↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Mutual Information for the Detection of Crush

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Mutual Information for the Detection of Crush
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0028747
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Harding, Steve Gwynne, Martyn Amos

Abstract

Fatal crush conditions occur in crowds with tragic frequency. Event organizers and architects are often criticised for failing to consider the causes and implications of crush, but the reality is that both the prediction and prevention of such conditions offer a significant technical challenge. Full treatment of physical force within crowd simulations is precise but often computationally expensive; the more common method of human interpretation of results is computationally "cheap" but subjective and time-consuming. This paper describes an alternative method for the analysis of crowd behaviour, which uses information theory to measure crowd disorder. We show how this technique may be easily incorporated into an existing simulation framework, and validate it against an historical event. Our results show that this method offers an effective and efficient route towards automatic detection of the onset of crush.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Other 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 4 20%
Computer Science 2 10%
Social Sciences 2 10%
Sports and Recreations 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 30%