1. Introduction
Jane Jacobs [
1] first proposed the concept of urban vitality and used it to indicate the intensity of human activities in urban space. Later studies used this concept primarily to measure the richness of people’s activities in the space and the perception of an excellent urban spatial environment. Urban vitality plays a vital role in fulfilling people’s needs for a high-quality life and augmenting the overall spatial quality of cities [
2,
3]. Typically, blocks are areas surrounded by roads and are the fundamental building blocks of the urban fabric. From the standpoint of human behavior, a block is a shared space created by the spatial interaction of residents’ behavior [
4]. Urban activities and their interaction with spatial entities reflect block vitality, where spatial entities refer to geographic spaces that support people’s activities, including stores and parks [
5,
6]. Block vitality is a part of urban vitality. Block vitality exerts a positive impact on the health of residents, public safety of the city, and socioeconomic development [
7,
8,
9]. The single function and sociality of blocks have declined people’s willingness to engage in spatial interaction activities in recent years, contradicting the residents’ gradually increasing demand for livability. Lately, block vitality has garnered widespread attention as a critical component of urban vitality.
As early as when urban vitality was first proposed, studies discussed the factors influencing urban vitality. Most traditional studies on urban vitality used questionnaires and field interviews to qualitatively investigate the factors and mechanisms influencing vitality and suggest ways to enhance urban vitality [
3,
10,
11]. For example, studies proposed that the higher the building density, the narrower the neighborhood form, and the more intricate the urban function, the higher the urban vitality [
12,
13,
14]. Previous studies laid the foundation with strong operability; however, these studies had limitations such as the lack of data support, limited research scope, and that the degree of influence of each element cannot be measured quantitatively [
15]. With the progress of Internet technology, various open-source big data have been extensively used in academic research. These big data have the advantages of large data volume and easy access, providing robust data support to realize quantitative research on urban vitality.
Traditional quantitative studies of urban vitality mostly used small restaurant business distribution density [
16,
17] and nighttime lighting data [
18,
19,
20] as vitality measures to measure static vitality, leading to a lack of research on the difference in vitality between workdays and weekends. However, various aspects of human activity, such as willingness to go out, activity choices, and places to travel, differ markedly between workdays and weekends [
21,
22]. Thus, urban vitality characterized by the intensity of human activities in the city also exhibits significant differences. Hence, it is necessary and meaningful to consider the difference in vitality between workdays and weekends in the research system. From the different attributes of urban vitality, the environmental influencing factors of urban vitality are primarily divided into two categories—social environment and physical environment [
23,
24]. While the social environment denotes economic elements, historical and cultural elements, and other sociological attributes, the physical environment denotes the elements of the physical space. In the research of the influence mechanism of urban vitality, three aspects of urban function, urban accessibility, and the degree of urban construction among the elements of the physical environment are used extensively [
5,
25,
26,
27]. Traditional research on urban function is typically measured using land-use type data, which is valid but still has disadvantages such as large scope and slow update [
5]. Notably, people are the source of urban vitality and the subject of perception of the urban environment, and their perception of the external environment significantly influences their behavior. However, human perception of the environment has not been included in the research mechanism of environmental impact on vitality.
In recent years, cellular signaling data have been applied to measure regional vitality [
28,
29,
30], which can truly and reliably reflect human behavior and better represent the spatial and temporal dynamics of human activities compared with traditional data of restaurant enterprises and luminous remote-sensing data. Based on the abovementioned advantages, the cellular signaling data can contribute to the study of the dynamic change characteristics of vitality on workdays and weekends and illustrate the overall vitality intensity more comprehensively [
31,
32]. With the availability of open-source data, the measurement of two aspects of urban function—urban function density, which can also be called land-use intensity, and urban-function-mixing degree meaning the intensity of mixed land use—has changed. The POI data are used as the most fine-grained data of urban land use to assess the function density of cities, compensating for the drawbacks of large scope and slow update of land-use type data [
33,
34]. In addition, the calculation of the function-mixing degree has evolved from the traditional calculation of the area and proportion of each type of land in the region to the calculation of the spatial entropy of POI; this calculation reflects a more representative degree of mixing [
35,
36]. People are a vital source and component of urban vitality; however, the existing literature lacks research on how people’s perception of the physical environment affects urban vitality. Some studies have attempted to explore the impact of street greening on human travel behavior. They have considered the approach of extracting vegetation indices from remote-sensing image data, which differ markedly from the greening situation shown by human eyes [
37]. With the rapid advancement of multisource geospatial data, researchers have access to a large number of publicly available geotagged images [
38]. The viewpoint of these streetscape images can more intuitively reflect residents’ actual perceptions of their surroundings, providing the feasibility of introducing the perception of human eye vision into the influencing factors of block vitality on a large scale [
39].
Previous research on urban vitality has focused on developed countries in Europe and the United States, and the exploration of the relationship between urban vitality and urban environment in China has important implications for developing countries [
40]. With the development of open-source data in China, scholars have studied the relationship between block vitality and block environment in major cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenzhen [
20,
25,
41]. The existing inquiry on the relationship between urban vitality and environment in China suffers from the shortcomings of small research scope (only some streets are studied) and failure to consider spatial heterogeneity and temporal heterogeneity [
2,
41,
42]. This study expanded the scope of the study based on the previous work and considered the lack of vitality comparison between workdays and weekends and the lack of human eye perception in vitality research in existing studies. This study used cellular signaling data distribution density to measure block vitality and constructed four level indicators—“block development intensity”, which measures the horizontal and vertical development of block land, “block function”, which indicates the use of block land, “block accessibility”, which is a measure of how easy it is to get around the block, and block environment perception—innovatively introducing human perception of the environment into the discussion of the correlation with block vitality. In addition, geographically weighted regression models (GWR) were used to analyze the impact of each indicator element on vitality during workdays versus weekends. The remaining components of this study are as follows:
Section 2 introduces the background of the study area, the source, and preprocessing of the study data;
Section 3 introduces the research methods, including the construction of the index system, image segmentation method, and the GWR;
Section 4 details the research results;
Section 5 and
Section 6 discuss the research results and analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the study.
5. Conclusions and Discussion
Now is an era of rapid development of big data; cellular signaling data as a type of big data can effectively reflect the spatial and temporal characteristics of human behavior. This study used the distribution density of cellular signaling data to quantify block vitality and constructed an index system for the block environment. In addition, human perception of the environment was introduced into the index system. Streetscape image segmentation was used to attain the perception of greenery and sky to better fit the human perspective. Finally, GWR was used to reflect the temporal and spatial impact mechanism of the indicator on the vitality of the block, and according to the impact mechanism, it contributed to making reasonable suggestions for improving block vitality. The following conclusions were drawn from this study:
First, block vitality has significant spatial and temporal heterogeneity. Overall, vitality is stronger and more concentrated in downtowns than in distant urban areas. Block vitality is at its lowest in the early hours of the day and peaks during lunch and dinnertime. Block vitality on weekends is more balanced with a decrease in the peak. Nighttime vitality on weekends is higher than on workdays.
Second, indicators of block environment have large variability in their impact on block vitality. The most influential indicators are the function density of the block and the road density, whereas the less influential indicators are the function-mixing degree and the sky view. Enhancing the accessibility of blocks can be done by increasing the density of bus stations, rationalizing subway lines to decrease the distance from the nearest subway station, and implementing a “small block and dense road network.” Facilitating people’s travel behavior is a necessary condition for the growth of block vitality. Increasing building density and floor area ratio in poorly built-up areas can accommodate more social behavior to attain block vitality growth. Increasing the function density and mix of functions in a block can attract more people to work, live, relax, and play. By increasing the block attractiveness, the vitality can be increased. Finally, beautiful greenery, shade, and open views will attract people to go out and promote block vitality, especially in blocks with poorly constructed existing greenery.
Finally, a gap exists between the impact of each indicator on workdays and weekends. Owing to the differences in the behavioral characteristics of people on workdays and weekends, the degree of influence of each indicator on block vitality also varies. For example, for blocks with a high demand for weekend outings, such as universities, improving block accessibility can effectively enhance block vitality. Blocks with a single function, such as industrial parks, can be made more vibrant by increasing the functional density and functional mix of the block.
6. Contributions and Limitations
People are paying increasing attention to the human living environment in recent years. As a crucial index to measure the degree of urban development and enhance the human living environment, the study of its quantification and influencing factors is essential to improve block vitality. This study intended to enrich the quantitative form of block vitality and improve the index system of block vitality by examining the influencing factors and mechanisms of block vitality in Wuhan and, meanwhile, hopes that the findings will provide reference suggestions for the enhancement of block vitality in other cities.
From a theoretical perspective, the innovation points of this study are primarily reflected in the following two points. First, this study used cellular signaling data that reflect the spatial and temporal characteristics of human behavior. Cellular signaling data have the advantages of a large sample size and reliable information, which can completely reflect the real condition of workdays and weekends compared with traditional data. Second, this study added human perception of the environment to the index system of block vitality evaluation. Using streetscape image segmentation to quantify the green-looking ratio and openness of the block from a human perspective fills the gap of human perception of the environment in block vitality research and reflects the human-centered planning idea. From a practical perspective, this study focused on dynamic block vitality and examined ways to enhance block vitality by dividing it into workdays and weekends, as opposed to previous studies of static vitality.
Although this study has many advantages, some limitations need to be addressed subsequently. First, with respect to the dependent variable, the activities of some people who do not engage in mobile communication behaviors were overlooked when quantifying block vitality. Subsequent studies can combine other indicators to jointly enhance the quantification of block vitality. Second, in terms of environmental elements, the environmental elements in this study considered more physical environmental elements, while social environmental elements such as population size and economic development were not included in the consideration [
58]. Green-looking ratio and openness as human perception of the environment were included in this study, but human perception of emotion is diverse, and other elements such as human emotions in different environments should also be included in the index system in subsequent studies to more comprehensively consider the impact of human perception on block vitality.