1 / 76

Crowd Simulation I

Crowd Simulation I. Introduction to Microscopic Crowd Simulation Techniques. Outline. Introduction to Crowd Simulation Fields of Study & Applications Visualization vs. Realism Microscopic vs. Macroscopic Flocking Social Forces 2D Cellular Automaton. Introduction.

hung
Télécharger la présentation

Crowd Simulation I

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. Crowd Simulation I Introduction to Microscopic Crowd Simulation Techniques

  2. Outline • Introduction to Crowd Simulation • Fields of Study & Applications • Visualization vs. Realism • Microscopic vs. Macroscopic • Flocking • Social Forces • 2D Cellular Automaton

  3. Introduction • Crowd simulation attempts to model the motions of objects within an environment. • The topic has been researched from several different areas of study: • Entertainment and Visual Effects • Architecture and Civil Engineering • Psychology • Computer Science

  4. Applications of Crowd Simulation • Entertainment and Visual Effects • Goal: Create a visually realistic model of crowds for use in movies, television, and video games. • Architecture and Civil Engineering • Goal: Study the flow of people/vehicles through environments. • Analyze road network efficiency. • Building evacuation characteristics. • Psychology • Goal: Validate behavior models of the human mind under different environmental conditions (ex. panic). • Computer Science • Goal: • Help out in any of the three areas above with algorithmic know-how. • Study AI models and behavior.

  5. Visualization vs. Realism • The various crowd simulation techniques can generally be divided into two categories: • Visualization • Entertainment and Visual Effects • Realism • Architecture and Civil Engineering • Psychology • Techniques have begun to merge over the last decade.

  6. Crowd Visualization • Goal: Create a visually realistic model of crowds. • Simulation does not have to be physically accurate. • Techniques may have to integrate with motion captured animations. • Algorithms frequently exploit Level-of-Detail. • Movies and television applications can afford offline processing as long as simulation time is reasonable. • Video games have real-time requirements.

  7. Crowd Visualization Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2000 – 2003). Using the tool “Massive.” Disney’s Lion King (1994).

  8. Crowd Realism • Goal: Study the flow of people/vehicles through environments. • Must be as physically accurate as possible. • Studies constantly compare simulation results with empirical data. • Simple visualizations such as a single point per object. • May have a very high order of objects to simulate.

  9. Crowd Realism Simulation of a ship evacuation, using the tool EXODUS. Paths of pedestrian exploration driven by space syntax architectural concepts.

  10. Microscopic vs. Macroscopic • Simulations techniques can also be categorized as microscopic vs. macroscopic. • Microscopic techniques simulate the individual object. • Crowd behavior is an emergent property of the microscopic-level algorithms driving the simulation. • Macroscopic techniques simulate groups of objects. • Example: Treating a transit system as a flow problem. • The rest of this lecture will study three different approaches to microscopic crowd simulation techniques.

  11. Flocking

  12. Flocking • Flocking technique introduced by Craig W. Reynolds and his Boids. • Techniques to simulate animal flocking, herds, and schooling. • Sets the stage for further study into crowd simulation. • Each agent in the simulation is called a “boid.” • Big Idea: Complex crowd behaviors can be achieved through individual agents following simple rules.

  13. Demos • Boids: • http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/applet/ • Disney’s Lion King: • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruNv7uATZTQ • How was this done?

  14. Flocking – Geometry in Flight • Each boid has its own local coordinate system: • X axis is left/right • Y axis is up/down • Z axis is ahead/back • Rotations too: • Rotation about X is pitch • Rotation about Y is yaw • Rotation about Z is roll • Each boid moves along its positive Z axis where pitch and yaw realign the global orientation of the Z axis.

  15. Flocking – Geometry in Flight (2)

  16. Flocking – Geometry in Flight (3) • For realism in the simulation… • Momentum is conserved. • Speed dampening achieved by setting a maximum speed and acceleration. • Gravity is only used for banking of boids. • Banking orientation a function of path curvature and direction of gravity. • Not physically realistic. Does not capture that traveling up is harder than traveling down.

  17. Flocking – Steering Behaviors • Flocking is closely related to particle systems. • Forces between particles cause motion. • Interactions take place within a local neighborhood of each Boid. • Three basic steering behaviors: • Separation • Alignment • Cohesion • Each steering behavior directs thrust in a desired direction.

  18. Flocking – Steering Behaviors (2) • Separation • Boids steer to avoid crowding local flockmates. • Collision avoidance. • Keeps boids a realistic distance apart.

  19. Flocking – Steering Behaviors (3) • Alignment (AKA Velocity Matching) • Boids attempt to match the velocity of their neighbors. • Complements separation. • Causes boids to move in the same general direction.

  20. Flocking – Steering Behaviors (4) • Cohesion • Boids steer to move towards the average position of local flockmates. • Causes boids to keep together in a local flock. • Allows flocks to both merge and bifurcate.

  21. Flocking – Boid Brain • Each steering behavior may yield a different thrust vector. • The Boid Brain combines, prioritizes, and arbitrates between potentially conflicting urges.

  22. Flocking – Boid Brain (2) • Averaging (and weighted averaging) of steering vectors works “pretty well” but can yield poor behavior in cases where steering urges are in opposite directions. • Hesitation or indecision can lead to collisions with obstacles. • Example: • (Turn -90 degrees + Turn 90 degrees) / 2 = 0.

  23. Flocking – Boid Brain (3) • Better Solution: • A fixed amount of “acceleration” is available to each boid each simulation iteration. • Steering vectors are processed in order of priority with a weighted average. • Priorities may be reassigned dynamically. • Steering vectors are processed until all acceleration credits have been used up. • The last processed vector is attenuated to keep within acceleration credit limits.

  24. Flocking – Simulated Perception • As mentioned earlier, boid perception is limited to a local field of view. • Local neighborhood is a spherical zone of sensitivity centered around a boid’s origin. • Sensitivity is weighted with the inverse exponential of distance. (1/r2) • Early Boid implementation used linear weighting which yielded unrealistic spring-like animations. • Additional parameters can be used to simulated different fields of view: • Extra weighting in forward direction to increase awareness of what is ahead.

  25. Flocking – Simulated Perception (2) • Implications of local perception: • Flocks of boids are allowed to bifurcate as groups of boids may break away from others and still satisfy the cohesion steering behavior. • Global cohesion/centering models were used early in Boids’ development. • Generated unusual effects causing all members of a scattered flock to simultaneously converge towards the flock’s centroid. • Spatially-oriented data structures may be used to reduce complexity below O(n2).

  26. Social Forces

  27. Social Forces • Developed by Dirk Helbing and Peter Molnar in 1995 with several advancements over the last decade. • Later contributions from Illes Farkas and Tamas Vicsek. • A frequently referenced piece of work. • Widely successful because it elegantly reproduces many common features observed in pedestrian movement.

  28. Social Forces • Social Forces are not exerted by the environment on a pedestrian’s body, but rather a quantity that describes the motivation to act. • Respect personal space. • Follow others at a safe distance. • Avoid getting too close to walls and obstacles. • Can be thought of as a developed model of “flocking for human pedestrians” as humans follow a set of social rules that guide their movement.

  29. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Desired Motion • Obstacle Avoidance • Social Force • Attractive Forces • Let’s work backwards. Here’s the equation describing all forces acting on an individual agent:

  30. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Acceleration towards a goal. • Given current location, desired location, current speed, and desired speed, an equation describing acceleration towards the destination is given by: • Where eα is a unit vector towards the destination. • The ταterm is a relaxation time that causes a delay after the agent has performed deceleration processes.

  31. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Respect the personal space of others. • Pedestrians will keep a certain distance from others that depends upon the pedestrian density and desired speed. • This behavior can be implemented as a repulsive force between agents with the following equations: • Where Vαβ is a monotonic decreasing function of b with equipotential lines having the form of an ellipse that is in the direction of motion. • Elliptical range allows for an agent to leave room for their own subsequent steps. • Helbinget al later revise and simplify this equation in 2000. This will be discussed in a little bit.

  32. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Respect the personal space of others. (cont.) • Pedestrians have a limited cone of vision, so forces from agents outside an agent’s immediate attention should be attenuated. • This is done with the following weight function: • This gives us the final inter-agent repulsive forces: • Care must be taken for inter-agent forces to not cross between obstacles. For example, agents on opposite sides of a wall should not affect each other.

  33. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Avoid colliding with obstacles. • Pedestrians will also keep a certain distance from borders of buildings, walls, obstacles, etc. to avoid injury. • This behavior can be described by the following: • Where UαB is a monotonic decreasing potential. • The vector rαB denotes the distance between the agent and the nearest portion of the obstacle.

  34. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Social Forces also allows attractive forces. • Examples: • Friends • Street Performers • Window Displays • The equation for these forces has the same form as the inter-agent repulsive forces. • This force is also attenuated with a field of attention, giving:

  35. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • Here is the final Social Force equation one more time: • The social force model is now defined by: • The fluctuation term takes into account random variations in behavior. Enhances realism. m/s2

  36. Social Forces ’95 – Equations • The previous equation described changes in acceleration. • Changes in velocity are given by the following equation: • The trailing g-term caps speed. m/s

  37. Social Forces ’95 – Simulations • Repulsive potentials were assumed decrease exponentially: • Parameter values: • Voαβ = 2.1m2/s2 • σ= 0.3m • UoαB = 10m2/s2 • R = 0.2m • τα = 0.5s (smaller times  more aggressive)

  38. Social Forces ’95 – Simulations (2) • Two pedestrian phenomena were observed with these equations: • Lane Formation • Door Oscillation

  39. Social Forces ’95 – Simulations (3) • Lane Formation • The empty circles and full circles have desired direction of motion in opposite directions. • Circle diameter reflects actual velocity.

  40. Social Forces ’95 – Simulations (4) • Door Oscillation • If one pedestrian has been able to pass a narrow door, other pedestrians with the same desired walking direction can follow easily. Others have to wait. • The door can be “captured” as pressure on the opposite side builds up, allowing pedestrians in the other direction to pass.

  41. Social Forces – Additions • Several additions to Social Forces has been made over the years. • In 2000, the equations were revised to study panic and evacuation dynamics. • Characteristics of panic: • People move or try to move considerably faster than normal. • Individuals start pushing each other (violating repulsive forces from earlier work). • Moving becomes uncoordinated. • Arching and clogging appears at exits. • Jams build up. • Physical interactions in jams can build up to dangerous pressures, injuring people and breaking of obstacles. • Injured people become obstacles to the rest of the crowd. • People show a tendency towards mass behavior. • Alternative exits are often overlooked or not efficiently used. • The bold items were addressed in 2000.

  42. Social Forces ’00 – Equations • The revised inter-agent force equation is given by: • “Body force” counteracts body compression. k is a large constant. • “Sliding friction force” impedes relative tangential motion if pedestrians come too close. Κ is another large constant. • Inspired by granular interactions. • Obstacle repulsion force updated in the same manner.

  43. Social Forces ’00 – Equations • The desired direction of motion updated to also include mass behavior: • Simulations found that a mix of both individual and mass directions worked best. • Panic (high mass behavior) is realized through a high pi value.

  44. Social Forces ’00 – Simulations • Arching/Clogging at exits:

  45. Social Forces ’00 – Simulations • Corridor widening can lead to bottlenecks:

  46. Social Forces ’00 – Simulations • Mass behavior and inefficient use of exits:

  47. Social Forces – More Results • Below shows the effects of fire, which is said to have a socio-psychological strength 10x greater than a normal wall. • Incapacitated agents are shown as full circles.

  48. Social Forces – More Results (2) • Suggestions for improved motion. • Environments more conducive to efficient motion are shown on the right.

  49. Social Forces – More Results (3) • Breaking of a corridor doorway into two helps in lane formation and avoid door clogging and oscillation.

  50. Social Forces – More Results (4) • Placing a column in front of an exit can alleviates problems due to arching by reducing pressure. • More efficient egress. • Fewer or no injuries. • Injured agents are shown as full circles on the left.

More Related