A simulation as a service methodology with application for crowd modeling, simulation and visualization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crowd modeling and simulation (M&S) has been used to support the analysis of the behavior of crowds, in order to predict the impact of pedestrian movement and to test design alternatives. In recent years, crowd M&S has become more complex, and new technologies such as CAD (computer-aided design) and BIM (building information modeling) authoring tools are being used to support the process. There are challenges in adopting these technologies due to the lack of automation and integration of these tools for crowd M&S. We propose a method based on a distributed architecture with simulation in the cloud, and composition using workflows. In particular, we adopt a model-driven engineering approach to extract data from CAD/BIM authoring tools, Cell-DEVS theory for crowd modeling, simulation as a service to execute simulation remotely, and three-dimensional visualization. Finally, we present a case study for crowd evacuation, discussing the advantages of the proposed architecture. We show the advantages obtained when using distributed deployment, simulation-based design and collaborative development and we discuss how this facilitates the crowd behavior study and improves reusability in crowd M&S.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it