Partitioning all of Japan into a 500 m-square grid, we defined each of the sections as residential if their day-time to night-time population ratios were less than 0.8 during ordinary times (taken as the average values from January 6, to January 31, 2020). The threshold of 0.8 was fixed after checking that there was not a significant difference in the results of analysis, even using thresholds of 0.9 or 0.7.
We define the number of people going out, \(n_{i}(t)\), of a residential area (500 m grid section), i, in a certain period, t, as the difference between the night-time population and the day-time population, as follows
$$\begin{aligned} n_{i}(t)=p_{i}(t,0:00 \sim 6:00)-p_{i}(t,9:00 \sim 18:00). \end{aligned}$$
(1)
\(p_{i}(t,\tau )\) is the average population for a time period, \(\tau \). By aggregating the number of people going out, \(n_{i}(t)\), for all residential areas in a given region, r, we estimate the outflow from its region,
$$\begin{aligned} N_{r}(t)=\sum _{i \in r}n_{i}(t). \end{aligned}$$
(2)
\(N_{r}\) strongly reflects the outflow from the areas with many residents in a region r. For example, the contribution of \(N_{r}\) in \(r=\)Tokyo is largest in Setagaya-ku and smallest in Aogashima-mura. For residential areas in Tokyo, the night-time population was approximately 5.3 million and the weekday daytime population was approximately 3.6 million, so the ordinary weekday outflow was about 1.7 million.
The rates of stay-home for residents of each region were calculated by comparing the outflow on each day with the standard during normal times, categorized by weekdays, Saturdays, and holidays. We illustrate the computation method with a concrete example. The outflow for residential areas in Tokyo is approximately 870,000 per hour on average on holidays from January 6 to January 31, 2020.
$$\begin{aligned} N_\mathrm{Tokyo}({\text {Holidays on Jan., }} 2020) \approx 870{,}000. \end{aligned}$$
(3)
The outflow on the snow day (March 29, 2020) was approximately 360,000.
$$\begin{aligned} N_\mathrm{Tokyo}({\text {March }} 29, \, 2020) \approx 360{,}000. \end{aligned}$$
(4)
Going out for x minutes is counted as x/60 people. Based on the outflow in January 2020, the stay-home rate on a given day, t, is defined as follows,
$$\begin{aligned} {\text {StayHomeRate}}_{r}(t)= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 1-\frac{N_{r}(t)}{N_{r}({\text {Weekdays on Jan., }} 2020)} &{} \text{ if } \text{ day } t \text { is a weekday}\\ 1-\frac{N_{r}(t)}{N_{r}({\text {Saturdays on Jan., }} 2020)} &{} \text{ if } \text{ day } t \text { is a Saturday}\\ 1-\frac{N_{r}(t)}{N_{r}({\text {Holidays on Jan.,}} \, 2020} &{} \text{ if } \text{ day } t \text { is a holiday} \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$
(5)
On the snow day, people living in Tokyo showed a stay-home rate of 59% (=0.59), relative to ordinary holiday rates. If the outflow is more significant than on a normal day, the stay-home rate will be negative. For example, on February 4, the first day of the Snow Festival in Sapporo, the stay-home rate was \(-0.11\) in the Chuo-ku of Sapporo.
The rates of stay-home observe the change in the number of people out of residential areas. On the other hand, Google’s COVID-19 community mobility report observes the change in the number of people staying in residential areas based on the median value of the corresponding day of the week during the five weeks from January 3 to February 6, 2020 [19]. The definition of residential areas and the representativeness of the users who provide location information are unclear in the Mobility Report. However, the Mobility Report is widely used as a reference worldwide. We estimate the change in staying home from baseline, \(C_{r}(t)\), using DOCOMO’s “Mobaku” in the same way as the stay-home rate (the change in outing), as follows:
$$\begin{aligned} C_{r}(t)= \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \frac{\sum _{i \in r}p_{i}(t, 9:00 \sim 18:00)}{ \sum _{i \in r}p_{i}({\text {Weekdays on Jan.,}} \, 2020, 9:00 \sim 18:00)}-1 &{} \text{ if } \text{ day } t \text { is a weekday}\\ \frac{\sum _{i \in r}p_{i}(t, 9:00 \sim 18:00)}{ \sum _{i \in r}p_{i}({\text {Saturdays on Jan.,}} \, 2020, 9:00 \sim 18:00)}-1 &{} \text{ if } \text{ day } t \text { is a Saturday}\\ \frac{\sum _{i \in r}p_{i}(t, 9:00 \sim 18:00)}{ \sum _{i \in r}p_{i}({\text {Holidays on Jan.,}} \, 2020, 9:00 \sim 18:00)}-1 &{} \text{ if } \text{ day } t \text { is a holiday} \end{array} \right. \end{aligned}$$
(6)
We compare \(C_{r}(t)\) to the mobility report on residential areas and the stay-home rate. Figure 3 shows these time series in \(r=\)Tokyo. \(C_{r}(t)\) is almost equal to the mobility report on residential areas. In other words, the residential areas we observe are not so different from those of Google, and the trend of population change in residential areas is also the same. There are divergences between \(C_{r}(t)\) (is the change in staying home) and the stay-home rate (is the change in outing) because \(C_{r}(t)\) and google mobility reports do not take into account the resident population (night population). The Japanese government had set a goal of reducing the number of contact opportunities (mainly going out) by 80%. To observe the achievement of the goal, the stay-home rate, which observes the number of people who go out, is useful.