Modeling pedestrians road crossing behavior in traffic

system micro-simulation in China

學生：董瑩蟬

Purpose

This paper used the questionnaires to

investigated the pedestrians behavior,

and videotape collect the pedestrians

crossing gap, finally used visual

C++6.0 simulation crossing situation.

Reference

• Blue et al.(2001) and Fang et al.(2003) build bi-directional pedestrian movement modeled.

• Yagil (2000) used questionnaire investigate that effect pedestrian crossing road factor when the sign showed don’t walk.

Reference

• Keegan et al.(2000) investigated the pedestrian waiting countdown timer behavior.

• Liu et al.,(2000) showed that pedestrian divided two type they are law-obeying and opportunistic.

Reference

• Wan et al.(2004) found that many pedestrian trend to choose critical gap.

• Hamed (2001) investigated the attention when at the divided streets.

• Zhang et al.(2004) build a pedestrian road crossing model.

Model framework

Model framework• This study classified pedestrians

– Type I ： pedestrian comply with the traffic law– Type II ： pedestrian cross during red man.

• R1 ： It was the type I pedestrian percentage

• R2 ： the type I pedestrian follow other

pedestrian behavior that become violate

traffic rules. • R3 ： Pedestrian accept the certain T △ percentage.

Method-questionnaires• Subject:

– 200 Xi’an Jiaotong university 、 300 randomly pedestrian

• Valid questionnaires: 495

• Gender: 304 Male and 191 Female

• Time: Data collect from November 22nd to 23rd,2003

• The age distribution present table 1.

• Questionnaires result present table 2 and 3

Result-questionnaires

• Table 2 we can found the pedestrian more than 80 percentages crossing on the zebra and look at the traffic lights when they crossing.

Result-questionnaires

Result-questionnaires

• Table 3 can calculate the R2 presentage

R2=(55-17)/55*100%=69%– The 55 was from general conditions with very low (Typ

e l)– 17 was the other can’t effect the type pedestrian.

• Table 3 found that the pedestrian road crossing behavior there were same factors may effect decision include other pedestrian, traffic volume and whether or not policeman.

Method-videotape• The video camera

placed on the 27th floor of building.

• Used continuously photographing record picture. The Hero 3000 with the length of 1 s can obtain 24 picture.

• Used ACDSee4.0 to choosing 989 sample were collected.

Pedestrian waiting areas

Method-videotape

• △T: define the safety criterion of gap acceptance for pedestrian.• D: between vehicle and pedestrian distance.• W: the width of the coming vehicle. • D0: the width between vehicle and pedestrian.• V: vehicle speed.• Vped: pedestrian speed.

Result-videotape

• The ratio=accept gap/(reject gap+ accept gap)

• We can found the some decision wasn’t safe for pedestrian.

Result-simulation

• There were four car-generators in the traffic simulation.

• The white, black and grey circle was the pedestrian type I, type II and follow other to violate traffic signal.

Result

• There were some different between simulation data and video camera.

Fig. 7. Comparison of the time interval distribution of pedestrians arriving between the data extracted from videotape and simulation results.

Result

• The pedestrian leave waiting area that was the red light runner • The pedestrian follower red light runner within 2s that was the violati

on follower.• We can found the red light runner lower than the videotape, and the

violation follower is much higher.

Conclusion

• That have established a model framework for road crossing behavior.

• The pedestrian divided to two type, that were law-obey and opportunistic, when they at red light situation.

• The result found that pedestrian road crossing behavior different for some factors.