ArticleExperimental brain research2021
Influence of path curvature on collision avoidance behaviour between two walkers.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Waist rotation angle as indicator of probable human collision-avoidance direction for autonomous mobile robots.PloS one · 2025Article
- Gaze behavior during pedestrian interactions in a community environment: a real-world perspective.Experimental brain research · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Navigating crowded community spaces requires interactions with pedestrians that follow rectilinear and curvilinear trajectories. In the case of rectilinear trajectories, it has been shown that the perceived action opportunities of the walkers might be afforded based on a future distance of closest approach. However, little is known about collision avoidance behaviours when avoiding walkers that follow curvilinear trajectories. Twenty-two participants were immersed in a virtual environment and avoided a virtual human (VH) that followed either a rectilinear path or a curvilinear path with a 5 m or 10 m radius curve at various distances of closest approach. Compared to a rectilinear path (control condition), the curvilinear path with a 5 m radius yielded more collisions when the VH approached from behind the participant and more inversions when the VH approached from in-front. During each trial, the evolution of the future distance of closest approach showed similarities between rectilinear paths and curvilinear paths with a 10 m radius curve. Overall, with few collisions and few inversions of crossing order, we can conclude that participants were capable of predicting future distance of closest approach of virtual walkers that followed curvilinear trajectories. The task was solved with similar avoidance adaptations to those observed for rectilinear interactions. These findings should inform future endeavors to further understand collision avoidance strategies and the role of-for example-non-constant velocities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33175191What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.