Advanced models for centroidal particle dynamics: short-range collision avoidance in dense crowds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer simulation of dense crowds is finding increased use in event planning, congestion prediction, and threat assessment. State-of-the-art particle-based crowd methods assume and aim for collision-free trajectories. That is an idealistic yet not overly realistic expectation, as near-collisions increase in dense and rushed settings compared with typically sparse pedestrian scenarios. Centroidal particle dynamics (CPD) is a method we defined that explicitly models the compressible personal space area surrounding each entity to inform its local pathing and collision-avoidance decisions. We illustrate how our proposed agent-based method for local dynamics can reproduce several key emergent dense crowd phenomena at the microscopic level with higher congruence to real trajectory data and with more visually convincing collision-avoidance paths than the existing state of the art. We present advanced models in which we consider distraction of the pedestrians in the crowd, flocking behavior, interaction with vehicles (ambulances, police) and other advanced models that show that emergent behavior in the simulated crowds is similar to the behavior observed in reality. We discuss how to increase confidence in CPD, potentially making it also suitable for use in safety-critical applications, including urban design, evacuation analysis, and crowd-safety planning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".