WALK: A Modular Testbed for Crowd Evacuation Simulation

  • Stefan Münchow
  • Ia Enukidze
  • Stefan Sarstedt
  • Thomas Thiel-Clemen
Conference paper


When large numbers of people gather in public spaces such as stadiums, railway stations, shopping centers and concert halls there is an increased risk of mass emergence and disasters. Critical situations could possibly be prevented with appropriate tools to anticipate them. WALK is a modular designed crowd evacuation simulation system using a multi-agent approach.

One major goal of WALK is to provide a framework for the simulation and comparison of different socio-psychological theories to gain essential insights about the emergence of crowd behavior. Moreover, the framework is supposed to allow the simulation of many diverse scenarios. In order to achieve these goals, the system has to offer a maximum level of flexibility by following software engineering best practices. In this paper, we will explain the customizable architecture of WALK, which enables scientists from different fields, e.g. psychology and computer science, to use it as a testbed for their studies.


Crowd simulation Multi-agent system Pedestrian evacuation 


  1. 1.
    Staatsanwaltschaft Duisburg 2010. Presseerklärung der Staatsanwaltschaft Duisburg zu den Ermittlungen im Zusammenhang mit den Geschehnissen bei der‚ Loveparade‘ in Duisburg’.
  2. 2.
    Henderson, L. F. 1971. “The Statistics of Crowd Fluids”, Nature, 229, 381–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Helbing, D., Farkas, I. and Vicsek, T. 2000. “Simulating dynamical features of escape panic”. Nature, 407, 487–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zhou, S., Chen, D., Cai, W., Luo, L., Low, M. Y. H., Tian, F., Tay, V. S.-H., et al. 2010. “Crowd modeling and simulation technologies”. ACM Transactions on Modeling and Computer Simulation, 20(4), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schneider. B.(2011). Die Simulation menschlichen Panikverhaltens. Wiesbaden: Vieweg + Teubner Verlag / Springer Fachmedien.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drury, J., Cocking, C. & Reicher, S. (2009). The Nature of Collective Resilience: Survivor Reactions to the 2005 London Bombings. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters. Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 66–95.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wijermans, F. E. H. (2011). Understanding crowd behaviour: Simulating situated individuals. Groningen: University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., and Collins, A. 1988. “The cognitive structure of emotions”. Cambridge [England]: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuligowski, E.D. 2009. “The Process of Human Behavior in Fires”. National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, Technical Note 1632.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological review, 111(4), 1036–60. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.111.4.1036 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Burke, R., Isla, D., Downie, M., Ivanov, Y., & Blumberg, B. (2001). Creature smarts: The art and architecture of a virtual brain. Proceedings of the Computer Game Developers Conference.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaminka, G. A., & Fridman, N. (2006). A cognitive model of crowd behavior based on social comparison theory. Proceedings of the AAAI-2006 workshop on cognitive modeling. Retrieved from
  13. 13.
    Commission on Civil Protection (2011): Vierter Gefahrenbericht (4th Report on current threats to the public), The Commission on Civil Protection of the German Federal Ministry of Interior (Eds.), in German, 176 pp.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stefan Münchow
    • 1
  • Ia Enukidze
    • 2
  • Stefan Sarstedt
    • 1
  • Thomas Thiel-Clemen
    • 1
  1. 1.Hamburg University of Applied SciencesHamburgGermany
  2. 2.Hamburg UniversityHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations