#import "../preamble.typ": *

= Conclusion
    As seen above, there is still a lot of work to be done. And while the general travel time indiactor seems to work as a useful tool to gain informaiton about general connectivity in specific locations, the planning indicator unfortunately still seems to need a lot of work to become a useful and non-redundant measure of transit accessibility.

    As such the travel time difference indicator manages to convey information about general service patterns like the average headway of transit services, but lacks information that could have been gained by much simpler metrics too, that involve less intensive calculations. This is less true for the general mean travel time indicator that displays patterns, that are much more easy to distinguish and interpret.

    These kind of calculations then can play a vital role in informing the public but also in informing decisions of policy makers and transit agencies in their decision making processes. However, to give a full picture, a much more intensive study of travel behaviour, model itineraries and effects of specific tranist arrangements is necessary. As such this project feels, like an exercise in futility: trying to boil down hugely complex systems into easy indicators. In the end it probably needs a whole set of indicators to understand the workings of a transit system and all it's varied effects on the people who are supposed to use it.
 
<end_of_chapter>

#locate(loc => bib_state.at(query(<end_of_chapter>, loc).first().location()))