Using a Telepresence System to Investigate Route Choice Behavior
A combination of a telepresence system and a microscopic traffic simulator is introduced. It is evaluated using a hotel evacuation scenario. Four different kinds of supporting information are compared: standard exit signs, floor plans with indicated exit routes, guiding lines on the floor and simulated agents leading the way. The results indicate that guiding lines are the most efficient way to support an evacuation but the natural behavior of following others comes very close. On another level the results are consistent with previously performed real and virtual experiments and validate the use of a telepresence system in evacuation studies. It is shown that using a microscopic traffic simulator extends the possibilities for evaluation, e.g. by adding simulated humans to the environment.
This work was supported by the research project “The Pedestrian Simulation VISSIM within a Telepresence System” within the Central Innovation Programme for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (ZIM) of the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi).
- 2.M. Kobes, N. Oberijé, and K.G.T. Morsche. Serious gaming for behavioral assessment and research in case of emergency. an evaluation of experiments in virtual reality. In Proceedings of Conference: Simulation - Concepts, Capability and Technology (SimTecT 2009), 2009.Google Scholar
- 3.N. Nitzsche, U.D. Hanebeck, and G. Schmidt. Extending telepresent walking by motion compression. In 1. SFB-Aussprachetag Human Centered Robotic Systems (HCRS 2002), pages 83–90, 2002.Google Scholar
- 5.P. Rößler, U.D. Hanebeck, and N. Nitzsche. Feedback controlled motion compression for extended range telepresence. In Proceedings of IEEE Mechatronics & Robotics (MechRob 2004), Special Session on Telepresence and Teleaction, pages 1447–1452, 2004.Google Scholar
- 6.N. Nitzsche, U.D. Hanebeck, and G. Schmidt. Motion compression for telepresent walking in large-scale remote environments. In Proceedings of SPIE, AeroSense Symposium, 2003.Google Scholar
- 7.M. Fellendorf and P. Vortisch. Microscopic Traffc Flow Simulator VISSIM. Fundamentals of Traffic Simulation, pages 63–94, 2010.Google Scholar
- 8.PTV AG. VISSIM 5.30 User Manual. Karlsruhe, 2010.Google Scholar
- 9.M. Kobes, I. Helsloot, B. de Vries, N. Oberijé, and N. Rosmuller. Fire response performance in a hotel. behavioural research. In Interflam 2007, p. 1429, 2007.Google Scholar
- 10.M. Kobes, N. Oberijé, and M. Duyvis. Case studies on evacuation behaviour in a hotel building in bart and in real life. In Klingsch et al. , pages 183–201.Google Scholar
- 13.M.J. Quellette. Visibility of exit signs. Progressive Architecture, 36:39–42, 1993.Google Scholar
- 14.W.W.F Klingsch, C. Rogsch, A. Schadschneider, and M. Schreckenberg, editors. Pedestrian and Evacuation Dynamics 2008. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010.Google Scholar