Digital Atlas · case study · 15-minute walk catchments from each student union
Amenities around sixteen US campuses and the signals of their neighbourhoods
Restaurants, cafes, bars and sports facilities within a 15-minute walk of each campus's student union, measured from Digital Atlas place and population layers only, ranked, correlated with the attainment, income and jobs of the same catchment with student density held constant, and set beside a published world ranking.
Generated 2026-11-01 01:32 UTC. Releases: boundaries=layer00_geography_v2_polygons, employment_od=tract_employment_v2, higher_order=demand_employment_access_v2, mobility=national_tracts_v2, nightlights=national_tracts_v1, people=comprehensive_v3, places=us-cleaned-places-categorized, places_resolver_v5=resolver_v5_upstream_92007a1, road_network=national_full_v2. Origin: each campus's student union; a first pass from the main listing is recorded in steps.md.
Executive summary
Densest amenities: Columbia University (amenity index 100.0, 103.1 food and drink places per km²), then University of California, Berkeley (72.4) and University of Pennsylvania (53.1). Sparsest: Stanford University (7.7), Duke University and University of Florida. Strongest neighbourhood signals: Harvard University; weakest: The Ohio State University. Research output, citations and official rankings do not exist in Digital Atlas; the signals here are residents' attainment and income, workplace jobs and net job inflow of the catchment, and they describe the neighbourhood around the campus, not the institution. The outside view at the end sets the atlas measures beside a published world ranking.
Amenity index against success index across the sixteen: Spearman rho +0.11 (p 0.68); controlling for the catchment's 18-to-24 share, partial rho +0.10.
Simple correlations with |rho| of at least 0.5:
Sports facilities per km² vs Success index: rho +0.54, p 0.029, partial rho +0.43
No partial correlation (18-to-24 share held constant) reaches |rho| 0.5 either.
Combined view
Rank
University
Control
Amenity index
Amenity rank
Success index
Success rank
Amenity label
Signal label
1
Columbia University
private
100.0
1
49.9
5
High density
Strong signal
2
University of Pennsylvania
private
42.2
3
59.6
3
High density
Strong signal
3
University of California, Berkeley
public
56.1
2
36.6
7
High density
Moderate
4
Harvard University
private
30.0
8
79.8
1
Moderate
Strong signal
5
University of Michigan
public
36.4
5
43.4
6
High density
Strong signal
6
The University of Texas at Austin
public
31.1
7
33.8
9
Moderate
Moderate
7
University of Chicago
private
6.9
13
51.1
4
Low density
Strong signal
8
Stanford University
private
3.5
16
63.4
2
Low density
Strong signal
9
University of Wisconsin-Madison
public
39.8
4
18.9
15
High density
Weak signal
10
Georgia Institute of Technology
public
19.3
11
36.0
8
Moderate
Moderate
11
University of Washington
public
33.8
6
25.9
14
High density
Weak signal
12
University of California, Los Angeles
public
21.3
10
31.6
10
Moderate
Moderate
13
Arizona State University
public
26.3
9
27.1
12
Moderate
Weak signal
14
University of Florida
public
5.1
14
29.3
11
Low density
Moderate
15
The Ohio State University
public
19.1
12
16.4
16
Low density
Weak signal
16
Duke University
private
3.8
15
26.4
13
Low density
Weak signal
Amenity density (15-minute walk from the student union)
Rank
University
Residents
Area km²
Restaurants
Cafes
Bars
Food & drink /1,000
Food & drink /km²
Sports facilities
Sports /1,000
Sports /km²
Amenity index
1
Columbia University
77,843
3.26
225
83
28
4.32
103.1
88
1.13
27.0
100.0
2
University of California, Berkeley
32,442
3.90
191
72
19
8.69
72.4
37
1.14
9.5
56.1
3
University of Pennsylvania
28,307
3.81
138
56
8
7.14
53.1
37
1.31
9.7
42.2
4
University of Wisconsin-Madison
27,926
2.90
97
31
38
5.94
57.3
15
0.54
5.2
39.8
5
University of Michigan
23,515
4.06
102
48
34
7.82
45.4
39
1.66
9.6
36.4
6
University of Washington
20,120
3.95
100
52
13
8.20
41.7
38
1.89
9.6
33.8
7
The University of Texas at Austin
25,518
3.78
113
44
17
6.82
46.1
18
0.71
4.8
31.1
8
Harvard University
33,401
4.41
101
39
10
4.49
34.0
49
1.47
11.1
30.0
9
Arizona State University
13,639
3.94
101
35
26
11.88
41.2
15
1.10
3.8
26.3
10
University of California, Los Angeles
30,887
3.98
82
36
2
3.89
30.2
25
0.81
6.3
21.3
11
Georgia Institute of Technology
14,336
3.62
70
14
5
6.21
24.6
29
2.02
8.0
19.3
12
The Ohio State University
27,284
4.18
76
41
24
5.17
33.8
10
0.37
2.4
19.1
13
University of Chicago
23,292
4.07
48
18
3
2.96
17.0
10
0.43
2.5
6.9
14
University of Florida
12,641
4.22
23
17
7
3.72
11.1
19
1.50
4.5
5.1
15
Duke University
5,060
3.68
24
16
2
8.30
11.4
12
2.37
3.3
3.8
16
Stanford University
9,047
3.78
9
18
2
3.21
7.7
20
2.21
5.3
3.5
Success signals
Rank
University
Age 18-24
Median age
Bachelor's+
Graduate
Median HH income
Per-capita income
Poverty
Workplace jobs
Jobs /km²
Net inflow /resident
Success index
1
Harvard University
32%
27.8
87.1%
56.1%
$120,456
$72,968
14.5%
34,599
7,846
0.64
79.8
2
Stanford University
60%
21.9
92.2%
57.2%
$72,748
$28,006
16.3%
9,193
2,434
0.82
63.4
3
University of Pennsylvania
61%
21.3
76.9%
39.2%
$49,609
$15,710
37.2%
65,720
17,262
2.07
59.6
4
University of Chicago
30%
27.3
73.3%
50.6%
$64,237
$43,964
25.6%
28,064
6,901
0.84
51.1
5
Columbia University
17%
34.9
62.2%
35.0%
$81,648
$55,941
20.2%
47,640
14,615
0.21
49.9
6
University of Michigan
78%
21.3
81.8%
46.9%
$38,088
$28,089
57.9%
16,795
4,140
0.55
43.4
7
University of California, Berkeley
60%
21.9
72.7%
37.6%
$56,568
$30,490
39.2%
19,354
4,968
0.33
36.6
8
Georgia Institute of Technology
60%
22.5
67.9%
32.1%
$79,169
$40,740
24.1%
20,506
5,667
1.16
36.0
9
The University of Texas at Austin
82%
20.5
79.4%
33.4%
$27,094
$13,101
53.7%
25,066
6,639
0.74
33.8
10
University of California, Los Angeles
77%
20.9
69.8%
35.9%
$45,696
$11,535
47.2%
21,937
5,517
0.50
31.6
11
University of Florida
90%
19.6
72.7%
45.7%
$17,797
$3,493
64.2%
12,147
2,880
0.85
29.3
12
Arizona State University
73%
20.4
65.0%
29.2%
$52,604
$25,515
31.9%
25,712
6,534
1.65
27.1
13
Duke University
72%
20.7
58.1%
26.5%
$40,811
$5,838
36.1%
43,340
11,763
8.35
26.4
14
University of Washington
72%
21.2
66.9%
31.3%
$40,338
$20,117
42.5%
23,507
5,945
0.94
25.9
15
University of Wisconsin-Madison
82%
21.1
56.7%
27.3%
$23,238
$12,977
67.2%
29,290
10,108
0.88
18.9
16
The Ohio State University
78%
20.6
55.9%
21.5%
$31,130
$14,291
51.1%
42,678
10,219
1.35
16.4
Correlations, simple and with the 18-to-24 share held constant
Amenity measure
Signal
n
Pearson r
Spearman rho
p (rho)
Partial rho | 18-24 share
Restaurants per km²
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
-0.22
-0.12
0.656
-0.13
Restaurants per km²
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
-0.25
-0.19
0.485
-0.22
Restaurants per km²
Median household income
16
+0.17
+0.07
0.795
+0.05
Restaurants per km²
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.49
+0.38
0.151
+0.37
Restaurants per km²
Net job inflow per resident
16
-0.35
-0.28
0.295
-0.27
Restaurants per km²
Success index
16
+0.06
+0.04
0.871
+0.01
Cafes per km²
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
-0.14
-0.03
0.922
-0.03
Cafes per km²
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
-0.20
-0.07
0.787
-0.07
Cafes per km²
Median household income
16
+0.09
-0.05
0.846
-0.13
Cafes per km²
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.47
+0.26
0.322
+0.28
Cafes per km²
Net job inflow per resident
16
-0.33
-0.38
0.147
-0.39
Cafes per km²
Success index
16
+0.08
+0.05
0.854
+0.07
Bars per km²
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
-0.39
-0.33
0.217
-0.30
Bars per km²
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
-0.37
-0.34
0.200
-0.28
Bars per km²
Median household income
16
-0.26
-0.22
0.405
-0.02
Bars per km²
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.22
+0.27
0.316
+0.34
Bars per km²
Net job inflow per resident
16
-0.28
-0.15
0.587
-0.19
Bars per km²
Success index
16
-0.33
-0.26
0.333
-0.15
Food & drink per km²
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
-0.24
-0.14
0.617
-0.14
Food & drink per km²
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
-0.27
-0.20
0.464
-0.21
Food & drink per km²
Median household income
16
+0.10
-0.02
0.940
-0.04
Food & drink per km²
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.48
+0.38
0.147
+0.39
Food & drink per km²
Net job inflow per resident
16
-0.35
-0.32
0.226
-0.33
Food & drink per km²
Success index
16
+0.01
+0.00
0.991
+0.01
Food & drink per 1,000 residents
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
-0.26
-0.23
0.393
-0.20
Food & drink per 1,000 residents
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
-0.50
-0.50
0.050
-0.47
Food & drink per 1,000 residents
Median household income
16
-0.23
-0.15
0.572
+0.08
Food & drink per 1,000 residents
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.09
+0.12
0.656
+0.18
Food & drink per 1,000 residents
Net job inflow per resident
16
+0.31
+0.33
0.208
+0.31
Food & drink per 1,000 residents
Success index
16
-0.37
-0.34
0.196
-0.29
Sports facilities per km²
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
+0.02
+0.36
0.165
+0.33
Sports facilities per km²
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
+0.09
+0.39
0.134
+0.30
Sports facilities per km²
Median household income
16
+0.46
+0.44
0.087
+0.28
Sports facilities per km²
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.39
+0.02
0.931
-0.08
Sports facilities per km²
Net job inflow per resident
16
-0.29
-0.48
0.062
-0.45
Sports facilities per km²
Success index
16
+0.37
+0.54
0.029
+0.43
Amenity index
Bachelor's+ share (25+)
16
-0.17
-0.04
0.888
-0.05
Amenity index
Graduate-degree share (25+)
16
-0.18
-0.06
0.820
-0.09
Amenity index
Median household income
16
+0.21
+0.06
0.837
+0.00
Amenity index
Workplace jobs per km²
16
+0.48
+0.30
0.264
+0.29
Amenity index
Net job inflow per resident
16
-0.35
-0.38
0.151
-0.37
Amenity index
Success index
16
+0.12
+0.11
0.680
+0.10
The confound itself, Spearman rho of the 18-to-24 share against each signal: Bachelor's+ share (25+) -0.16; Graduate-degree share (25+) -0.34; Median household income -0.94; Workplace jobs per km² -0.24; Net job inflow per resident +0.17; Success index -0.64.
Methodology
**Origin.** The student union's street address, an input to the case, resolved by `find_geography.geocode` (places resolver, confidence recorded); where the address snapped to a disconnected campus path (Columbia, Florida) the nearest street intersection was used. A first pass from the main campus listing (`places.find` filtered to College & University) is in steps.md and is where the declared-centre rule came from.
**Proximity.** `routing.catchment` walk, 15 minutes, OpenStreetMap road network (release national_full_v2), identical for all sixteen; the handle is tract-based, so residents and jobs are the covered tracts weighted by coverage.
**Amenities.** `places.count` on the handle with `per_capita: true`: the Food & Beverage level-1 category split by level-2 into cafes (Bagel Shop, Bakery & Pastry, Bubble Tea, Coffee Shop, Juice & Smoothie), bars (Bar, Cocktail Bar, Hookah Lounge, Lounge & Nightclub, Pub & Brewery, Sports Bar, Wine Bar) and restaurants (everything else except Caterer, Food & Beverage - Other, Winery); sports facilities are Gym & Fitness Center, Sports Club & Facility, Recreation Center, Boxing Gym, Martial Arts, Yoga Studio, Pilates Studio. No stadium, arena or campus-recreation category exists.
**Signals.** `area_profile.population`, `education_labor`, `income_distribution` and `workplace_jobs` on the same handle with `missing_values: exclude`; net job inflow from `area_profile.daytime_population`, which returns LODES flows, not a daytime estimate. The momentum score was not used: LODES coverage breaks made it an artefact for two campuses in the first pass.
**Indices.** N(x) is min-max over the sixteen. Amenity index = 0.7 N(food & drink per km²) + 0.3 N(sports per km²). Success index = mean of N(bachelor's+), N(graduate share), N(median household income), N(workplace jobs per km²). Labels are tertiles; combined rank is the rank sum.
**Correlation.** Pearson r and Spearman rho over the sixteen, two-sided p for rho (t approximation, df = 14), and the partial Spearman correlation with the catchment's 18-to-24 share held constant (rank residuals).
N(x) = 100 × (x − min over the sixteen) / (max − min)
Amenity index = 0.7 × N(food & drink places per km²) + 0.3 × N(sports facilities per km²)
Success index = mean of N(bachelor's+ share), N(graduate share), N(median household income), N(workplace jobs per km²)
Partial rho = Spearman correlation of the rank residuals after regressing each on the 18-to-24 share
Labels = tertiles; combined rank = amenity rank + success rank
Data quality and limitations
Student unions are an outside input; the atlas resolves them but cannot choose them. A different declared centre (main gate, library) would move the catchments by a few hundred metres.
A 15-minute walk from a union is still student-dominated: the 18-to-24 share and median age columns show it, and the partial correlations exist for that reason. Dormitory group quarters are not published at tract resolution.
Counts are open place listings, not seats, revenue or footfall; campus dining halls and recreation centres count only when listed. Per-capita income and some ratios carry status `proxy`.
LODES workplace jobs have coverage breaks and coding quirks: Michigan's tract jobs fall to zero in 2023 (its value is the latest non-zero year); UCLA's and Florida's university payroll is coded to health, Duke's shed includes its hospital, UT Austin's includes the Capitol complex. Total jobs are usable; the education-sector split is not.
Sixteen campuses chosen by name for spread, not a sample of all universities; correlations are descriptive at n = 16.
The campuses
1. Columbia University privateQS 2026 #38
origin Broadway & W 115th St, New York (Alfred Lerner Hall; the 2920 Broadway address point snapped to an isolated campus path and was replaced by the intersection) · catchment 3.26 km², 21 tracts, 77,843 residents, 18-to-24 share 17%
225restaurants
83cafes
28bars
88sports facilities
103.1food & drink per km²
62%bachelor's+
$81,648median HH income
47,640workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 49, Chinese 32, Pizza 20, Bakery & Pastry 17, Mexican 17. Amenity: High density (index 100.0); signal: Strong signal (index 49.9).
2. University of California, Berkeley publicQS 2026 #17
origin MLK Jr. Student Union, 2495 Bancroft Way, Berkeley, CA 94720 · catchment 3.90 km², 12 tracts, 32,442 residents, 18-to-24 share 60%
191restaurants
72cafes
19bars
37sports facilities
72.4food & drink per km²
73%bachelor's+
$56,568median HH income
19,354workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 44, Chinese 21, Pizza 17, Ice Cream & Dessert 15, Bubble Tea 15. Amenity: High density (index 56.1); signal: Moderate (index 36.6).
3. University of Pennsylvania privateQS 2026 #15
origin Houston Hall, 3417 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA 19104 · catchment 3.81 km², 13 tracts, 28,307 residents, 18-to-24 share 61%
138restaurants
56cafes
8bars
37sports facilities
53.1food & drink per km²
77%bachelor's+
$49,609median HH income
65,720workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 37, Food & Beverage - Other 22, Pizza 14, Food Truck & Street Vendor 13, Halal 11. Amenity: High density (index 42.2); signal: Strong signal (index 59.6).
4. University of Wisconsin-Madison publicQS 2026 #110
origin Memorial Union, 800 Langdon St, Madison, WI 53706 · catchment 2.90 km², 9 tracts, 27,926 residents, 18-to-24 share 82%
97restaurants
31cafes
38bars
15sports facilities
57.3food & drink per km²
57%bachelor's+
$23,238median HH income
29,290workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Bar 29, Coffee Shop 23, Food & Beverage - Other 12, Chinese 10, Sandwich Shop 9. Amenity: High density (index 39.8); signal: Weak signal (index 18.9).
5. University of Michigan publicQS 2026 #45
origin Michigan Union, 530 S State St, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 · catchment 4.06 km², 9 tracts, 23,515 residents, 18-to-24 share 78%
102restaurants
48cafes
34bars
39sports facilities
45.4food & drink per km²
82%bachelor's+
$38,088median HH income
16,795workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 34, Bar 14, Food & Beverage - Other 13, Pizza 8, Ice Cream & Dessert 8. Amenity: High density (index 36.4); signal: Strong signal (index 43.4).
6. University of Washington publicQS 2026 #81
origin Husky Union Building, 4001 E Stevens Way NE, Seattle, WA 98195 · catchment 3.95 km², 10 tracts, 20,120 residents, 18-to-24 share 72%
100restaurants
52cafes
13bars
38sports facilities
41.7food & drink per km²
67%bachelor's+
$40,338median HH income
23,507workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 28, Chinese 15, Bubble Tea 13, Mexican 8, Vietnamese 7. Amenity: High density (index 33.8); signal: Weak signal (index 25.9).
7. The University of Texas at Austin publicQS 2026 #68
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 31, Mexican 14, Bar 11, Food & Beverage - Other 11, Halal 10. Amenity: Moderate (index 31.1); signal: Moderate (index 33.8).
8. Harvard University privateQS 2026 #5
origin Smith Campus Center, 1350 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02138 · catchment 4.41 km², 13 tracts, 33,401 residents, 18-to-24 share 32%
101restaurants
39cafes
10bars
49sports facilities
34.0food & drink per km²
87%bachelor's+
$120,456median HH income
34,599workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 24, American 13, Ice Cream & Dessert 10, Indian 9, Pizza 9. Amenity: Moderate (index 30.0); signal: Strong signal (index 79.8).
9. Arizona State University publicQS 2026 #173
origin Memorial Union, 301 E Orange St, Tempe, AZ 85281 · catchment 3.94 km², 7 tracts, 13,639 residents, 18-to-24 share 73%
101restaurants
35cafes
26bars
15sports facilities
41.2food & drink per km²
65%bachelor's+
$52,604median HH income
25,712workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 24, Mexican 18, Food & Beverage - Other 12, Bar 11, Pizza 9. Amenity: Moderate (index 26.3); signal: Weak signal (index 27.1).
10. University of California, Los Angeles publicQS 2026 #46
origin Ackerman Union, 308 Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90095 · catchment 3.98 km², 11 tracts, 30,887 residents, 18-to-24 share 77%
82restaurants
36cafes
2bars
25sports facilities
30.2food & drink per km²
70%bachelor's+
$45,696median HH income
21,937workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 24, Food & Beverage - Other 13, Mexican 7, Sandwich Shop 7, Pizza 6. Amenity: Moderate (index 21.3); signal: Moderate (index 31.6).
11. Georgia Institute of Technology publicQS 2026 #123
origin 351 FERST DR NW, ATLANTA, GA, 30332 (John Lewis Student Center; street-interpolated point) · catchment 3.62 km², 7 tracts, 14,336 residents, 18-to-24 share 60%
70restaurants
14cafes
5bars
29sports facilities
24.6food & drink per km²
68%bachelor's+
$79,169median HH income
20,506workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 9, Pizza 9, Sushi 6, Fast Food 6, Sandwich Shop 6. Amenity: Moderate (index 19.3); signal: Moderate (index 36.0).
12. The Ohio State University publicQS 2026 #190
origin Ohio Union, 1739 N High St, Columbus, OH 43210 (geocoded 2026-10-31 as calls 187 to 190 of run 1) · catchment 4.18 km², 11 tracts, 27,284 residents, 18-to-24 share 78%
76restaurants
41cafes
24bars
10sports facilities
33.8food & drink per km²
56%bachelor's+
$31,130median HH income
42,678workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 28, Bar 18, Sandwich Shop 12, Pizza 10, Food & Beverage - Other 10. Amenity: Low density (index 19.1); signal: Weak signal (index 16.4).
13. University of Chicago privateQS 2026 #13
origin Reynolds Club, 5706 S University Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 · catchment 4.07 km², 15 tracts, 23,292 residents, 18-to-24 share 30%
48restaurants
18cafes
3bars
10sports facilities
17.0food & drink per km²
73%bachelor's+
$64,237median HH income
28,064workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 14, Vegan, Vegetarian & Health 8, Sandwich Shop 5, American 5, Mexican 5. Amenity: Low density (index 6.9); signal: Strong signal (index 51.1).
14. University of Florida publicQS 2026 #212
origin Reitz Union, 686 Museum Rd, Gainesville, FL 32611 (routed from Museum Rd & Reitz Union Dr) · catchment 4.22 km², 5 tracts, 12,641 residents, 18-to-24 share 90%
23restaurants
17cafes
7bars
19sports facilities
11.1food & drink per km²
73%bachelor's+
$17,797median HH income
12,147workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 12, Food & Beverage - Other 6, Bar 6, Sandwich Shop 5, Mediterranean 2. Amenity: Low density (index 5.1); signal: Moderate (index 29.3).
15. Duke University privateQS 2026 #62
origin Bryan Center, 125 Science Dr, Durham, NC 27708 · catchment 3.68 km², 4 tracts, 5,060 residents, 18-to-24 share 72%
24restaurants
16cafes
2bars
12sports facilities
11.4food & drink per km²
58%bachelor's+
$40,811median HH income
43,340workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 12, Food & Beverage - Other 8, Sandwich Shop 4, Bakery & Pastry 3, Indian 3. Amenity: Low density (index 3.8); signal: Weak signal (index 26.4).
16. Stanford University privateQS 2026 #3
origin Tresidder Memorial Union, 459 Lagunita Dr, Stanford, CA 94305 · catchment 3.78 km², 3 tracts, 9,047 residents, 18-to-24 share 60%
9restaurants
18cafes
2bars
20sports facilities
7.7food & drink per km²
92%bachelor's+
$72,748median HH income
9,193workplace jobs
Most common food categories: Coffee Shop 17, Food & Beverage - Other 10, American 3, Sandwich Shop 2, Food Truck & Street Vendor 1. Amenity: Low density (index 3.5); signal: Strong signal (index 63.4).
Conclusion
Measured the same way for all sixteen, from each student union, amenity density is a property of the city around the campus and of nothing else the atlas can see. Columbia's 15-minute walk holds 225 restaurants, 83 cafes and 28 bars in 3.26 km² (103.1 food and drink places per km²); Berkeley follows at 72.4, then Wisconsin-Madison at 57.3 and Penn at 53.1. At the other end, Stanford (7.7 per km²), Florida (11.1), Duke (11.4) and Chicago (17.0) are campuses whose 15-minute walk is mostly campus. The declared centre moved the first pass a good deal (rho +0.71 between the two densities): Ohio State, Wisconsin and Florida left the bottom once the walk started where students actually gather, Georgia Tech and Stanford fell, so the first pass's "sparsest" list was partly an artefact of where listings sit, exactly as suspected.
Amenities do not track the neighbourhood's signals. Amenity index against success index is rho +0.11 (p 0.68), and +0.10 once the catchment's 18-to-24 share is held constant. Of 42 pairs tested, one clears the 0.5 line (sports facilities per km² against the success index, rho +0.54, p 0.03, partial +0.43) and one sits on it (food and drink per 1,000 residents against graduate-degree share, rho −0.50, p 0.05); at 42 tests, two hits near p 0.05 is what chance produces. The signals themselves are mostly a measure of how few students live in the walk: the 18-to-24 share correlates with median household income at rho −0.94 and with the success index at −0.64.
Amenities do not track the university's standing either. Against the QS World University Rankings 2026 position of the sixteen, the amenity index gives rho +0.15 and food and drink per km² +0.08: Stanford (QS 3) has the sparsest walk, Columbia (QS 38) the densest, Wisconsin (QS 110) the third densest. What does track QS standing is the atlas's neighbourhood success index, at rho +0.85: the higher a university ranks, the more educated, richer and job-denser the 15-minute walk around its union, largely because fewer undergraduates live in it (Harvard 32%, Chicago 30%, Columbia 17%, against 78% to 90% at Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin and Florida). So the finding is clean and a little surprising: a university's standing is visible in who lives around it, not in how many restaurants, cafes, bars or gyms are within a walk.
Outside view
Read on 2026-10-31 and 2026-11-01. These sources are outside Digital Atlas and change no number above; the QS ranks are used only in this section and the table that follows.
QS World University Rankings 2026, as listed by univfyi.com (the QS site refused the fetch; the aggregator's figures match the QS summaries found in search): Stanford 3, Harvard 5, Chicago 13, Penn 15, Berkeley 17, Columbia 38, Michigan 45, UCLA 46, Duke 62, UT Austin 68, Washington 81, Wisconsin 110, Georgia Tech 123, Arizona State 173, Ohio State 190, Florida 212. The correlation with the atlas's amenity measures is near zero; with the atlas's neighbourhood signals it is strong. The published ranking and the atlas agree that prestige and walkable nightlife are different things.
Spoon University ranked campuses by late-night restaurants, with New York University first at 239 and Columbia second at 229. Columbia is first here too, on a broader measure (all open food and drink listings within a 15-minute walk). The two agree that the Manhattan campuses lead.
Niche's "best college location" rankings, as reported by Business Insider, score access to bars, restaurants and cafes among other factors and put NYU and the University of San Francisco at the top; the counts are not published and the lists date from 2015 to 2017.
Crimson Education's college-town guide singles out Madison's craft beer and farmers' markets, Austin's food trucks and barbecue, and Berkeley's gourmet dining. With the union as origin all three agree: Berkeley is second, Wisconsin-Madison third (its Memorial Union sits at the foot of State Street) and UT Austin seventh. In the first pass, from the main listings, Madison and Austin had ranked eleventh and tenth; the declared centre is what reconciled the atlas with the town's reputation.
WalletHub's Best College Towns 2025, summarised by Stacker, ranks Atlanta first for social environment. Georgia Tech is eleventh by amenity density here; WalletHub scores the whole city, and Tech's student centre sits in the middle of a large campus.
No public source counts restaurants, cafes, bars and sports facilities within one consistent walk-time of each campus, and none correlates them with neighbourhood attainment or income or with a world ranking. The common belief that leading universities sit in vibrant districts holds for Columbia and Penn and fails for Stanford, Chicago and Duke in this measure.
Case studies are simple analyses that show what Digital Atlas data can do. Read them on these terms:
Information only. Nothing in a case study is political, investment, financial, legal, betting or other professional advice, and nothing in it recommends taking or avoiding any action.
Not for decisions. Do not use a case study to make voting, campaign, investment, trading, betting, business or any other decisions, and do not rely on it in place of your own research and professional advice.
Not a prediction or guarantee. Calls, scores and estimates come from deliberately simple models with stated assumptions. They are not probabilities or forecasts of any outcome, and actual results may differ materially.
No endorsement. Propheus Pte. Ltd. does not support or oppose any candidate, party, campaign, company or product, and is not affiliated with any of them.
Third-party data. Polls, ratings and other public figures belong to their publishers and are reported as published, with their dates. We do not verify them and are not responsible for their accuracy.
Fixed at a date. Each case study reflects data available on the date it states. It will not be updated and may contain errors or omissions.
No responsibility or liability. Case studies are provided "as is", without warranties of any kind. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Propheus Pte. Ltd. accepts no responsibility or liability for any loss or damage arising from their use or from reliance on them.
Use of this website, including case studies, is subject to our Terms of Service. Read the Terms of Service.