The collective behavior of human crowds may result from visually-guided interactions between neighbors, such as walking side-by-side. By modeling these local interactions we aim to explain emergent crowd behavior. Previously we investigated behavioral strategies use to control speed in side-by-side walking (VSS 2012); here we report more extensive analyses and test additional models. A participant and a confederate walked together across an open 12m x 12m room, while their head positions were tracked. The confederate was instructed to slow down or speed up mid-trial, whereas the participant was instructed to walk next to the confederate. Cross-correlation of confederate and participant speed profiles revealed significant coordination (mean r=0.79, delay=650 ms) compared to randomly selected virtual pairs (mean r=0.18). Six speed-control models were compared, simulating the participant’s acceleration on each trial by using the confederate’s data as input: (a) distance model (median r=0.38), null the z-distance between the confederate and participant, (b) direction model (median r=0.21), null the angle between the visual direction of the confederate and the participant’s sagittal plane, (c) speed model (median r=0.80), null the difference in speed between the participant and the confederate, (d) constant distance model (median r=0.61), reduce the z-distance between neighbors to a constant value, (e) linear combination model (median r=0.80), a weighted sum of the speed and distance models, and (f) ratio model (median r=0.52), a ratio of the speed and distance models. Thus, a simple speed-matching model best accounts for the human data; adding a distance term does not explain further variance. This result is similar to that for speed control in pedestrian following (Rio 2010, 2012), suggesting a general principle for the visual coordination of speed among neighbors in a crowd. Future work will investigate the visual coordination of heading direction. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2013
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Page et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: