MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416055670 · doi:10.62754/ais.v6i4.409

Quantitative Simulation of Human Evacuation Dynamics under Visibility Impairment in Indoor Fire Scenarios

2025· article· W4416055670 on OpenAlexaff
Kil-Hong Joo, Jihoon Seo

Bibliographic record

VenueArchitecture Image Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisibilitySmokeSituational ethicsFire safetySituation awareness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study quantitatively analyzes the impact of visibility degradation caused by smoke spread on human evacuation behavior during indoor fires. Hence the reaction-based evacuation model outlined in the New Zealand Fire Safety Verification Method (C/VM2), simulations were conducted to observe how evacuees respond under conditions of gradually decreasing visibility due to increasing smoke concentration. Specific behavioral changes were examined, including Response Time, Route Selection, Avoidance Behavior, and Situational Awareness. For the purpose of this study, an indoor environment was modeled, and smoke spread was visualized to design an evacuation model that reflects visibility constraints. The analysis revealed that once smoke concentration exceeds a certain threshold, evacuees face significant visual impairment, leading to delay in evacuation and increased risk of collisions. Furthermore, the Presence of Smoke Control System, the Status of Door Opening, and the Configuration of Evacuation Route were found to be closely related to visibility during fire events. It emphasizes the importance of incorporating visibility-based strategies into evacuation planning alongside physical architectural considerations in performance-based fire safety design. It also suggests the potential for integrating psychological response factors and AI-based predictive systems in future research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.148
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.338 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchitecture Image StudiesSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207