Abstract:This study analyzes the volume of Citi Bike trips in New York City during March of 2016 and aims to determine if the average number of trips on the weekdays is greater than the average volume of trips on the weekends. This difference, or lack thereof, would indicate that Citi Bike subscribers primarily use the service to commute to and from work. Conducting a difference in means t-test at a .05 significance level, I am able to reject the null hypothesis, that Citi Bike ridership on the weekdays is less than or equal to the ridership volume during the weekends. Data:In order to conduct this study, I acquired and analyzed Citi Bike data. The original dataset included several columns of information that were irrelevant to this project, so I removed everything except the columns hosting information about trip start time and trip duration. (Initially, I did not remove all columns, but decided to do so given Ian Wright's feedback on my notebook). I created a new 'date' column inside the Pandas dataframe, which was capable of reading and grouping data with date and time information. With that, I generated a final 'weekday' column, which associated the date with a categorical assignment corresponding to weekday: 0 = Monday through 6 = Sunday. I then summed the number of rides by weekday and plotted the seven counts. Finally, I reset the dataframe index to date and time in order to run a count of all rides that occurred by date. I reapplied the weekday iterator to associate a weekday with each date. These daily counts were then separated into two lists, one list has a count by day of each weekday and the other has a count of each weekend day.Analysis:With daily weekday and daily weekend trip counts in lists, I was able to run a t-test, which determines whether the difference in means of two samples is statistically significant. Per both Ian and Kevin Han's recommendations, I chose the t-test because because I do not have the population parameters (mean and standard deviation). Results:Testing my data at a significance value of .05, allowed me to reject the null hypothesis, which states that the Citi Bike ridership on the weekdays is less than or equal to that on the weekends. I can reject the null hypothesis because the p-value returned in the t-test is .01. Future Research:While I can reject the null hypothesis, this experiment leaves room for further analysis. For example, I only test one month of data here, and while there are many rides in one month, a more robust analysis, and perhaps predictive analysis, could be created by using more data. Because Citi Bikes are outdoor methods of transportation, I anticipate that ridership volume in March may not be indicative of annual ridership patterns.Link to Github repository: https://github.com/kristikorsberg/PUI2016_kk3374/tree/master/HW6_kk3374
Screen shot 2016 10 16 at 4.02.12 pm

Santiago Carrillo

and 5 more

ABSTRACT New York City keeps records of Citi Bike services, including demographics of users and statistics on bike use. Here, we performed a statistical analysis to determine the relationship between biker age and trip duration, testing the alternative hypothesis that Citi Bike users under age 35 are more likely to bike for longer durations than the average user. Through a simple Z-test, we were able to reject our null hypothesis, concluding that trip duration of bikers under 35 is significantly greater than the average user. DATA For this project, our research question was: _Are Citi Bike users under 35 years of age significantly more likely bike for longer durations compared to the average user?_ For this analysis, we formed the following hypotheses: _Null Hypothesis:_ The mean trip duration of Citi Bike users under the age of 35 is the same or less than the mean trip duration of an average user, significance level = 0.05. _Alternative Hypothesis:_ The mean trip duration of Citi Bike users under the age of 35 is more than the mean trip duration of an average user, significance level = 0.05 To test these hypotheses, we chose Citi Bike data from December 2015. The information downloaded from the data facility contained more variables than needed to compare age and trip duration. Additionally, it was not organized in columns, which could led to errors, such as interpreting variable names as observations. As such, we first organized our data into columns, then dropped 13 of the 15 categories. We were left with “birth year” as our independent variable, and “trip duration” in seconds as our dependent variable. After plotting both variables, we identified several outliers of impossibly old users, i.e., those born before 1910. Plot 1 shows a scatter plot of the raw data, plotting birth year against trip duration. Histogram 1 shows the raw distribution of age across the data set. In Histogram 3, the distributions of trip duration for the entire data set (in blue) and for the group of those 35 and under (in green) are compared. ANALYSIS Our peer reviews suggested we perform a Z-test to compare the information of users under 35 and the total population. This test is possible because we know the population parameters (since dataset itself represents the entire population of Citi Bike users). Given the size of our sample, and the fact that we know the mean and standard deviation for both both groups, we chose to test our hypothesis with a Z-test. As such, we first had to calculate the mean and standard trip duration for the two groups. These values were plugged into the Z-test formula. RESULTS From our Z-test, we obtained a Z-statistic of 17.79. From the Z-Table, this gave an area of over 0.9998. Thus, our p-value is (1 - 0.9998), or 0.0002, meaning there is a 0.02% probability that the difference observed between the two groups is due to chance alone. Specifically, this p-value is much smaller than our alpha level of 0.05, meaning we can reject our null hypothesis, and can conclude that trip duration times of Citi Bike users are longer for those under age 35 compared the average user. LINK TO ORIGINAL NOTEBOOK https://github.com/jc7344/PUI2016_jc7344/blob/master/HW6_jc7344/HW6_Assignment2.ipynb