In recent years, terrorist attacks all over the world caused many civilian casualties seriously. Under the knife and axe terrorist attack, there are usually four groups of event-related persons, that is, pedestrians, terrorists, police, and safety guards in the scene. The behavior of them is different, but they are rarely considered together in existing litterateurs, especially the police and safety guards. In this paper, we propose the FFPS (extended floor-field model combined with on-site control actions of police and safety guards) model to study pedestrian evacuation dynamics considering terrorist attack on-site control action differences between police and security guards. The FFPS model consists of three aspects. First, pedestrian evacuation dynamics in terrorist attack environment is modeled. Second, the behavior of terrorists, police and safety guards is studied. Third, the differences of on-site control actions between police and safety guards are studied. We set up the scenario for simulation. The influence of terrorists’ number and location, police and security guards’ different actions, police entering time, police shooting distance, police and safety guards’ spatial position, and police control strategy on evacuation dynamics are analyzed in detail. Those results provide valuable insights to quickly control terrorists, and sharply reduce casualties in terrorist attack environment.
LiuQ. A social force model for the crowd evacuation in a terrorist attack. Physica A2018; 502: 315–330.
3.
BernardiniGQuagliariniE. Terrorist acts and pedestrians’ behaviours: first insights on European contexts for evacuation modelling. Saf Sci2021; 143: 105405.
4.
HelbingD. A fluid-dynamic model for the movement of pedestrians. Complex Syst1992; 6: 391–415.
5.
HughesRL. The flow of human crowds. Annu Rev Fluid Mech2003; 35: 169–182.
6.
XiongTZhangPWongSC, et al. A macroscopic approach to the lane formation phenomenon in pedestrian counterflow. Chin Phys Lett2011; 28: 108901.
7.
ColomboRMGaravelloMLécureux-MercierM. A class of nonlocal models for pedestrian traffic. Math Models Methods Appl Sci2012; 22: 1150023–115002334.
8.
HughesRL. A continuum theory for the flow of pedestrians. Transp Res C2002; 36: 507–535.
9.
WozniakM. From dawn to dusk: daily fluctuations in pedestrian traffic in the city center. SIMULATION. Epub ahead of print 9December2023. DOI: 10.1177/00375497231212543.
10.
MaJWangMLiL. A kinetic theory model of human crowds accounting for visual attention. SIMULATION2022; 98: 1039–1056.
11.
BellomoNGibelliLOutadaN. On the interplay between behavioral dynamics and social interactions in human crowds. Kinet Relat Models2019; 12: 397–409.
12.
HanYBLiuH. Modified social force model based on information transmission toward crowd evacuation simulation. Physica A2017; 469: 499–509.
13.
XiaoYGaoZYQuYC, et al. A pedestrian flow model considering the impact of local density: Voronoi diagram based heuristics approach. Transp Res C2016; 68: 566–580.
14.
YuanZJiaHZhangL, et al. A social force evacuation model considering the effect of emergency signs. SIMULATION2018; 94: 723–737.
15.
QuYCXiaoYWuJJ, et al. Modeling detour behavior of pedestrian dynamics under different conditions. Physica A2018; 492: 1153–1167.
16.
HelbingDMolnàrP. Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. Phys Rev E1995; 51: 4282–4286.
17.
HelbingDFarkasIVicsekT. Simulating dynamical features of escape panic. Nature2000; 407: 487–490.
18.
GuoXWChenJQYouSZ, et al. Modeling of pedestrian evacuation under fire emergency based on an extended heterogeneous lattice gas model. Physica A2013; 392: 1994–2006.
19.
LiXChenTPanLL, et al. Lattice gas simulation and experiment study of evacuation dynamics. Physica A2008; 387: 5457–5465.
20.
FukuiMIshibashiY. Self-organized phase transitions in cellular automaton models for pedestrians. J Phys Soc Jpn1999; 68: 2861–2863.
21.
LiDWHanBM. Behavioral effect on pedestrian evacuation simulation using cellular automata. Saf Sci2015; 80: 41–55.
22.
PereiraLABurgarelliDDuczmalLH, et al. Emergency evacuation models based on cellular automata with route changes and group fields. Physica A2017; 473: 97–110.
23.
YuanXTTangTQChenL, et al. A fine grid cellular automaton model for pedestrian evacuation considering the effect of an obstacle. SIMULATION2023; 99: 957–968.
24.
JianXXWongSCZhangP, et al. Perceived cost potential field cellular automata model with an aggregated force field for pedestrian dynamics. Transp Res C2014; 42: 200–210.
25.
TangTQShaoYXChenL. Modeling pedestrian movement at the hall of high-speed railway station during the check-in process. Physica A2017; 467: 157–166.
26.
ChenLTangTQHuangHJ, et al. Modeling pedestrian flow accounting for collision avoidance during evacuation. Simul Model Pract Theory2018; 82: 1–11.
27.
JaferSLawlerR. Emergency crowd evacuation modeling and simulation framework with cellular discrete event systems. SIMULATION2016; 92: 795–817.
28.
NishinariKKirchnerANamaziA, et al. Simulations of evacuation by an extended floor field CA model. In: HoogendoornSPLudingSBovyPHL, et al. (eds) Traffic and Granular Flow’03. Berlin: Springer, 2004, pp. 405–410.
29.
JahediniaFBagheriMNaderanA, et al. Simulation of luggage-laden passengers’ behavior in the evacuation process based on a floor field CA model case study: Tehran metro-rail transfer corridor. SIMULATION2023; 99: 681–701.
30.
LuLChanCYWangJ, et al. A study of pedestrian group behaviors in crowd evacuation based on an extended floor field cellular automaton model. Transp Res C2017; 81: 317–329.
31.
HuJYouLZhangH, et al. Study on queuing behavior in pedestrian evacuation by extended cellular automata model. Physica A2018; 489: 112–127.
AlamMJPinchemelAHabibMA, et al. Airport evacuation under panic conditions: a microsimulation modeling applied at Ottawa International Airport. SIMULATION2023; 99: 1213–1224.
34.
LiHWangYJiangJ, et al. Metro station evacuation safety assessment considering emergency response. SIMULATION2022; 98: 919–931.
35.
ZhaoYLiYZ. Inertia effects on strategy updating in emergency evacuation from a room with multiple exits. Int J Mod Phys C2014; 25: 1450043.
36.
ZhangGWHuangDZhuGQ, et al. Probabilistic model for safe evacuation under the effect of uncertain factors in fire. Saf Sci2017; 93: 222–229.
37.
ZhengYJiaBLiXG, et al. Evacuation dynamics with fire spreading based on cellular automaton. Physica A2011; 390: 3147–3156.
38.
ZhengYJiaBLiXG, et al. Evacuation dynamics considering pedestrians’ movement behavior change with fire and smoke spreading. Saf Sci2017; 92: 180–189.
39.
ZhengYLiXGZhuN, et al. Evacuation dynamics with smoking diffusion in three dimension based on an extended floor-field model. Physica A2018; 507: 414–426.
40.
YukawaSHatayamaMTatanoH. A study of evaluation method for large-scale flood evacuation planning using the network equilibrium analysis. J Jpn Soc Civ Eng Ser D32011; 67: 177–188.
41.
HigoEOkadaNHipelKW, et al. Cooperative survival principles for underground flood: Vitae System based multi-agent simulation. Expert Syst Appl2017; 83: 379–395.
42.
ZhengYLiXGJiaB, et al. Simulation of pedestrians’ evacuation dynamics with underground flood spreading based on cellular automaton. Simul Model Pract Theory2019; 94: 149–161.
43.
IskandarRDugdaleJBeckE, et al. Agent-based simulation of seismic crisis including human behavior: application to the city of Beirut, Lebanon. SIMULATION. Epub ahead of print 1September2023. DOI: 10.1177/00375497231194608.
44.
LiuQ. A social force approach for the defensive strategy of security guards in a terrorist attack. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct2020; 46: 101605.
45.
CaoSCQianJLLiXL, et al. Evacuation simulation considering the heterogeneity of pedestrian under terrorist attacks. Int J Disaster Risk Reduct2022; 79: 103203.
46.
LiuJJiaYMaoTL, et al. Modeling and simulation analysis of crowd evacuation behavior under terrorist attack. Physica A2022; 604: 127891.
47.
LuPZhangZLiM, et al. Agent-based modeling and simulations of terrorist attacks combined with stampedes. Knowl-Based Syst2020; 205: 106291.
48.
WangJNiSJShenSF, et al. Empirical study of crowd dynamic in public gathering places during a terrorist attack event. Physica A2019; 523: 1–9.
49.
ChenCKTongYHShiC, et al. An extended model for describing pedestrian evacuation under the threat of artificial attack. Phys Lett2018; 382: 2445–2454.
50.
ChenCKTongYH. Evacuation simulation considering action of guard in artificial attack. Chin Phys B2019; 28: 275–282.
51.
MaLChenBQiuSH, et al. Agent-based modeling of emergency evacuation in a railway station square under sarin terrorist attack. Int J Mod Phys C2017; 08: 1750022.
52.
LiSZhuangJShenS, et al. Driving-forces model on individual behavior in scenarios considering moving threat agents. Physica A2017; 481: 127–140.
53.
LiSZhuangJShenS. A three-stage evacuation decision-making and behavior model for the onset of an attack. Transp Res C2017; 79: 119–135.
54.
AbreuOCuestaABalboaA, et al. On the use of stochastic simulations to explore the impact of human parameters on mass public shooting attacks. Saf Sci2019; 120: 941–949.
55.
DingNMaYDongD, et al. Experiment and simulation study of emergency evacuation during violent attack in classrooms. J Saf Sci Resil2021; 2: 208–221.
