Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36367888›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Guiding crowds when facing limited compliance: Simulating strategies.

Christina Maria Mayr, Gerta Köster

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christina Maria MayrDepartment of Computer Science and Mathematics, Munich University of Applied Sciences HM, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1686-3460
Gerta KösterDepartment of Computer Science and Mathematics, Munich University of Applied Sciences HM, Munich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

At traffic hubs, it is important to avoid congestion of pedestrian streams to ensure safety and a good level of service. This presents a challenge, since distributing crowds on different routes is much more difficult than opening valves to, for example, regulate fluid flow. Humans may or may not comply with re-directions suggested to them typically with the help of signage, loudspeakers, apps, or by staff. This remains true, even if they perceive and understand the suggestions. Yet, simulation studies so far have neglected the influence of compliance. In view of this, we complement a state-of-the-art model of crowd motion and crowd behavior, so that we can vary the compliance rate. We consider an abstracted scenario that is inspired by a metro station in the city of Munich, where traffic regulators wish to make some passengers abandon the obviously shortest route so that the flow evens out. We investigate the effect of compliance for two very simple guiding strategies. In the first strategy, we alternate routes. In the second strategy, we recommend the path with the lowest crowd density. We observe that, in both cases, it suffices to reroute a small fraction of the crowd to reduce travel times. But we also find that taking densities into account is much more efficient when facing low compliance rates.

Indexed as

CrowdingComputer SimulationHumansMotion

Identifiers

PMID36367888
PMCPMC9651580

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.