Advertisement

An Adaptive Simulation Tool for Evacuation Scenarios

  • Daniel Formolo
  • C. Natalie van der Wal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10423)

Abstract

Building useful and efficient models and tools for a varied audience, such as evacuation simulators for scientists, engineers and crisis managers, can be tricky. Even good models can fail in providing information when the user’s tools for the model are scarce of resources. The aim of this work is to propose a new tool that covers the most required features in evacuation scenarios. This paper starts with a review of current software, prototypes and models simulating evacuation scenarios, by discussing their required and desired features. Based on this overview, we propose our simulator comparing it with other models and commercial tools. Moreover, we discuss the importance of building simulators that cover the minimum requirements to avoid the risk of building inefficient models or tools that do not provide enough insights for users to take right decisions in terms of security policies in crowded events. The implications of this work are to present a new simulation tool and to start a discussion in this research field on mandatory features of evacuation simulation tools that will provide valuable information to users and to find out what the criteria are to define these features.

Keywords

Evacuation Simulation Crowd model Multi-agent Tools 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was undertaken as part of the EU HORIZON 2020 Project IMPACT (GA 653383) and Science without Borders – CNPq (scholarship reference: 233883/2014-2). We would like to thank our Consortium Partners and stakeholders for their input and the Brazilian Government.

References

  1. 1.
    Challenger, R., Clegg, C.W., Robinson, M.A., Leigh, L.: Understanding crowd behaviours, vol. 1: Practical guidance and lessons identified. London: The Stationery Office (TSO) (2010). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/understanding-crowd-behaviours-documents
  2. 2.
    Donald, I., Canter, D.: Intentionality and fatality during the King’s Cross underground fire. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 22, 203–218 (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grosshandler, W.L., Bryner, P., Madrzykowski, D.M., Kuntz, K.: Report of the Technical Investigation of The Station Nightclub Fire (NIST NCSTAR 2), vol. 1. National Construction Safety Team Act Reports (NIST NCSTAR) – 2 (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ha, V., Lykotrafitis, G.: Agent-based modeling of a multi-room multi-floor building emergency evacuation. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 391(8), 2740–2751 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Haron, F., Alginahi, Y.M., Kabir, M.N., Mohamed, A.I.: Software evaluation for crowd evacuation software evaluation for crowd evacuation–case study: Al case study: Al case study: Al-masjid an masjid an-nabawi. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Issues – IJCSI 9, 128–134 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Incontrol Simulation Solutions: Pedestrian Dynamics (2017). http://www.pedestrian-dynamics.com/
  7. 7.
    Kobes, M., Helsloot, I., de Vriesc, B., Posta, J.G.: Building safety and human behaviour in fire: a literature review. Fire Saf. J. 45(1), 1–11 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Legion (2017). http://www.legion.com/
  9. 9.
    Murakami, Y., Minami, K., Kawasoe, T., Ishida, T.: Multi-agent simulation for crisis management. In: 2002 Proceedings. IEEE Workshop Knowledge Media Networking, pp. 135–139. IEEE (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McConnell, N.C., Boyce, K.E., Shields, J., Galea, E.R., Day, R.C., Hulse, L.M.: The UK 9/11 evacuation study: analysis of survivors’ recognition and response phase in WTC1. Fire Saf. J. 45(1), 21–34 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oasys Software: MassMotion (2017). http://www.oasys-software.com/
  12. 12.
    Proulx, G., Fahy, R.F.: The time delay to start evacuation: review of five case studies. Fire Saf. Sci. 5, 783–794 (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Santos, G., Aguirre, B.E.: A critical review of emergency evacuation simulation models (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    SimWalk (2015). http://www.simwalk.com/
  15. 15.
    Templeton, A., Drury, J., Philippides, A.: From mindless masses to small groups: conceptualizing collective behavior in crowd modeling (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    van Toll, W., Jaklin, N., Geraerts, R.: Towards believable crowds: a generic multi-level framework for agent navigation (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wagner, N., Agrawal, V.: An agent-based simulation system for concert venue crowd evacuation modeling in the presence of a fire disaster. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(6), 2807–2815 (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    van der Wal, C.N., Formolo, D., Robinson, M., Minkov, M., Bosse, T.: An agent-based evacuation model with social contagion mechanisms and cultural factors. In: Proceedings of IEA/AIE 2017 (2017). In PressGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    van der Wal, C.N., Formolo, D., Robinson, M., Minkov, M., Bosse, T.: Developing a crowd evacuation model with socio-cultural, cognitive, and emotional elements. Trans. Comput. Collect. Intell. (2017). In PressGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wilensky, U.: NetLogo. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL (1999)
  21. 21.
    Zheng, X., Zhong, T., Liu, M.: Modeling crowd evacuation of a building based on seven methodological approaches. Build. Environ. 44(3), 437–445 (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Massachusetts State: Emergency Evacuation Safety Plan Guidelines Handbook Department of Developmental Services (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands

Personalised recommendations