Validation of an Agent-based Microscopic Pedestrian Simulation Model at the Pedestrian Walkway of Brooklyn Bridge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to validate a recently developed agent-based pedestrian simulation model, using data collected at the pedestrian walkway of Brooklyn Bridge. Video data were collected at the walkway and the trajectories of 294 pedestrians were extracted using computer vision. A genetic algorithm was applied to identify the optimum model parameters that minimize the error between the simulated and the actual trajectories of the calibration dataset. The simulation model was then applied to reproduce the trajectories of 214 pedestrians, considered for validation. The validation results showed that the model was capable of producing pedestrian trajectories with high accuracy, as the average location error between actual and simulated trajectories was for 0.32 m, while the average speed error was 0.06 m/s. Macroscopic results of the model were assessed by comparing the density–speed relationship in both actual data and the simulation. Finally, the accuracy of the model in reproducing the actual behavior of pedestrians during different interactions was evaluated. Results showed that the model was capable of handling these interactions with high accuracy, ranged between 79% and 100%.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".