在大规模宗教集会和对照实验设置中,评估冲突情况下行人的间隙选择决策——一项试点研究

IF 2.8 3区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Choice Modelling Pub Date : 2023-09-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100450
Karthika P S , Ashish Verma
{"title":"在大规模宗教集会和对照实验设置中,评估冲突情况下行人的间隙选择决策——一项试点研究","authors":"Karthika P S ,&nbsp;Ashish Verma","doi":"10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Previous studies on modelling the microscopic behaviour of pedestrians have focused on conflict resolution among pedestrians in pedestrian-pedestrian interactions. Many of these models propose alternate mechanisms to avoid conflicts by introducing repulsive forces between pedestrians or a set of predefined rules stating the precedence of movements to sidestep obstacles and other pedestrians. However, the possibility of formulating the decision-making mechanism pedestrians use to overcome conflicts as a gap-seeking behaviour has not been explored. In this study, resolving conflicts between opposing pedestrians is modelled as gap choice decisions made by individuals. Pedestrians looking for gaps or spaces in a crowd to facilitate their movement form the basis for such an analysis. The study compares pedestrians' gap acceptance behaviour across two scenarios: pedestrian movement in a field setup (Kumbh Mela) and a controlled experiment. Multiple gap choice decisions of individuals are modelled to understand the effect of individual-level heterogeneity on gap choices. Apart from the gap duration, spacing, position of gap, linear density, age, and presence of luggage significantly influenced the gap choices. Model validation is done using appropriate methods for both field and experimental data. The bootstrap method of internal validation and holdout validation is used to assess the performance of the estimated model on field data and experimental data, respectively. It is seen that the models have reasonable predictive and discriminative abilities. The analysis results also indicate that pedestrians tend to force gaps to facilitate movement in their natural state. Consequently, controlled experiments might have limitations in reproducing or motivating the participants to behave like a crowd.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46863,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Choice Modelling","volume":"49 ","pages":"Article 100450"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the gap choice decisions of pedestrians in conflict situations in mass religious gatherings and controlled experimental setup – A pilot study\",\"authors\":\"Karthika P S ,&nbsp;Ashish Verma\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jocm.2023.100450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Previous studies on modelling the microscopic behaviour of pedestrians have focused on conflict resolution among pedestrians in pedestrian-pedestrian interactions. Many of these models propose alternate mechanisms to avoid conflicts by introducing repulsive forces between pedestrians or a set of predefined rules stating the precedence of movements to sidestep obstacles and other pedestrians. However, the possibility of formulating the decision-making mechanism pedestrians use to overcome conflicts as a gap-seeking behaviour has not been explored. In this study, resolving conflicts between opposing pedestrians is modelled as gap choice decisions made by individuals. Pedestrians looking for gaps or spaces in a crowd to facilitate their movement form the basis for such an analysis. The study compares pedestrians' gap acceptance behaviour across two scenarios: pedestrian movement in a field setup (Kumbh Mela) and a controlled experiment. Multiple gap choice decisions of individuals are modelled to understand the effect of individual-level heterogeneity on gap choices. Apart from the gap duration, spacing, position of gap, linear density, age, and presence of luggage significantly influenced the gap choices. Model validation is done using appropriate methods for both field and experimental data. The bootstrap method of internal validation and holdout validation is used to assess the performance of the estimated model on field data and experimental data, respectively. It is seen that the models have reasonable predictive and discriminative abilities. The analysis results also indicate that pedestrians tend to force gaps to facilitate movement in their natural state. Consequently, controlled experiments might have limitations in reproducing or motivating the participants to behave like a crowd.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"volume\":\"49 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100450\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Choice Modelling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534523000519\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Choice Modelling","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755534523000519","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

先前对行人微观行为建模的研究主要集中在行人与行人互动中行人之间的冲突解决。这些模型中的许多提出了替代机制,通过在行人之间引入排斥力或一组预先定义的规则来避免冲突,这些规则规定了避开障碍物和其他行人的动作的优先级。然而,将行人用来克服冲突的决策机制制定为一种寻求差距的行为的可能性尚未得到探索。在这项研究中,解决对立行人之间的冲突被建模为个人做出的间隙选择决策。行人在人群中寻找空隙或空间以方便他们的移动,这构成了这种分析的基础。这项研究比较了两种场景下行人的间隙接受行为:野外设置(大壶节)和对照实验中的行人运动。对个体的多重差距选择决策进行建模,以了解个体水平异质性对差距选择的影响。除了间隙持续时间外,间隙的间距、位置、线密度、年龄和行李的存在显著影响间隙的选择。模型验证是使用适当的方法对现场和实验数据进行的。内部验证和保留验证的bootstrap方法分别用于评估估计模型在现场数据和实验数据上的性能。可以看出,这些模型具有合理的预测和判别能力。分析结果还表明,行人在自然状态下倾向于强行设置间隙以便于移动。因此,对照实验在再现或激励参与者表现得像一群人方面可能存在局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evaluating the gap choice decisions of pedestrians in conflict situations in mass religious gatherings and controlled experimental setup – A pilot study

Previous studies on modelling the microscopic behaviour of pedestrians have focused on conflict resolution among pedestrians in pedestrian-pedestrian interactions. Many of these models propose alternate mechanisms to avoid conflicts by introducing repulsive forces between pedestrians or a set of predefined rules stating the precedence of movements to sidestep obstacles and other pedestrians. However, the possibility of formulating the decision-making mechanism pedestrians use to overcome conflicts as a gap-seeking behaviour has not been explored. In this study, resolving conflicts between opposing pedestrians is modelled as gap choice decisions made by individuals. Pedestrians looking for gaps or spaces in a crowd to facilitate their movement form the basis for such an analysis. The study compares pedestrians' gap acceptance behaviour across two scenarios: pedestrian movement in a field setup (Kumbh Mela) and a controlled experiment. Multiple gap choice decisions of individuals are modelled to understand the effect of individual-level heterogeneity on gap choices. Apart from the gap duration, spacing, position of gap, linear density, age, and presence of luggage significantly influenced the gap choices. Model validation is done using appropriate methods for both field and experimental data. The bootstrap method of internal validation and holdout validation is used to assess the performance of the estimated model on field data and experimental data, respectively. It is seen that the models have reasonable predictive and discriminative abilities. The analysis results also indicate that pedestrians tend to force gaps to facilitate movement in their natural state. Consequently, controlled experiments might have limitations in reproducing or motivating the participants to behave like a crowd.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
31
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Latent class choice models with an error structure: Investigating potential unobserved associations between latent segmentation and behavior generation Model choice and framing effects: Do discrete choice modeling decisions affect loss aversion estimates? A consistent moment equations for binary probit models with endogenous variables using instrumental variables Transformation-based flexible error structures for choice modeling
×
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