A State-of-the-Art Review on Empirical Data Collection for External Governed Pedestrians Complex Movement

Table 1

Summary of empirical results on externally governed complex pedestrian traffic movements.

Ref.

Source

Movement Type

Infrastructure

Subject

Controllability

Competitiveness

Summaries

Facility Type

Bottleneck

Obstacle

Animal

Pedestrian

Laboratory

Field

Normal

Emergency

Panic

Key Findings

Limitations & Future Recommendations

Further Data Usage

[56]

Daamen and Hoogendoorn (2003)

Straight line; Egress; Opposing; Intersecting

Narrow corridor; Large hallway ground

●

●

●

●

(i) Demonstrate a detailed process for designing controlled experiments; (ii) Define and calculate the microscopic and macroscopic characteristics from trajectories for straight, opposing and intersecting flows; (iii) Find different pedestrian walking features with and without bottleneck

(i) Only present the analysis of bottleneck experiments data; (ii) Data analysis methods are not comprehensive

(i) Bottleneck experiments data were further analyzed [20, 176, 177]

[131]

Saloma et al. (2003)

Egress (Mice)

Water pool

●

●

●

●

(i) Burst sizes of mice egress through the exit exhibit exponential or power-law distribution depending on exit size; (ii) Self-organized queuing behavior can be observed when the door width only enables one mice to pass; (iii) The queue will be broken with the increase of door width

(i) Whether the findings from the mice can be applicable of humans should be further studies by comparing with empirical data

(i) Further analysis of the experiments data considering the effect of prior individual training [132]

[141]

Isobe et al. (2004)

Opposing

Narrow channel

●

●

●

(i) Experiment data can help improve the lattice gas model by considering the front watching effect and back step; (ii) Jamming transition is not found in experiment

(i) The experiment data have not been used for the analysis of microscopic flow features

(i) –

[142]

Nagai et al. (2005)

Opposing

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

(i) The arrival time of crawler depends highly on the initial location; (ii) Mean arrival time increases with density

(i) It is interesting to know how the vision condition among crawlers affect the opposing movement

(i) –

[57]

Seyfried et al. (2005)

Straight line

Narrow passageway

●

●

●

(i) Determine the fundamental diagram for single-file movements; (ii) Single-file and 2D movements have agreements on velocity-density relations; (iii) Required length and velocities indicated a linear relation

(i) Lack of automatic trajectories extraction; (ii) Participants did not behave like real life walking in experiments

(i) Across cultural comparison of fundamental diagrams [61, 62]

[178]

Cepolina & Tyler (2005)

Ingress; Egress

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Capacity drop at bottleneck arises from a geometric issue and a time effect; (ii) Discover the relationships between average inflow and outflow

(i) The data comparison is not reasonable due to different setups

(i) –

[9]

Helbing et al. (2005)

Straight line; Opposing; Intersecting; Egress; Counteracting

Narrow passageway

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Boundary conditions influence capacity of facilitates and the headway distribution of pedestrians; (ii) The proper use of obstacle can stabilize flow patterns and increase flow fluidity; (iii) For opposing flows, long bottleneck is less efficient than short bottleneck; (iv) For intersecting flows, lane formation is the result of a significant irregularity and clusters in the passing time; (v) Several design solutions are proposed based on simulations

(i) Additional empirical data are needed to verify the proposed design solutions; (ii) More psychological factors of pedestrians should be considered

(i) –

[119]

Altshuler et al. (2005)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Symmetric breaking can be found in panicking ants

(i) The ants’ data can be used for comparison with the symmetric breaking phenomena in humans

(i)–

[100]

Kretz et al. (2006)

Egress

Width-changing door

●

●

●

●

(i) Specific flow decrease with the increase of width when the width is under 100cm and keeps a constant when the width exceeds 100cm

(i) Further experiments should consider the heterogeneous group

(i) Data have been used to compare with ants experiments [7]

[143]

Kretz et al. (2006)

Opposing

Corridor

●

●

●

(i) Total flow is always larger in opposing movement than straight line movement; (ii) The number of lanes in opposing flow can be as much as 4

(i) Repeated experiments should be carried out considering elderly people, different corridor width and shape, side preference etc.

(i) –

[98]

Nagai et al. (2006)

Egress

Room

●

●

●

●

(i) Channel capacity is different for walkers and crawlers (75 vs. 35); (ii) Mean escape time increases with the number of walkers and crawlers; (iii) Mean flow increases with density till reaching the capacity or clog occurs; (iv) Lattice gas model can reproduce the egress of walker and crawlers well in a correspondence with empirical data

(i) Detailed gait characteristics of walker and crawlers should be analyzed by introducing more advanced computer vision techniques

(i) –

[12]

Asano et al. (2007)

Straight line; Opposing; Intersecting

Restricted passageway

●

●

●

(i) Crossing angle may affect speed-density parameters; (ii) Distance headway affects mean speed

(i) Require considering heterogeneity in crowds

(i) Development of a combined micro-meso-model [179]

[74]

Berrou et al. (2007)

Straight line; Ingress; Opposing

Passageway; door

●

●

●

●

(i) Strong context-dependencies require to be considered into the modeling of crowd motion pattern

(i) The capability of samples to represent the population are not examined

(i) –

[174]

Dyer et al. (2008)

Random flow

Circle room

●

●

●

(i) Small directionally informed pedestrian can guide the group to targeted directions without verbal communication

(i) Flow characteristics for the different directional flows are not analyzed

(i) Further analysis on three new questions [180]

[72]

Kretz et al. (2008)

Straight line

Stairs

●

●

●

(i) 485 individuals’ walking speed on a long stairway; (ii) Mean upward walking speed on a long stairway can be half of that on a short stairway

(i) No universal scaling factor for speed on stairways in dependence of the stairway length

(i) –

[99]

Zhang et al. (2008)

Egress

Room

●

●

●

●

(i) Evacuation times display a normal distribution; (ii) Arrival time and escape order shows linear dependence with similar slope; (iii) Coordination among escapers is beneficial to the outflow

(i) Assumptions cannot be tested under panic situations

(i) –

[62]

Chattaraj et al. (2009)

Straight line

Narrow passageway

●

●

●

(i) Free flow speed keeps the same between Indian and German participants; (ii) German tend to have more minimum personal space than Indian; (iii) German are more sensitive to the increase in density than Indian; (iv) The length of corridor does not have influence on the fundamental diagram

(i) Lack of a method that can measure the dependence of fundamental diagram on security distance

(i) –

[75]

John et al. (2009)

Straight line (Ants)

Nature path

●

●

●

●

(i) No overtaking behavior in straight movement ants trails; (ii) No jammed branch for ant traffic in straight movement; (iii) No hysteresis and synchronized flow in ant traffic

(i) Lack of the exploration of analogy between ants traffic system and other traffic systems such as vehicular flow and pedestrian flow

(i) –

[61]

Liu et al. (2009)

Straight line

Narrow passageway

●

●

●

(i) Lateral oscillation remains 5.5 cm at free flow; (ii) With the increase of density, the velocity drops, the lateral oscillation rises and the time headway surges

(i) No clear explanation on the differences with Seyfried et al. (2015)’s results

(i) –

[181]

Moussaïd et al. (2009)

Straight line; Opposing

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Individual evading behaviors for straight and opposing situations are different; (ii) Side preference can be interpreted as a coordination behavior or a cultural bias

(i) Successive interaction with other people should be investigated

(i) –

[21]

Seyfried et al. (2009)

Egress

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Bottleneck capacity rises with the widen of width; (ii) Jam can occur at below max. capacity situation; (iii) Zipper effect starts to be observed at the bottleneck width of 0.7m; (iv) Absolute values and figures from a lab experiment cannot simply be adopted for design usage.

(i) Panic and emergency situation have not been considered

(i) –

[120]

Shiwakoti et al. (2009)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Placement of obstacle near the exit can increase the flow in general cases; (ii) Corner exits tend to have higher flow comparing to middle exits in squared chambers

(i) Lack of human empirical data on obstacle performance and exit location effect

(i) Development of an animal-based microscopic model [7, 127].; (ii) Study the effect of obstacle on egress dynamics [123].

[83]

Yanagisawa et al. (2009)

Turning; Egress

Wide-changing bottleneck

●

●

●

●

●

(i) The introduction of turning and conflicts functions to floor field model agree well with empirical data; (ii) Outflow depends on the position of obstacle near the exits; (iii) About four pedestrians are trying to exit at the same time when the exit width is 50cm

(i) The floor field model is not intelligent enough to capture the lane formation process as empirical data indicate

(i) –

[67]

Boltes et al. (2010)

Egress

Bottleneck corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Automatic trajectories extraction can be realized in PeTrack with high accuracy in space and time based on markers

(i) The recognition approach needs to be replaced for marker-less tracking

(i) Analysis of the bottleneck flow patterns [101, 102].

[8]

Burd et al. (2010)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Obstacle can increase the ants’ egress flow under normal nested situations

(i) Comparison of non-panic data with panic data is required

(i) –

[107]

Daamen and Hoogendoorn (2010)

Egress

Narrow door

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Capacity increases with the rise of stress level at 220cm width and the finding reverses at 110cm width; (ii) Population with more children has the highest capacity (mean value of 3.31P/m/s); (iii) Population with 5% disabled people has the lowest capacity (mean value of 2.02P/m/s); (iv) The open door leads to more interactions between participants resulting in reduce in speed and outflow

(i) Latent factors on pedestrian dynamics should be analyzed

(i) Data were used to calibrate several pedestrian simulation models [182]

[150]

Versluis (2010)

Straight line; Intersecting; Opposing

Passageway in a hall

●

●

●

(i) 88% movements are related lateral and longitudinal interaction; (ii) Approach side has no effect on the overtaking side; (iii) Pedestrians prefer larger lateral evasion in opposing condition and larger longitudinal evasion in intersecting condition; (iv) As the rise of interacting angle, mean interaction point increases and mean longitudinal evasion decreases

(i) Variable selections, measurement and experimental setups should be improved

(i) Collison avoidance behavior was analyzed [183]

[155]

Wong et al. (2010)

Intersecting

Passageway in a stadium

●

●

●

(i) Conflict-induced interactions increase with the angle; (ii) People are less willing to follow the front pedestrian to reduce conflicts; (iii) The capacity for intersecting flow grows with the increasingly imbalance of pedestrian density ratio

(i) Cultural factors should be considered in pedestrian models; (ii) Field observation data should be collected for intersecting flows

(i) Further analysis on the look-ahead behavior of pedestrians [184]; (ii) Using a Bayesian inference method to improve the current model [185]

[154]

Plaue et al. (2011)

Intersecting

Entrance area of a building

●

●

●

(i) Nearest-neighbour kernel density method is suitable for the density estimation of human crowds

(i) The flow characteristics have not been analyzed enough

(i) –

[80]

Shiwakoti et al. (2011)

Turning; Egressing (Humans & Ants)

Circular chamber; Doorway

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Turning movements create push and delay in egress; (ii) Column at the exit can increase the flow of panicking ants; (iii) Observation of the in-store stampede shows consistency with ants experiments

(i) Need a scaling model to find the analogism between animals and humans quantitatively

(i) Develop an animal-based model to simulate uni-directional crowd movement [7]

[103]

Song et al. (2011)

Egress

Wide-changing corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Compare with Kretz et al. (2006), densities outside the bottleneck region is the same, densities are higher and velocities are smaller inside the bottleneck

(i) The explanation for the difference between the compared researches are not fully explained

(i) Further analyze of experiments data [104]

[58]

Zhang et al. (2011)

Straight line; Merging

Wide-changing corridor

●

●

●

(i) Use four density measurements methods and automatic video processing; (ii) Specific flow is independent of corridor width under less congested situation without bottleneck; (iii) Fundamental diagrams for different shapes of facilities are not comparable

(i) Influence of crowd heterogeneity on the shape of fundamental diagrams has not been discussed

(i) –

[159]

Boyce et al. (2012)

Merging

Stair-floor interface

●

●

●

(i) Location of stair-floor connections have influences on merging flows; (ii) Population composition affects the merging patterns

(i) Lack of real panic data on merging flows

(i) –

[81]

Dias et al. (2012)

Straight line; Turning (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

(i) Right angled path are 20% less efficient than straight path

(i) Design solutions are not proposed based on the results

(i) –

[93]

Jelić et al. (2012)

Turning

Ring corridor

●

●

●

(i) Provide a measurement method for instantaneous fundamental diagrams; (ii) Velocity-distance headway relations can be used to segment three linear regimes

(i) The overall cross-cultural comparison is weak

(i) –

[169]

Ma et al. (2012)

Merging

Ultra high-rise building

●

●

●

(i) Merging behavior can affect the flow of evacuees; (ii) Overtaking behavior can be frequently observed on the refugee floor

(i) It should be a more significant contribution if the individuals’ entire evacuation process can be tracked

(i) –

[94]

Moussaïd et al. (2012)

Turning; Opposing

Ring corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Find the transition between organized and disorganized states in pedestrian traffic; (ii) Unstable dynamics is the result of speed variations among pedestrians

(i) The underlying reason for the speed variations has not been explored

(i) –

[124]

Soria et al. (2012)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

(i) Selfish behavior does not exist in ants traffic; (ii) Discover the faster-is-slower effect in escaping ants under different stress levels

(i) Lack of discussion and comparison with human empirical data

(i) Faster-is-slower effects of ants are revisited and compared with human crowds [128]

[151]

Zhang et al. (2012)

Opposing; Intersecting

Corridor

●

●

●

(i) Bi-directional flow is classified into stable separated lanes (SSL), dynamical multi-lanes (DML) flows with balanced and unbalanced flow ratio (BFR, UFR); (ii) Density measurement methods do not affect fundamental diagrams significantly; (iii) Different ordering flows do not affect fundamental diagrams significantly

(i) Experiments under hyper-congested situation should be further conducted

(i) –

[84]

Zhang et al. (2012)

Turning; Merging

Corridor

●

●

●

(i) Present Voronoi diagrams for speed and density distribution over space for turning and merging flows; (i) Pedestrians tend to accelerate their speed after merging

(i) No further analysis on turning movements considering locomotion characteristics

(i) Same data were used for developing PeTrack [186]

[125]

Boari et al. (2013)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Ants’ egress efficiency is independent of hurry degree; (ii) Selfish egress behavior is not found in ants traffic; (iii) Faster-is-slower effect is not observed

(i) The further underlying reasons for the results difference are not discussed well

(i) –

[86]

Burghardt et al. (2013)

Turning

Stairs

●

●

●

(i) Maximum specific flow values are up to 1.25m/s for upward movement and 1.22m/s for downward movement; (ii) Stairs without bends are preferred

(i) Stairs evacuation data on turning bend section should be compared

(i) –

[97]

Dias et al. (2013)

Turning; Merging; Intersecting; (Ants)

Complex chamber

●

●

●

●

(i) Turning angle affects escape flow significantly; (ii) Clogging transitions can be found in intersecting flows

(i) Effects of intersecting and merging should be further investigated

(i) –

[156]

Wu and Lu (2013)

Weaving

Corridor

●

●

●

(i) The effects of weaving are more significant within a region; (ii) Flow values and flow ratios are significant with the operation of weaving area

(i) Safety indices for pedestrian weaving zones can be further established

(i) Level-of-service for pedestrian weaving zone were analyzed [187]

[73]

Zhang et al. (2013)

Straight line

Long street

●

●

●

(i) Combine use of camera and active infrared counter; (ii) A complete dataset of flow rate and velocity for high density straight flow; (iii) Find the boundary effect of uni-directional dense laminar flow; (iv) Multi-directional flow data cannot be directly applied to uni-directional flow

(i) Measurements cannot reach individual trajectory level; (ii) Personal and crowd collective factors are not investigated; (iii) Data availability and usability are unknown

(i) –

[163]

Aghabayk et al. (2014)

Merging

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Crowd arrival and departure flow increase with the rise of desired speed; (ii) Time headways decrease with speed; (iii) Merging angle affects flow and headways

(i) Lack of detailed analysis within the merging regions

(i) More detailed analysis in a journal paper [162]

[77]

Dias et al. (2014)

Turning

Corridor

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Speed tends to reduce at a fixed region around turning point; (ii) The speed reduction increases with the rise of merging angle

(i) Sample size is not enough; (ii) High density situation should be investigated

(i) Develop the optimal trajectories method for turning manoeuvres [89]

[105]

Liao et al. (2014)

Egressing

Wide door

●

●

●

●

(i) The density and speed inside the bottleneck are independent on the width of door; (ii) A linear dependency is observed between flow and bottleneck width

(i) The flow and density are calculated using the trajectories under both stable and unstable state

(i) Trajectories were further utilized to test a method that can measure the steady flow state [188]

[129]

Sobhani et al. (2014)

Egressing (woodlice)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

(i) Fundamental diagrams near exit regions for animal flow have differences in normal and panic situations.; (ii) Stress level of woodlice has positive relation with the number of blockages near the exit

(i) Quantitative comparison between animals and humans should be conducted to test their hypothesis

(i) More detailed analysis with the same datasets [130]

[189]

Sun et al. (2014)

Opposing; Weaving

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Weaving conflicts tends to be centralized within a stable region; (ii) Lane changing behaviors are modelled in weaving movements

(i) The asymmetric of weaving area location may arise from the organization of experiments

(i) Data were further analyzed to reproduce subway corridor flow [190]

[109]

Garcimartín et al. (2014)

Egress

Room

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Time headways display a heavy-tailed distribution; (ii) Burst sizes fit an exponential function

(i) Steady state flows should be measured to fit the model

(i) Extended analysis were conducted [110]

[138]

Zuriguel et al. (2014)

Egress (Sheep)

Width-changing fence

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Time headways for sheep passing the bottleneck displays a power-law distribution; (ii) The burst sizes for sheep flock obey an exponential decay; (iii) Universal laws that can describe the flow and clogs of different particle systems are established

(i) Require more real life empirical data on human egress considering the effect of obstacle size and position

(i) Use the sheep data to study the effect of door width and obstacle placement on sheep flow [139]; (ii) Effect of obstacle position on flow and clogging patterns were further studied [140]

[111]

Bode et al. (2015)

Egress

Room

●

●

●

●

(i) Social grouping behavior has negative effects on egress efficiency; (ii) No clear time differences can be found between individual and group movements in front of the exits

(i) Samples might not be enough

(i) –

[88]

Dias et al. (2015)

Turning

Angle-changing corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Longitudinal spacing between pedestrians tends to rise as speed increases; (ii) Speed levels affect flow-density and speed-spacing relationships

(i) Require further investigation on the combined effects under complex environments

(i) Data were utilized to calibrate a cellular automation model [79]

[157]

Lian et al. (2015)

Intersecting

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Among Chinese students, walking in the right-hand side can accelerate the lane formation process; (ii) Obstacle can help to stable intersecting flows

(i) The effect of smoothing the corners of the intersection can be a future work

(i) –

[95]

Kuang et al. (2015)

Turning

Ring path

●

●

●

(i) Find the speed variation, step fluctuation and delay from Stop-and-Go waves in single-file ring movement

(i) Insides of flow characteristics are not presented

(i) –

[166]

Shiwakoti et al. (2015)

Merging

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Pedestrian tends to reduce velocity in merging zone; (ii) The speed reduction is significantly with merging angle and desired speed; (iii) The speed reduction can impede the flow of out stream corridor

(i) Experiments with more participants should be conducted; (ii) Effect of blocked vision should be studied

(i) –

[121]

Wang et al. (2015)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Time headway displayed an exponential decay in ants traffic; (ii) Mean flow is independent linearly on the exit width; (iii) Exit width affects the time headway; (iv) Ant’s group size affects the flow at certain exit width

(i) Accuracy of data extraction should be improved

(i) –

[63]

Zhang et al. (2015)

Straight line

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

(i) Boundary has an effect on fundamental diagram; (ii) Higher maximal specific flow can be detected under open boundary condition; (iii) Stop-and-go waves can be observed under closed boundary condition

(i) Lack of empirical data of high density situations for this setup

(i) –

[116]

Ezaki et al. (2016)

Ingress

Room

●

●

●

●

(i) Individual prefers to select location near corner and wall; (ii) Flow avoidance, boundary preference, distance cost and angle cost are modelled

(i) Design and guidance solutions for ingress can be further presented

(i) –

[42]

Gorrini et al. (2016)

Opposing

Corridor

●

●

●

(i) Higher flow ratio has negative influence on speed; (ii) Walking in group is less efficient than individual walker

(i) The impact of coordination movement should be further investigated

(i) –

[161]

Huo et al. (2016)

Merging

Stair-floor interface

●

●

●

(i) Merging movement at stair landings decrease the speed and increase the total evacuation time

(i) More detailed analysis on the interaction mechanisms on the stair-floor interfaces are required

(i) –

[133]

Lin et al. (2016)

Egress (Mice)

Room

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Burning joss-sticks can be used to stimulate mice to different stress levels; (ii) Egress time and the number of clogs increase with levels of stimulus; (iii) Faster-is-slower effect is observed

(i) The quantitative relationships between the stress levels of the mice and the burning of joss-sticks should be presented

(i) The effect of obstacle was further analyzed [134]; (ii) The effect of exit position was further analyzed [136]; (iii) The effect of bottleneck width was further analyzed [135]

[191]

Liu et al. (2016)

Ingress; Egress

Room

●

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Ingress order has significant influence on the location of people in steady state and the egress order; (ii) Crowd distribution in steady state is not uniform; (iii) Inactive person may affect inflow and outflow process

(i) The method to detect steady state is questionable

(i) –

[117]

Liu et al. (2016)

Ingress

Room

●

●

●

●

(i) Ingress order is significant with individual’s location distribution in the steady state and the egress order.; (ii) Inactive pedestrians contribute a negative effect on the movement

(i) The effects of inhomogeneous composition are not necessarily negative

(i) –

[114]

Nicolas et al. (2016)

Egress

Room

●

●

●

●

(i) Flow increases monotonically with density; (ii) Selfishness behavior may impede the egress flow at bottleneck; (iii) A generalized zipper effect is observed; (iv) Faster-is-slower effect is not observed

(i) Latent parameter effects should be further analyzed

(i) A more comprehensive journal paper [115]

[3]

Shi et al. (2016)

Merging

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Merging angle and flow direction affect flow characteristics such as flow and time headway; (ii) Blocked vision effects can be found at merging section; (iii) Branched merging flow is less safe than opposed merging flow

(i) Safety indices for merging section should be established; (ii) Level-of-service for merging region should be evaluated

(i) Further analysis of right angle merging case [38]; (ii) Further analysis of vision condition [192]

[164]

Shahhoseini et al. (2016)

Merging (Ants)

Angle-changing chamber

●

●

●

●

(i) Merging layouts can create stop-and-go waves; (ii) Merging angle affects traffic flow characteristics

(i) Comparison analysis with human data are needed

(i) Compare ants data with human experiments with similar setups [193]

[92]

Sun et al. (2016)

Turning

Angle-changing corridor

●

●

●

(i) Smoothed turning curve point design based on the Beijing subway corridor angle; (ii) Flow characteristics are significant with different angles and radii; (iii) Right angle corridor has large impact on the cumulative density and mean speed

(i) The boundary materials of the corridor are not solid

(i) –

[113]

von Krüchten and Schadschneider (2016)

Egress

Square room

●

●

●

●

(i) Queuing at the exit can shorten egress time comparing with board distribution; (ii) Moving as a compact crowd can increase the egress flow

(i) Differences between ordered compactly movement and the bursts after clogs are not discussed

(i) More detailed analysis were published in a journal [112]

[76]

Wang and Song (2016)

Straight line; Egress; (Ants)

Restricted passageway

●

●

●

●

(i) No jam among stressed ants trails; (ii) Speed seems to be constant with density

(i) Effect of stressfulness is not quantified

(i) –

[122]

Wang et al. (2016)

Egress (Ants)

Chamber

●

●

●

●

●

(i) Stressed ants exhibit symmetry breaking; (ii) Escape flow reaches the peak when the spacing of two exits is largest; (iii) Social force model has different performance in terms of describing the traffic rules of ants and humans

(i) Comparison with human empirical data is encouraged

(i) –

[13]

Cao et al. (2017)

Straight line; Opposing; Intersecting

Corridor

●

●

●

(i) The difference in the effects of measurements of fundamental diagrams gradually appears as the increase of density level; (ii) No difference is found between bi-directional and four-directional flows in fundamental diagrams under same density level

(i) Microscopic properties should be further analyzed for uni-, bi-, four-directional flows

(i) –

[171]

Cuesta et al. (2017)

Merging

Tunnel

●

●

●

●

(i) Merging impedes the evacuation efficiency in tunnel; (ii) Merging decreases the rail car flow and the walkway flow; (iii) As the increase of height difference between rail car exit and walkway, the more walkway flow dominates the flow; (iv) No gender effects can be found in deference behavior

(i) Experiments should be conducted in real tunnel for more realism

(i) –

[165]

Lian et al. (2017)

Merging

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Lane formation can be found in main flow; (ii) Main and branched flow can be mutual bottleneck when the flow saturated at the 2.4m width branched corridor; (iii) Speed in main channel decreases as the approaching of merging areas in 1.6m and 2.4m corridors

(i) More statistical approaches should be applied to verify the effects of different variables

(i) –

[60]

Jin et al. (2017)

Turning

Ring corridor

●

●

●

(i) Uni-directional flow experiment exhibits four traffic states: free flow, congested, over-congested and hyper congested state; (ii) Transition from stopped state and moving state can be observed under hyper-congested situation; (iii) Flow rates in over-capacity situation are almost constant; (iv) Three types of lane formations could be found in bi-directional flows

(i) The segmentation of steady flow states is done by manual observation

(i) –

[137]

Oh and Park (2017)

Egress (Mice)

Angle-changing chamber

●

●

●

●

(i) Mice do not often follow the ideal route; (ii) Total mean velocity, total egress time decrease with the exit angle

(i) Empirical validation with human crowd data should be considered

(i) –

[96]

Rahman et al. (2017)

Turning

Angle-changing corridor

●

●

●

(i) L-shaped corridor has the lowest average speed compared with 60° and 135°; (ii) Participant prefers to walk in the inner side of the corridor due to the shorter walking distance

(i) More advanced statistical methods should be applied to examine the mixed variable effects

(i) –

[170]

Shahhoseini et al. (2017)

Merging

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Asymmetric setups can create more delays compared to symmetric setups; (ii) Asymmetric setups also can create more imbalance between merging streams

(i) Further analysis within the merging sections should be conducted

(i) Find the faster-is-slower effects in merging sections [167]; (ii) Compare the data with ants experiments [193]

[68]

Sharifi et al. (2017)

Straight line; Turning

Loop corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Homogenous flow experience a 75% capacity drop at bottleneck; (ii) Disable people need more space to keep their desired speed; (iii) Larger spacing is kept within the groups with wheelchair users

(i) Gait-level features of disabled people and normal people should be a further research direction

(i) Analysis of the data with a focus on speed distribution [90] and time headway [71]

[91]

Sieben et al. (2017)

Ingress; Turning

Semicircle & right-angle corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Spatial structures have influence on entrance dynamics in terms of density, waiting time and speed transition; (ii) Constriction effects are found in both structures

(i) Experiments with single exit and dual exits can be further conducted

(i) –

[152]

Xue et al. (2017)

Opposing

Ground with grid

●

●

●

(i) Comparative experiments to examine the gridlock effect in CA model; (ii) Gridlock is not spotted even under high density opposing flow

(i) Different competitiveness levels should be considered

(i) –

[17]

Wagoum et al. (2017)

Diverging; Turning

Corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Under normal situation people choice exit only concerned with shortest path; (ii) Under high density situation, the load balancing for two exits can be detected

(i) Experiment data under emergency situations should be used for comparison

(i) Further development of a route choice model [194]

[66]

Cao et al. (2018)

Straight line

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

(i) Young people tend to control the lateral movement better than the aged people; (ii) Step length increases as the rise of velocity and they exhibit a quadratic relation for three groups; (iii) Gender and height effects on fundamental diagrams are not found

(i) More statistical analysis should be applied to test the significance among the relations

(i) Study the heterogeneous crowd considering age composition [64]

[158]

Sun et al. (2017)

Egress

Narrow corridor

●

●

●

●

(i) Use of funnel shape exit design with different angles; (ii) The optimal funnel angle is between 46° to 65°

(i) The width and length of corridor are fixed; (ii) Extra obstacle effects are not considered

(i) –

[158]

Sun et al. (2017)

Intersecting

Ground

●

●

●

●

(i) Effects of 5 types of intersecting angle and obstacle implement under three flow conditions are investigated; (ii) The influences of angles on flow operation speed vary at different flow conditions

(i) The effects of obstacle shapes and positions are not considered

(i) Obstacle effects in intersecting roundabout region is further studied [149]

[65]

Wang et al. (2018)

Straight line

Narrow passageway

●

●

●

(i) Effects of height on step length and duration change with density; (ii) Step length & frequency-speed relations can be better described by power function; (iii) Swaying amplitude-speed relations can be segmented into two regimes

(i) Unintended factors affecting the stepping characteristics should be eliminated

(i) –

[153]

Wang et al. (2018)

Straight line; Opposing

Restricted passageway

●

●

●

●

(i) Ants show unified sensitivity to distance headway in both uni- and bi-directional flow; (ii) Head-on encounter and evading behaviors can be frequently observed; (iii) Ants spend more time for encounter communication than humans; (iv) Following behavior of ants can improve the flow of opposing movement

(i) Quantitative comparison with empirical data in bi-directional vehicular traffic and pedestrian traffic is encouraged

(i) –