MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167241476 · doi:10.21236/ada552369

The Impact of Cultural Differences on Crowd Dynamics in Pedestrian and Evacuation Domains

2011· report· en· W2167241476 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gal A. Kaminka

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianDynamics (music)Computer scienceEconomic geographyGeographyTransport engineeringPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : This report results from a contract tasking Bar Ilan University as follows: Accounting for Culture in Agent-Based Pedestrian Crowd Simulation. Accurate models of crowd dynamics are an important challenge in multi-agent systems and agent-based social simulation. Crowd models are able to predict the resulting macro level behavior from micro level interactions. However, many existing crowd models do not yet account for cultural factors in crowd behavior, and even more so, for crowds composed of members of different cultures. In this paper we examine the impact of cultural differences on the crowd dynamics in pedestrian and evacuation domains. In the pedestrian domain we relate to recorded pedestrian data in five different countries: Iraq, Israel, England, Canada and France and characterize these cultures based on cultural attributes at the individual level: personal spaces, speed, avoidance side and group formations. We use an agent-based simulation to investigate the impact on the resulting macro level behavior, such as pedestrian flow, number of collisions, etc. We also examine the impact of mixed-culture pedestrians on the resulting macro-level behavior. We quantitatively validate the simulation against data from movies of human crowds, in different countries. 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207