I get a smaller radius (139.33m) since I used the population density of 18,600 from the article. I recommend changing the equation to have ’2Q’ in the numerator, where Q = quality. The radius would be directly proportional to the quality, which not only makes logical sense, but it makes the equation more interesting.

I get a smaller radius (139.33m) since I used the population density of 18,600 from the article. I recommend changing the equation to have ’2Q’ in the numerator, where Q = quality. The radius would be directly proportional to the quality, which not only makes logical sense, but it makes the equation more interesting.