# Exploring Space Syntax Integration at Public Transport Hubs and Public Squares Using Drone Footage
## 1 Introduction  
Space Syntax is a concept and method that was developed primarily in the fields of urban design and architecture for describing and analysing the relationships between spaces and buildings (both outdoor and indoor). In Space Syntax, the spaces are understood as voids (streets, squares, rooms, fields, etc.) between walls, fences and other impediments or obstructions that restrain (pedestrian) traffic and/or the visual field. The fundamental building blocks of Space Syntax are the axial lines and axial maps, or convex maps and isovist fields--depending on the size of the studied area. At the urban scale, axial lines correspond to street segments, and Space Syntax is concerned with the topological (relational) aspect of the street network, i.e., how axial lines are connected to each other [1]. On a smaller scale, such as inside buildings, or in the public spaces between groups of buildings in a neighbourhood or a small village, isovist fields and convex maps are used for the same purposes [2]. The main type of analysis used in Space Syntax focuses on connectivity and integration. Connectivity is a static local measure that represents the number of (neighbouring) lines that directly intersect a particular axial line (or isovist field). On the other hand, integration represents how well the initial segment is integrated into the global system, where higher integration means greater connection (or accessibility) to the network. Space Syntax typically uses topological distance (the lowest number of direction changes from each street segment to all others, typically called depth) or geometric distance (the lowest number of angular deviations from each street segment to all others) when calculating connectivity and integration [3]. The robust methodological foundation of Space Syntax--and the reason why we have decided to explore it further within this paper--is the existence of a correlationbetween pedestrian movement, vehicular movement, and the configuration of the spatial layout [4; 5; 6]. Several empirical studies have shown positive correlations between integration and the presence of pedestrians [5; 7; 8; 9]; in this regard, it can be argued that more integrated street segments attract more pedestrians partly because of the presence of various economic activities along them [4]. [PERSON] et al. (2014) [8] suggested pedestrian movement analysis to predict the future results of urban planning as well as to offer specific recommendations for areas where conflicts arise between cars and pedestrians. [PERSON] et al. (2016) [10] have proposed an alternative walkability index based on the concept of Space Syntax. Also of interest is the study by [PERSON] et al. (2016) [11] who examined whether two street network measures (intersection density and street integration from Space Syntax) were independently associated with walking for transport, and to what extent the relationship of street integration with walking for transport may be explained by the presence of destinations. [PERSON] et al. (2020) [12] used Space Syntax and geographic information systems (GIS) to examine the syntactic measures and built-environment factors that affect pedestrian volume in different land-use zones. Likewise, the Space Syntax method has been used for describing the spatial properties of vital well-functioned cities. For example, [PERSON] and [PERSON] (2012) [13] suggested using the Space Syntax method to gain insight into how the spatial structure of the street and road network in a station's vicinity relates to the station's place and node value. [PERSON] et al. (2020) [14] examined the strength and shape of associations of multiple built environment attributes with cycling for transport in Australian urban areas; they found that the odds of people using bicycles for transport were 10-15% higher for each additional decile increment in residential density, walk score, and street integration, suggesting potentially large differences in bicycle use between the least and most bicycle-friendly the neighbourhoods.