MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559190211 · doi:10.1080/23249935.2016.1266531

A bi-directional agent-based pedestrian microscopic model

2016· article· en· W2559190211 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohamed Hussein, Tarek Sayed

Bibliographic record

VenueTransportmetrica A Transport Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianComputer scienceMicrosimulationGenetic algorithmCalibrationArtificial intelligenceSimulationData miningMachine learningStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsTransport engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development of a pedestrian microsimulation model that was developed based on the agent based modeling approach, which effectively accounts for the pedestrian intelligence and heterogeneity. The model focuses on producing accurate trajectories for pedestrian interactions. Behavior rules that control pedestrian interactions were extracted from a detailed pedestrian behavior study conducted in Vancouver, BC. The calibration of model parameters was performed using a Genetic algorithm, which aimed at minimizing the error between simulated trajectories and real trajectories obtained by means of computer vision. The validation of the results was conducted using two different data sets. The average errors between simulated and actual trajectories for the two data sets were 35 cm and 27 cm, respectively, while the average speed errors were 13.3% and 5.1%. Results also showed that the model was capable of predicting the correct collision avoidance strategy in 95% of the validation cases investigated.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations43
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransportmetrica A Transport ScienceSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207