MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939896982 · doi:10.1155/2019/5207814

Hybrid Dynamic Route Planning Model for Pedestrian Microscopic Simulation at Subway Station

2019· article· en· W2939896982 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yongxin Gao, Feng Chen, Zijia Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCrowdsVisibilityPedestrianComputer scienceRoute planningMotion planningProcess (computing)Multipath propagationSimulationSelection (genetic algorithm)Visibility graphTicketReal-time computingTransport engineeringSocial force modelGraphRobotArtificial intelligenceEngineeringComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To make agents’ route decision-making behaviours as real as possible, this paper proposes a layered navigation algorithm, emphasizing the coordinating of the global route planning at strategic level and the local route planning at tactical level. Specifically, by an improved visibility graph method, the global route is firstly generated based on static environment map. Then, a new local route planning (LRP) based on dynamic local environment is activated for multipath selection to allow pedestrian to respond changes at a real-time sense. In particular, the LRP model is developed on the basis of a passenger’s psychological motivation. The pedestrians’ individual preferences and the uncertainties existing in the process of evaluation and choice are fully considered. The suitable local path can be generated according to an estimated passing time. The LRP model is applied to the choice of ticket gates at a subway station, and the behaviours of gate choosing and rechoosing are investigated. By utilizing C++, the layered navigation algorithm is implemented. The simulation results exhibit agents’ tendency to avoid congestion, which is often observed in real crowds.

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 score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207