ArticlePloS one2023
Identification of social groups and waiting pedestrians at railway platforms using trajectory data.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Waiting in crowded places: influence of number of pedestrians, waiting time and obstacles.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate the impact of social groups on waiting behaviour of passengers at railway platforms a method to identify social groups through the monitoring of distances between pedestrians and the stability of those distances over time is introduced. The method allows the recognition of groups using trajectories only and thus opens up the possibility of studying crowds in public places without constrains caused by privacy protection issues. Trajectories from a railway platform in Switzerland were used to analyse the waiting behaviour of passengers in dependence of waiting time as well as the size of social groups. The analysis of the trajectories shows that the portion of passengers travelling in groups reaches up to 10% during the week and increases to 20% on the weekends. 60% of the groups were pairs, larger groups were less frequent. With increasing group size, the mean speed of the members decreases. Individuals and pairs often choose waiting spots at the sides of the stairs and in vicinity of obstacles, while larger groups wait close to the platform entries. The results indicate that passengers choose waiting places according to the following criteria and ranking: shortest ways, direction of the next intended action, undisturbed places and ensured communication. While individual passengers often wait in places where they are undisturbed and do not hinder others, the dominating comfort criterion for groups is to ensure communication. The results regarding space requirements of waiting passengers could be used for different applications. E.g. to enhance the level of service concept assessing the comfort of different types of users, to avoid temporary bottlenecks to improve the boarding and alighting process or to increase the robustness of the performance of railway platforms during peak loads by optimising the pedestrian distribution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.