skip to main content
research-article

A Perceptually-Validated Metric for Crowd Trajectory Quality Evaluation

Published:27 September 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Simulating crowds requires controlling a very large number of trajectories and is usually performed using crowd motion algorithms for which appropriate parameter values need to be found. The study of the relation between parametric values for simulation techniques and the quality of the resulting trajectories has been studied either through perceptual experiments or by comparison with real crowd trajectories. In this paper, we integrate both strategies. A quality metric, QF, is proposed to abstract from reference data while capturing the most salient features that affect the perception of trajectory realism. QF weights and combines cost functions that are based on several individual, local and global properties of trajectories. These trajectory features are selected from the literature and from interviews with experts. To validate the capacity of QF to capture perceived trajectory quality, we conduct an online experiment that demonstrates the high agreement between the automatic quality score and non-expert users. To further demonstrate the usefulness of QF, we use it in a data-free parameter tuning application able to tune any parametric microscopic crowd simulation model that outputs independent trajectories for characters. The learnt parameters for the tuned crowd motion model maintain the influence of the reference data which was used to weight the terms of QF.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

References

  1. A. Alahi, K. Goel, V. Ramanathan, A. Robicquet, L. Fei-Fei, and S. Savarese. 2016. Social LSTM: Human Trajectory Prediction in Crowded Spaces. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 961--971. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2016.110Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Javad Amirian, Wouter van Toll, Jean-Bernard Hayet, and Julien Pettré. 2019. Data-Driven Crowd Simulation with Generative Adversarial Networks. In Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Computer Animation and Social Agents (Paris, France) (CASA '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 7--10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328756.3328769Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Glen Berseth, Mubbasir Kapadia, Brandon Haworth, and Petros Faloutsos. 2014. SteerFit: Automated Parameter Fitting for Steering Algorithms. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation (Copenhagen, Denmark) (SCA '14). Eurographics Association, Aire-la-Ville, Switzerland, Switzerland, 113--122. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2849517.2849536Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Panayiotis Charalambous and Yiorgos Chrysanthou. 2014. The PAG crowd: A graph based approach for efficient data-driven crowd simulation. Computer Graphics Forum 33, 8 (2014), 95--108.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Panayiotis Charalambous, Ioannis Karamouzas, Stephen Guy, and Yiorgos Chrysanthou. 2014. A Data-Driven Framework for Visual Crowd Analysis. Computer Graphics Forum 33 (10 2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.12472Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Ujjal Chattaraj, Armin Seyfried, and Partha Chakroborty. 2009. Comparison of Pedestrian Fundamental Diagram Across Cultures. Advances in Complex Systems (ACS) 12 (06 2009), 393--405. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525909002209Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Teófilo Dutra, Ricardo Marques, Joaquim Cavalcante-Neto, Creto Vidal, and Julien Pettre. 2017. Gradient-based steering for vision-based crowd simulation algorithms. Computer Graphics Forum 36 (05 2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.13130Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. A. Gupta, J. Johnson, L. Fei-Fei, S. Savarese, and A. Alahi. 2018. Social GAN: Socially Acceptable Trajectories with Generative Adversarial Networks. In 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2255--2264.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Stephen J Guy, Jatin Chhugani, Sean Curtis, Pradeep Dubey, Ming C Lin, and Dinesh Manocha. 2010. PLEdestrians: A Least-Effort Approach to Crowd Simulation, In Eurographics/ ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Computer Animation. Proc. of Eurographics/ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Computer Animation 2010, 1, 119--128. https://doi.org/10.2312/SCA/SCA10/119-128Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Stephen J Guy, Jur Van Den Berg, Wenxi Liu, Rynson Lau, Ming C Lin, and Dinesh Manocha. 2012. A statistical similarity measure for aggregate crowd dynamics. ACM Transactions on Graphics 31, 6 (2012), 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Dirk Helbing and Péter Molnár. 1995. Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. Physical Review E 51, 5 (may 1995), 4282--4286. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.51.4282Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Ludovic Hoyet, Anne-Hélène Olivier, Richard Kulpa, and Julien Pettre. 2016. Perceptual Effect of Shoulder Motions on Crowd Animations. ACM Transactions on Graphics 35 (07 2016), 1--10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897824.2925931Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Roger L Hughes. 2003. The flow of human crowds. Annual review of fluid mechanics 35, 1 (2003), 169--182. Asja Jelić, Cecile Appert-Rolland, Samuel Lemercier, and Julien Pettre. 2012. Properties of pedestrians walking in line: Fundamental diagrams. Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics 85 (03 2012), 036111. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.85.036111Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Mubbasir Kapadia, Shawn Singh, Brian Allen, Glenn Reinman, and Petros Faloutsos. 2009. SteerBug: An Interactive Framework for Specifying and Detecting Steering Behaviors. In Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation (New Orleans, Louisiana) (SCA '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 209--216. https://doi.org/10.1145/1599470.1599497Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Mubbasir Kapadia, Matt Wang, Shawn Singh, Glenn Reinman, and Petros Faloutsos. 2011. Scenario Space: Characterizing Coverage, Quality, and Failure of Steering Algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2011 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Symposium on Computer Animation (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) (SCA '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 53--62. https://doi.org/10.1145/2019406.2019414Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Ioannis Karamouzas, Peter Heil, Pascal Beek, and Mark H. Overmars. 2009. A Predictive Collision Avoidance Model for Pedestrian Simulation. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Motion in Games (Zeist, The Netherlands) (MIG '09). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 41--52. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-10347-6_4Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Ioannis Karamouzas, Brian Skinner, and Stephen J. Guy. 2014. Universal Power Law Governing Pedestrian Interactions. Physical Review Letters 113, 23 (dec 2014), 238701. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.238701Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Richard Kulpa, Anne-Hélène Olivier, Jan Ondřej, and Julien Pettré. 2011. Imperceptible Relaxation of Collision Avoidance Constraints in Virtual Crowds. ACM Trans. Graph. 30, 6 (Dec. 2011), 1--10. https://doi.org/10.1145/2070781.2024172Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Alon Lerner, Yiorgos Chrysanthou, and Dani Lischinski. 2007. Crowds by Example. Computer Graphics Forum 26, 3 (2007), 655--664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2007.01089.x arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2007.01089.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Rachel McDonnell, Michéal Larkin, Simon Dobbyn, Steven Collins, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2008. Clone attack! Perception of crowd variety. ACM Transactions on Graphics 27 (08 2008). https://doi.org/10.1145/1360612.1360625Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Rachel McDonnell, Michéal Larkin, Benjamin Hernandez, Isaac Rudomin, and Carol O'Sullivan. 2009. Eye-catching Crowds: Saliency based Selective Variation. ACM Transactions on Graphics 28 (08 2009). https://doi.org/10.1145/1531326.1531361Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jan Ondřej, Julien Pettré, Anne-Hélène Olivier, and Stéphane Donikian. 2010. A synthetic-vision based steering approach for crowd simulation. ACM Transactions on Graphics 29, 4 (2010), 123.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Sébastien Paris, Julien Pettre, and Stéphane Donikian. 2007. Pedestrian Reactive Navigation for Crowd Simulation: a Predictive Approach Abstract. Comput. Graph. Forum 26 (09 2007), 665--674. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2007.01090.xGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Craig W. Reynolds. 1987. Flocks, Herds and Schools: A Distributed Behavioral Model. SIGGRAPH Comput. Graph. 21, 4 (Aug. 1987), 25--34. https://doi.org/10.1145/37402.37406Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Adrien Treuille, Seth Cooper, and Zoran Popović. 2006. Continuum Crowds. ACM Trans. Graph. 25, 3 (July 2006), 1160--1168. https://doi.org/10.1145/1141911.1142008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. A. Turnwald, S. Eger, and D. Wollherr. 2015. Investigating similarity measures for locomotor trajectories based on the human perception of differences in motions. In 2015 IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (ARSO). 2015 IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (ARSO), Lyon, France, 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ARSO.2015.7428196Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. J. van den Berg, Ming Lin, and D. Manocha. 2008. Reciprocal Velocity Obstacles for real-time multi-agent navigation. In 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, New York, NY, 1928--1935. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2008.4543489Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. D. Wolinski, S. J. Guy, A.-H. Olivier, M. Lin, D. Manocha, and J. Pettré. 2014. Parameter Estimation and Comparative Evaluation of Crowd Simulations. Comput. Graph. Forum 33, 2 (May 2014), 303--312. https://doi.org/10.1111/cgf.12328Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A Perceptually-Validated Metric for Crowd Trajectory Quality Evaluation

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in

            Full Access

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader
            About Cookies On This Site

            We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

            Learn more

            Got it!