Intelligent People Flow Coordination in Smart Spaces

  • Marin Lujak
  • Sascha Ossowski
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9571)


In this paper, we present a short overview of the people flow coordination methods and propose a multi-agent based route recommender architecture for smart spaces which considers the influence of stress on human reactions to the recommended routes. The objective of the architecture is to ensure that people can efficiently move in and among smart spaces while at the same time improve the overall system performance. The functioning of the architecture is demonstrated on a case study. The proposed approach can be used, among others, in route recommendation in smart cities, large public events, and emergency evacuations.


Irrational Behavior Average Travel Time Smart Space Crowd Behavior Fundamental Diagram 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work has been partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness through grant TIN 2012-36586 -C03-02 (“iHAS”) as well as by the Autonomous Region of Madrid through grant P2013/ICE-3019 (“MOSI-AGIL-CM”, co-funded by EU Structural Funds FSE and FEDER), and through the Excellence Research Group GES2ME (Ref. 30VCPIGI05) co-financed by the University King Juan Carlos and Santander Bank.


  1. 1.
    Ahuja, R.K., Magnanti, T.L., Orlin, J.B.: Networks Flows: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications. Prentice Hall, New Jersey (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Banerjee, A.V.: A simple model of herd behavior. Q. J. Econ. 107(3), 797–817 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cocking, C., Drury, J., Reicher, S.: The psychology of crowd behaviour in emergency evacuations: results from two interview studies and implications for the fire and rescue services. Ir. J. Psychol. 30(1–2), 59–73 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Couzin, I.D., Franks, N.R.: Self-organized lane formation, optimized traffic flow in army ants. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 270(1511), 139–146 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drury, J., Novelli, D., Stott, C.: Psychological disaster myths in the perception and management of mass emergencies. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 43(11), 2259–2270 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Drury, J., Reicher, S.D.: Crowd control. Sci. Am. MIND 21(5), 58–65 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dyer, J.R.G., Ioannou, C.C., Morrell, L.J., Croft, D.P., Couzin, I.D., Waters, D.A., Krause, J.: Consensus decision making in human crowds. Anim. Behav. 75(2), 461–470 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fahy, R.F., Proulx, G., Aiman, L.: Panic or not in fire: clarifying the misconception. Fire Mater. 36(5–6), 328–338 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Helbing, D., Farkas, I., Vicsek, T.: Simulating dynamical features of escape panic. Nature 407(6803), 487–490 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hughes, R.L.: A continuum theory for the flow of pedestrians. Transp. Res. Part B Methodol. 36(6), 507–535 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hughes, R.L.: The flow of human crowds. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 35(1), 169–182 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Koo, J., Kim, B.-I., Kim, Y.S.: Estimating the effects of mental disorientation and physical fatigue in a semi-panic evacuation. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(5), 2379–2390 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lu, X., Luh, P.B., et al.: Guidance optimization of building evacuation considering psychological features in route choice. In: 11th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation (WCICA), pp. 2669–2674. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Luh, P.B., Wilkie, C.T., Chang, S.-C., Marsh, K.L., Olderman, N.: Modeling, optimization of building emergency evacuation considering blocking effects on crowd movement. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 9(4), 687–700 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lujak, M., Giordani, S., Ossowski, S.: Fair route guidance: bridging system and user optimization. In: IEEE 17th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), pp. 1415–1422. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lujak, M., Giordani, S., Ossowski, S.: Route guidance: bridging system and user optimization in traffic assignment. Neurocomputing 151, 449–460 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Traffic Assignment Manual: Bureau of public roads. US Department of Commerce (1964)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mawson, A.R.: Understanding mass panic and other collective responses to threat and disaster. Psychiatry 68(2), 95–113 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moussaïd, M., Helbing, D., Theraulaz, G.: How simple rules determine pedestrian behavior and crowd disasters. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 108(17), 6884–6888 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Palomar, D.P., Chiang, M.: A tutorial on decomposition methods for network utility maximization. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 24(8), 1439–1451 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pan, X., Han, C.S., Dauber, K., Law, K.H.: Human and social behavior in computational modeling and analysis of egress. Autom. Constr. 15(4), 448–461 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Raafat, R.M., Chater, N., Frith, C.: Herding in humans. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13(10), 420–428 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Staal, M.A., Bolton, A.E., Yaroush, R.A., Bourne Jr., L.E.: Cognitive performance and resilience to stress. In: Lukey, B.J., Tepe, V. (eds.) Biobehavioral Resilience to Stress, pp. 259–299. Taylor & Francis Group (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang, P., Luh, P.B., Chang, S.-C., Sun, J.: Modeling and optimization of crowd guidance for building emergency evacuation. In: IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, CASE 2008, pp. 328–334. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CETINIAUniversity King Juan CarlosMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations