skip to main content
10.1145/3267851.3267877acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesivaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Do you see groups?: The impact of crowd density and viewpoint on the perception of groups

Authors Info & Claims
Published:05 November 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Agent-based crowd simulation in virtual environments is of great utility in a variety of domains, from the entertainment industry to serious applications including mobile robots and swarms. Many studies of crowd behavior simulations do not consider the fact that people tend to congregate in smaller social gatherings, such as friends, or families, rather than walking alone. Based on a real-time crowd simulator which has been implemented as a unilateral incompressible fluid and augmented with group behaviors, a perceptual study was conducted to determine the impact of groups on the perception of the crowds at various densities from different camera views. If it is not possible to see groups under certain circumstances, then it may not be necessary to simulate them, to reduce the amount of calculations, an important issue in real-time simulations. This study provides researchers with a proper reference to design better algorithms to simulate realistic behaviors.

References

  1. Adrian F Aveni. 1977. The not-so-lonely crowd: Friendship groups in collective behavior. Sociometry (1977), 96--99.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. James S Coleman and John James. 1961. The equilibrium size distribution of freely-forming groups. Sociometry 24, 1 (1961), 36--45.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Cathy Ennis and Carol O'Sullivan. 2012. Perceptually plausible formations for virtual conversers. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 23, 3-4 (2012), 321--329. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Cathy Ennis, Christopher Peters, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2011. Perceptual effects of scene context and viewpoint for virtual pedestrian crowds. ACM Transactions on Applied Perception (TAP) 8, 2 (2011), 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Mizar Luca Federici, Andrea Gorrini, Lorenza Manenti, and Giuseppe Vizzari. 2012. Data collection for modeling and simulation: case study at the university of milan-bicocca. In International Conference on Cellular Automata. Springer, 699--708.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. JJ Fruin. 1970. Designing for Pedestrians. A Level of Service Concept. Polytechnical Institute of Brooklyn. Ph.D. Dissertation. Ph. D.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Weina Ge, Robert T Collins, and Barry Ruback. 2009. Automatically detecting the small group structure of a crowd. In Applications of computer vision (wacv), 2009 workshop on. IEEE, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Weina Ge, Robert T Collins, and R Barry Ruback. 2012. Vision-based analysis of small groups in pedestrian crowds. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence 34, 5 (2012), 1003--1016. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Edward Twitchell Hall. 1966. The hidden dimension. (1966).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. A Paul Hare. 1976. Handbook of small group research. (1976).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dirk Helbing, Anders Johansson, and Habib Zein Al-Abideen. 2007. Dynamics of crowd disasters: An empirical study. Physical review E 75, 4 (2007), 046109.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Rafael Hocevar, Fernando Marson, Vinícius Cassol, Henry Braun, Rafael Bidarra, and Soraia R. Musse. 2012. From their environment to their behavior: Aprocedural approach to model groups of virtual agents. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 7502 LNAI (2012), 370--376. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Roger L Hughes. 2002. A continuum theory for the flow of pedestrians. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 36, 6 (2002), 507--535.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. John James. 1953. The distribution of free-forming small group size. American Sociological Review (1953).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Tobias Kretz, Anna Grünebohm, Maike Kaufman, Florian Mazur, and Michael Schreckenberg. 2006. Experimental study of pedestrian counterflow in a corridor. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2006, 10 (2006), P10001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Tobias Kretz, Anna Grünebohm, and Michael Schreckenberg. 2006. Experimental study of pedestrian flow through a bottleneck. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2006, 10 (2006), P10014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Francisco Martinez-Gil, Miguel Lozano, Ignacio García-Fernández, and Fernando Fernández. 2017. Modeling, Evaluation, and Scale on Artificial Pedestrians: A Literature Review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 50, 5 (2017), 72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Mehdi Moussaïd, Niriaska Perozo, Simon Garnier, Dirk Helbing, and Guy Theraulaz. 2010. The Walking Behaviour of Pedestrian Social Groups and Its Impact on Crowd Dynamics. PLOS ONE 5, 4 (04 2010), 1--7.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Rahul Narain, Abhinav Golas, Sean Curtis, and Ming C. Lin. 2009. Aggregate Dynamics for Dense Crowd Simulation. In ACM SIGGRAPH Asia 2009 Papers (SIGGRAPH Asia '09). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 122, 8 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Xiaoshan Pan, Charles S Han, and Kincho H Law. 2005. A multiagent based simulation framework for the study of human and social behavior in egress analysis. In Computing in Civil Engineering (2005). 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Christopher Peters and Cathy Ennis. 2009. Modeling groups of plausible virtual pedestrians. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 29, 4 (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Francisco Arturo Rojas, Hyun Seung Yang, and Fernando M Tarnogol. 2014. Safe Navigation of Pedestrians in Social Groups in a Virtual Urban Environment. In Cyberworlds (CW), 2014 International Conference on. IEEE, 31--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Kenneth H. Rosen. 2002. Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Harmeet Singh, Robyn Arter, Louise Dodd, Paul Langston, Edward Lester, and John Drury. 2009. Modelling subgroup behaviour in crowd dynamics DEM simulation. Applied Mathematical Modelling 33, 12 (2009), 4408--4423.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. G Keith Still. 2000. Crowd dynamics. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Warwick.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Jur Van Den Berg, Sachin Patil, Jason Sewall, Dinesh Manocha, and Ming Lin. 2008. Interactive navigation of multiple agents in crowded environments. In Proceedings of the 2008 symposium on Interactive 3D graphics and games. ACM, 139--147. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Xiaoge Wei, Wei Lv, Weiguo Song, and Xiaolian Li. 2015. Survey study and experimental investigation on the local behavior of pedestrian groups. Complexity 20, 6 (2015), 87--97. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Steven A Wilmarth, Nancy M Amato, and Peter F Stiller. 1999. MAPRM: A probabilistic roadmap planner with sampling on the medial axis of the free space. In Robotics and Automation, 1999. Proceedings. 1999 IEEE International Conference on, Vol. 2. IEEE, 1024--1031.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Michael Wooldridge and Nicholas R Jennings. 1995. Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. The knowledge engineering review 10, 2 (1995), 115--152.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Wenjian Yu and Anders Johansson. 2007. Modeling crowd turbulence by many-particle simulations. Physical review E 76, 4 (2007), 046105.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Do you see groups?: The impact of crowd density and viewpoint on the perception of groups

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        IVA '18: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents
        November 2018
        381 pages
        ISBN:9781450360135
        DOI:10.1145/3267851

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 5 November 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        IVA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate17of82submissions,21%Overall Acceptance Rate53of196submissions,27%

        Upcoming Conference

        IVA '24
        ACM International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Agents
        September 16 - 19, 2024
        GLASGOW , United Kingdom

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader