MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W108564685 · doi:10.5555/2484920.2484946

The impact of culture on crowd dynamics: an empirical approach

2013· article· en· W108564685 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natalie Fridman, Gal A. Kaminka, Avishay Zilka

Bibliographic record

VenueAdaptive Agents and Multi-Agents Systems · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrowdsPedestrianCrowd simulationMacroComputer scienceCrowd psychologySet (abstract data type)Domain (mathematical analysis)Dynamics (music)Human–computer interactionData scienceSimulationArtificial intelligenceComputer securityTransport engineeringSociologyEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In agent-based social simulation, crowd models are used to generate agent behaviors that should correspond closely to human crowds. Despite significant progress in this area, many existing crowd models do not yet account for important cultural factors in crowd behavior, and even more so, for mixed-culture crowds. Moreover, evaluation of crowd models accounting for culture is particularly difficult, e.g., as controlled experiments are more difficult to set up, due to lack of subjects from different cultures. In this paper we examine the impact of cultural differences on crowd dynamics in pedestrian and evacuation domains. We account for micro-level cultural attributes: personal spaces, speed, pedestrian avoidance side and group formations. We then quantitatively validate the macro-level predictions of an agent-based simulation utilizing these against data from web-cam movies of human pedestrian crowds recorded in five different countries: Iraq, Israel, England, Canada and France. Using the validated simulations, we investigate the impact of each micro-level attribute on the resulting macro level behavior. We also examine the impact of mixed cultures on macro-level behavior. In the evacuation domain, we use an established simulation system to investigate cultural differences reported in the literature, and additionally explore the resulting macro level behavior.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdaptive Agents and Multi-Agents SystemsSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207