Comparison of Pedestrian Data of Single File Movement Collected from Controlled Pedestrian Experiment and from Field in Mass Religious Gathering

Siddhartha Gulhare, A. Verma, P. Chakroborty
{"title":"Comparison of Pedestrian Data of Single File Movement Collected from Controlled Pedestrian Experiment and from Field in Mass Religious Gathering","authors":"Siddhartha Gulhare, A. Verma, P. Chakroborty","doi":"10.17815/CD.2018.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Managing and controlling crowd during mass religious gathering is a challenge for organizers. With good computational capabilities, it is possible to create tools to simulate crowd in real time to aid crowd management. These tools need to be first calibrated and validated with pedestrian empirical data. The empirical data collection from field is difficult and therefore, data collection through controlled pedestrian experiments have become a convenient substitute. However, the ability of experiment data to reproduce actual crowd behavior needs to be examined. This study compared the experiment data with field data collected from mass religious gathering named Kumbh Mela held in India, 2016. The single file movement (pedestrians moving along a single line; SFM) experiment was conducted and its results were compared with the field SFM results. The speed in the field was found to be generally higher than in the experiment for a given density. The results clearly indicate that the pedestrians in the field are motivated to achieve a purpose but participants in the experiments lack the motivation. The pedestrian dynamics of the experiment was found to be different from the field. Hence, the results of pedestrian experiments should not be extrapolated to understand panic, crowd risk situations.","PeriodicalId":93276,"journal":{"name":"Collective dynamics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Collective dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17815/CD.2018.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Managing and controlling crowd during mass religious gathering is a challenge for organizers. With good computational capabilities, it is possible to create tools to simulate crowd in real time to aid crowd management. These tools need to be first calibrated and validated with pedestrian empirical data. The empirical data collection from field is difficult and therefore, data collection through controlled pedestrian experiments have become a convenient substitute. However, the ability of experiment data to reproduce actual crowd behavior needs to be examined. This study compared the experiment data with field data collected from mass religious gathering named Kumbh Mela held in India, 2016. The single file movement (pedestrians moving along a single line; SFM) experiment was conducted and its results were compared with the field SFM results. The speed in the field was found to be generally higher than in the experiment for a given density. The results clearly indicate that the pedestrians in the field are motivated to achieve a purpose but participants in the experiments lack the motivation. The pedestrian dynamics of the experiment was found to be different from the field. Hence, the results of pedestrian experiments should not be extrapolated to understand panic, crowd risk situations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
受控行人实验与群众宗教集会现场行人单文件运动数据的比较
在大规模宗教集会期间管理和控制人群对组织者来说是一项挑战。凭借良好的计算能力,可以创建实时模拟人群的工具来帮助人群管理。这些工具需要首先用行人经验数据进行校准和验证。从现场收集经验数据是困难的,因此,通过受控行人实验收集数据已经成为一种方便的替代品。然而,需要检验实验数据再现实际人群行为的能力。这项研究将实验数据与2016年在印度举行的名为大壶节的大规模宗教集会收集的现场数据进行了比较。进行了单行线运动(行人沿单行线运动;SFM)实验,并将其结果与现场SFM结果进行了比较。对于给定的密度,场中的速度通常高于实验中的速度。研究结果清楚地表明,田野里的行人有动机达到目的,但实验参与者缺乏动机。实验中的行人动力学与现场不同。因此,行人实验的结果不应被推断为了解恐慌、人群风险的情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊最新文献
Improving Pedestrian Dynamics Predictions Using Neighboring Factors Evaluation of Data Fitting Approaches for Speed/Flow Density Relationships Numerical and Theoretical Analysis of a New One-Dimensional Cellular Automaton Model for Bidirectional Flows Are Depth Field Cameras Preserving Anonymity? Pilot Study of Mental Simulation of People Movement During Evacuations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1