Pedestrian movement modelling for a commercial street considering COVID-19 social distancing strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research attempts to understand the impacts of social distancing on dense urban pedestrian environments through pedestrian movement simulations. It develops a pedestrian microsimulation modelling framework that evaluates three scenarios for a commercial street in the Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM). The Business-as-Usual scenario mimics pre-COVID conditions with no social distancing protocols. Pandemic Scenario# 1 represents social distancing without any changes in the pedestrian infrastructure. The HRM has adopted a mobility response plan for COVID-19, this generates Pandemic Scenario# 2 depicting the widened sidewalks within the pedestrian microsimulation model. The results reveal that the social distancing strategy in the pandemic scenarios significantly improved pedestrian flow in terms of the reduction in contact violations. These violations are described as instances in which a pedestrian violates the 2 m social distancing rule. The simulation of the first pandemic scenario (no sidewalk enhancement) showed a significant reduction of 43% in the number of contact violations during the one-hour pedestrian simulation of the street. The second pandemic scenario showed a 68% decrease in violations. The conclusions derived from this research support the actions of the municipality as the simulation results indicate that an increase in sidewalk width can influence contact rates and time travelled. When comparing the two pandemic scenarios, the scenario that incorporated wider sidewalks showed a decrease in total travel time and contact rates.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".