## 1 Introduction  
One of the significant challenges that the present world is facing is the uptake of sustainable modes of transport. The transportation sector is the second largest contributor to global greenhouse emissions [1]. Another challenge that needs immediate attention is the number of fatalities and casualties due to road traffic crashes. Road traffic crashes are the leading cause of death in the younger generation, 15-29 age group [2]. Hence, it is essential to improve safety as well as decrease the emissions from transportation. This will help save lives, decrease the number of injuries, and improve the cities' likeability. These objectives can only be achieved if we promote cycling as a mode of travel. The share of the cycling mode should increase many folds from the present low base [3]. Such a measure will have social, economic, as well as environmental benefits. The primary hurdle that affects the uptake of cycling as a mode of travel is the high inequity of cyclists' safety. Cyclists face 13 times higher risk for the same distance traversed in Great Britain [4]. A study on the mode shift elasticity [5] concluded that the latter is more significant than that for cyclists, i.e., they attracted a proportionally higher number of cyclist road users for a safety improvement. Identifying the physical and environmental threats to the cyclist in the natural urban environment provides an insight into the preference and choice of cyclists [6]. The built environment, weather, work-related factors, and attitudes affect the everyday commute by bicycle [7]. In addition to the varying infrastructure, environmental, and traffic flow conditions, cycling hazards are also dependent upon cyclist-specific variables of age, experience, and gender [8]. It is widely established in the literature (see [9, 10]) that how males and females use the infrastructure significantly varies, with varied safety implications. Women are likely to make short journeys, and their journey's spatial and temporal structure is different from men. They rarely prefer large multi-lane roads and busy junctions. Instead, they prefer selected areas of the city having narrow streets with calming traffic measures. They generally cycle at lower speeds, are more likely to make recreational rather than commuter trips and have a stronger liking for quiet traffic streets [11]. A study [12] investigating crashes in the Czech Republic reported that males account for around 69% of the crashes and are more likely to be involved in a fatal crash (80%). Similarly, a study in the USA [13] found that males are at a higher risk than females (around five times more for the same distance travelled). It is common speculation that men drive less safely and more recklessly than women. Another reported variable in the literature is the age of the trip maker. The work on cyclist near-misses in London [14] led them to the conclusion that the age group of the rider directly affects their daily near-misses. They reported that the daily near-misses decrease with age, from 2.47 (20-29) to 1.85 (>60 groups). These near misses are correlated with crashes (see [15]). Similar results were obtained in Germany, and a study concluded that cyclists of varying age groups use the infrastructure differently and exhibit varying microscopic road traffic behaviour [16; 17]. Men are more reluctant to modal shift to cycling than women [18; 19], and it takes much more improvement in the infrastructure and environment for women to consider cycling [20]. The British cycling report (Transport Research Lab report 490) argued that gender, age, and cycling experience are critical variables affecting cyclists' safety. However, these variables do not influence how the cyclist rates a particular cyclable route. The qualitative evaluation of the infrastructure is the same across age and gender [21]. Cycling safety is an important topic; however, limited studies effectively model the risk in terms of exposure [22].