results
### Bicycle Routes for Imotski Created by the Neural Networks  
After cross-checking NNs trained on Vrgorac and Knin area presented in Section 4.1, we used them to model non-existing bicycle routes in the Imotski area. We compared Imotski routes calculated with NNs to ones calculated using MA. The NN provided by training on the Vrgorac area produced the flatter route 35,660 m long, of which 3788 m differs from the route calculated using MA. In total, 89% of the route calculated with the NN overlaps with the route calculated using the multicriteria approach. The route consisted of 29 segments, of which 22 was overlapping with the route calculated using the MA approach. Figure 11 compared the results produced with NN and those produced with MA when the flatter routes are preferred. The route given by layer recurrent NN is displayed in red. The route calculated using MA that differed from the NN route is presented in black. The stop order of the NN model is labelled with white numbers, and the stop order calculated MA is labelled with black numbers. We can see that the routes overlap in most of the road network, but the stop order is different. The stop order difference is caused by the difference in the chosen route between the Imotski field and the town centre. However, we can say that both approaches gave very similar results. The steeper route chosen by layer recurrent NN is 39,138 m long and consists of 25 segments. The part of the route, which is 7841 m long and consisted of three segments, is not the same as the route provided by MA. That means that the overlap in length between the two routes is 80%; the overlap in the number of segments is 88%. Figure 12 presents the route calculated using a layer recurrent NN but with a network in which the steeper routes are preferred. A complete comparison of routes produced by a model trained with GIS MA and Vrgorac NN is shown in Table 5, and a graphical representation of the overlapping percentage is shown in Figure 13.  
Figure 11: Comparison—flatter route produced by layer recurrent NN. The next step was to check the results provided by models trained in the Knin area. The model which was trained on flatter routes produced the identical route on the Imotski area as the model trained on the Vrgorac area. The model trained on steeper routes provided the route shown in Figure 14, marked with black colour. Figure 12: Comparison—steeper route produced by layer recurrent NN. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Type of Route** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Rout Length** \\ **(Overlapping)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Number of Segments in** \\ **Route (Overlapping)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Percentage of** \\ **Length Overlapping** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Percentage of Overlapping** \\ **Segments** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Flat & \
\begin{tabular}{c} 35,660 m \\ (31,872 m) \\ \end{tabular} & 29 (22) & 89\% & 76\% \\ \hline Steep &
\begin{tabular}{c} 39,318 m \\ (31,477 m) \\ \end{tabular} & 25 (22) & 80\% & 88\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Comparison of Imotski bicycle routes given by model trained with GIS MA and a NN trained in Vrgorac area. Figure 13: Percentage of the length overlap between results of GIS MA and Vrgorac NN for Imotski bicycle routes. It was already stated that the steeper route chosen by layer recurrent NN is 39,138 m long and consisted of 25 segments. The part of the route, which is 9850 m long and consisted of 7 segments, is not the same as the route provided by MA. That means that the length overlap between the two routes is 75%, while the segment overlap is 72%. A complete comparison of routes produced by a model trained on Vrgorac roads with routes produced by a model trained on Krin roads is shown in Table 6, and a graphical representation of the overlapping percentage is shown in Figure 15.