1 / 62

Local Dynamics Models for Crowd Simulation

Local Dynamics Models for Crowd Simulation . Yeh, Hengchin. Outline. Introduction Optimal Velocity Model Helbing’s Model and Extensions Rule Based and Others HiDAC in More Detail References. Introduction– Definition . Narrow Helbing’s social forces. Introduction– Definition . Narrow

Albert_Lan
Télécharger la présentation

Local Dynamics Models for Crowd Simulation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Local Dynamics Models for Crowd Simulation Yeh, Hengchin

  2. Outline • Introduction • Optimal Velocity Model • Helbing’s Model and Extensions • Rule Based and Others • HiDAC in More Detail • References

  3. Introduction– Definition • Narrow • Helbing’s social forces.

  4. Introduction– Definition • Narrow • Helbing’s social forces. • Broad • Forces • Change of positions an velocities • According to local environment • Everything not Global (planning, navigation and so on)

  5. Introduction– Design flow • Observation • Choose the macroscopic phenomena you want to reproduce.

  6. Introduction– Design flow • Observation • Choose the macroscopic phenomena you want to reproduce. • Design the form of (microscopic) forces. • Highly arbitrary and heuristic. • Analogous to physics.

  7. Introduction– Design flow • Observation • Choose the macroscopic phenomena you want to reproduce. • Design the form of (microscopic) forces. • Highly arbitrary and heuristic. • Analogous to physics. • Simulation • Fix the problems.

  8. Introduction - Examples • Domain • Roadmaps • Cellular automata • Continuous space • etc. • Methods • Particle dynamics and potential field • Rule based, eg. flocking • Special, eg. RVO. CA: Very popular in Statistical Physics (eg. Physica A), but not in Graphics

  9. 1D-Optimal Velocity Model (OVM) • From Transportation Science • 1D traffic flow. • Imaging driving on highway: • A car will keep the maximum speed with enough the distance to the next car. • A car tries to run with optimal velocity determined by the distance to the next car. • Safety distance

  10. 1D-OVM • Formula • a: How “fast” the car wants to accelerate to the desired speed. • V: optimal (desired) speed. • b, c: constants Distance to the next car • tanh? Any monotonic increasing function with upper/lower bounds suffice.

  11. 1D-OVM • Demo • Phenomena: Congestion, phase transition • The uniform flow becomes unstable when a < 2 V(L/N). • Intuition: lag in response time magnifies fluctuations.

  12. 2D-OVM • Similar ideas • For • Only attraction • For • Both attraction and repulsion θ

  13. 2D-OVM • _ • Anything that models (approximates) the anisotropic nature of human perception / reaction. • For example: • Self driving force • Range of consideration θ

  14. 2D-OVM • Similar phenomena • Lane formation in low density. • Congestion in high density

  15. Helbing’s Forces • [Helbing and Molnar 1995] • Social force model for pedestrian dynamics • [Helbing et al. 2000] • “The paper”, published in Nature. • [Helbing et al. 2002] • [Lakoba and Kaup 2005] • [Helbing et al. 2005] • [Helbing et al. 2007] • Crowd turbulence: the physics of crowd disasters • [Yu and Johansson 2007] • Modeling Crowd Turbulence by Many-Particle Simulation

  16. Helbing 2000 • Main equation • Add features or modify this equation. • Example: • HiDAC • AERO

  17. Self-Driven Force • First term • Deviation of current velocity from preferred velocity • p: panic parameter; (in)dependence • : preferred velocity; “own” velocity. • : average velocity within a radius around the agent himself; “collective” velocity.

  18. Self-Driven Force • First term • Deviation of current velocity from preferred velocity • p: panic parameter; (in)dependence • : preferred velocity; “own” velocity. • : average velocity within a radius around the agent himself; “collective” velocity. • Compared to OVM • No distance dependence for preferred velocity. • No concept of safety distance. Can be added.

  19. Interactive Forces • Second Term

  20. Interactive Forces • Social force: • Baseline, almost in every paper • A, B, dij

  21. Interactive Forces • Pushing force: • Kernel • k, elasticity, spring constant

  22. Interactive Forces • Frictional force – relative velocity • But no static friction, alternative

  23. Agent-Obstacle Force • Analogously • Or, again

  24. Summary of Helbing 2000 • The social force do not have a physical source. • Body force and sliding friction forces do. • But rather simple • no ground friction • no dynamic constraint • Details; Qualitative vs quantitative.

  25. Summary of Helbing 2000 • Phenomena • Nick talked about them • Pressure buildup (Pressure discussed later) • Clogging at bottleneck • Jamming at widening • Faster is slower • Inefficient use of alternative exits (due to panicking and herding)

  26. Lakoba and Kaup 2005 • Title: Modifications of the Helbing-Molnár-Farkas-Vicsek Social Force Model for Pedestrian Evolution • HMFV later on. • Fix some counterintuitive results of HMFV, • by changing numerical values; • as well as modifying the model

  27. Problem 1 of HMFV • Overlapping: • HMFV allows overlapping, it NEEDS overlapping for pushing forces and frictional forces. • But no limit.

  28. Overlapping • There should be a “core” which is not penetratable.

  29. Overlapping • There should be a “core” which is not penetratable. • Maximum overlapping or squeezing • Smax, say, 20 % of the radius. • Collision Elimination

  30. Methods for Handling Overlapping • HMFV: use high k in • Problem: In order to prevent overlapping  makes humans very stiff springs or bouncy balls. • 5cm  5000 N, or ~ 7G • Potential Barrier: • for • approaches infinity as dij Rij – 2 Smax

  31. Potential Barrier • Numerically, Stiff equation • Since • f unbounded, very large. • In order to be stable, (i.e. x not “blowing off”) only very small time step can be used. • Runs forever. • Implicit integration is expensive too • Lakoba & Kaup – OEA

  32. Overlap-Eliminating Algorithm (OEA) • n= total number of pedestrians; count = 0; • While (overlapping occurs && count < n) • Find the most overlapped pedestrian pi. • If (pi intersects with the wall) • Move pi away from the wall • set vi,n 0; vi ,t stays the same. • make pi “stationary” • end if • Move all pj’s away from pi. • Set vj vi • end while

  33. OEA • Set vj vi this only works for uni-goal system, such as egress. • Still no guarantee. • But probability very low. • Can we do better? • What if the only collision free configuration is a “packing” one? • Finite packing? HARD

  34. OEA time step • Determine the maximum allowable time step by letting each pedestrian to move • No less than Smax. • Can be even bigger if all (obstacles and pedestrians) are at least d > Smax apart.

  35. OEA time step • OEA is a physical process. Need time. • Deduce the needed time from change of momentum and feasible “force”. time left for other physical processes

  36. fOE • fOE • a free parameter, how hard he can bounce away from overlapping objects. • Related to skeleton elasticity, c.f. k for “muscle” elasticity.

  37. Problem 2 of HMFV • Too small B • 8 cm ~ 1.4G • or say, 50 cm for less then a weight of a baseball. • Consider walking toward a wall. • Too bouncy. • Oscillation expected.

  38. Density Effects of the Social Force • Since B is larger now • need to suppress the social repulsion as the person approaches a dense crowd density is high. K0 =0.3 K1 >1 Normalized density D0 diameter of pedestrian

  39. Orientational Dependence of the Social Force • Face-to-back: W1 • Give extra weight to Face-to-face: W2

  40. Orientational Dependence of the Social Force • Face-to-back: W1 • Give extra weight to Face-to-face: W2

  41. Helbing ‘05 • Add some more features • Impatience • : average speed into the desired direction of motion. • Long waiting times decrease the actual velocity compared to the desired one, which increases the desired velocity

  42. More features • Fluctuation • Orientational effects 0.2 0.8

  43. [Helbing ‘05] Interesting Suggestions

  44. [Helbing ‘05] Interesting Suggestions

  45. What is left in this lecture • Examples of method-specific local dynamics • in AERO • in Autonomous Pedestrians [Shao and Terzopoulos ‘05] • HiDAC in more details • following Nick’s lecture.

  46. Local Dynamics in AERO

  47. Local Dynamics in AERO • New face: Roadmap force field lk p

  48. Autonomous Pedestrians • Rule-based. • local rules • A B D E F: collision avoidance. • C Modified Potential field. To maintain separation in a moving crowd.

  49. Autonomous Pedestrians • Temporary Crowd: • Moving in similar directions • Situated within a parabolic region in front of H. • ri repulsiveness • di distance to Ci fi di

  50. HiDAC • Position for agent i is

More Related