Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Feb 16;19(2):e0298622. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298622

Data-driven mathematical simulation analysis of emergency evacuation time in smart station’s operations management

Yang Hui 1,2,*, Qiang Yu 3, Hui Peng 1
Editor: Ahmed Mancy Mosa4
PMCID: PMC10871496  PMID: 38363782

Abstract

This research establishes an emergency evacuation time model specifically designed for subway stations with complex structures. The model takes into account multiple factors, including passenger flow rate, subway facility parameters, and crowd density, to accurately assess evacuation times. It considers the impact of horizontal walking distance, flow rate, subway train size, and stair parameters on the overall evacuation process. By identifying bottleneck points such as gates, car doors, and stairs, the model facilitates the evaluation of evacuation capacity and the formulation of effective evacuation plans, particularly in multiline subway transfer stations. The good consistency is achieved between the calculated evacuation time and simulated results using the Pathfinder software (with the relative error of 5.4%). To address urban traffic congestion and enhance subway station safety, the study recommends implemented measures for emergency diversion and passenger flow control. Additionally, the research presents characteristic mathematical models for various evacuation routes by considering the structural and temporal characteristics of metro systems. These models provide valuable guidance for conducting large-scale passenger evacuation simulations in complex environments. Future research can further enhance the model by incorporating psychological factors, evacuation signage, and strategies for vulnerable populations. Overall, this study contributes to a better understanding of evacuation dynamics and provides practical insights to improve safety and efficiency in subway systems.

Introduction

As the process of urbanization accelerates, the demand for efficient transportation services have become increasingly urgent. To meet this demand, many cities have gradually established comprehensive transportation systems, encompassed road traffic, rail transit, and shared mobility, among others [1]. Among these modes of transportation, the subway has emerged as a preferred choice for citizens due to its reliability, high capacity, and efficient travel speed. However, the unique architectural features of metro stations, such as limited construction space, airtightness, restricted ventilation, and limited visibility, which give rise to a series of challenges especially for passenger evacuations, risks of congestion and stampedes [2].

During emergencies, the structural characteristics of these subway stations can quickly exacerbate negative impacts. For instance, due to high passenger density, evacuating passengers may face difficulties in crowded spaces, leading to serious safety concerns. Additionally, the confined spaces and limited ventilation may result in the accumulation of toxic gases, intensifying the hazards during emergencies. In this context, accurately assessing the emergency evacuation and operational safety performance of subway stations have become crucial to ensure the safety of lives and property [3].

One key task among these assessments is the precise calculation of evacuation times in subway stations, determining whether they adhere to the guidelines outlined in the “Code for Design of Metro” (GB 50157-2013) [3]. This calculation serves not only as a significant indicator for evaluating the structural layout and evacuation capacity of subway stations but also as the foundation for formulating emergency evacuation plans and crowd control measures. However, traditional methods exhibit limitations in accurately predicting evacuation times due to the complexity and diversity of metro stations.

Hence, this research aims to address this issue by specifically designing an emergency evacuation time model, focusing on subway stations with complex structures. The model comprehensively considers multiple factors, including passenger flow rates, subway facility parameters, and crowd density, to achieve precise evaluations of evacuation times. By analyzing the influence of factors such as horizontal walking distance, flow rates, subway train sizes, and stair parameters on the overall evacuation process, the model can identify and quantify bottleneck points, such as gates, doors, and stairs, thereby facilitating the evaluation of evacuation capacity and the development of efficient evacuation plans, especially in complex situations such as multiline subway transfer stations. Overall, this research not only contributes to a deeper understanding of subway station evacuation dynamics but also offers practical insights to enhance safety and efficiency within subway systems. The development of a time model for emergency evacuations holds the potential to provide valuable guidance for the safety and sustainability of urban transportation systems.

Literature review

Present domestic and overseas research mainly focuses on the mathematical modeling of crowd evacuation [4, 5], data fitting [68], simulation and testing [911], and areas that affect evacuation factors [12, 13].

Regarding the establishment of evacuation models, Chen et al. [14] utilized the M/G/c/c model to analyze the evacuation capacity of passages and stairs in subway stations, identifying them as the most congested bottlenecks. Chen et al. [15] proposed a shortest route algorithm based on fuzzy multifactor network weights, offering a theoretical derivation and mathematical calculation to demonstrate its practicality. Xu et al. [16] investigated passenger flow on subway platforms and quantitatively analyzed the boarding time of waiting passengers through mathematical modeling, resulting in a final calculation formula for boarding time. A comparison between experimental data and the mathematical model showed an error within an acceptable range of 10%. Although existed research has made progress in analyzing passenger and emergency evacuation flows in metro stations, the improvement in evaluating the impact of key facilities, obstacles, and overall evacuation processes is still lacking.

In the field of field investigation and data fitting, Togawa [17] proposed an empirical formula for the crowd evacuation time of complex buildings in the 1950s, which provided calculation results for comprehensive emergency evacuations based on different evacuee flow rates and exit widths. However, this formula overlooked the distribution of facilities inside the building, resulting in slightly shorter calculated evacuation times compared to actual values. Dinenno [18] obtained reliable experimental data by conducting multiple evacuation drills in multistory buildings. They introduced the concept of “effective width” for stairs in their empirical formula for evacuation time. Parisi [19] introduced the “aspect area” in pedestrian advance and improved the social force model to better align with pedestrian evacuation situations. Zhou et al. [20] analyzed recent advancements in crowd evacuation guidance and comprehensively compared various methods such as static signs, dynamic signs, trained leaders, mobile devices, mobile robots, and wireless sensor networks. While these studies primarily focused on actual measurements and established empirical formula for single bottleneck areas, further research is needed to address the complexities of highly intricate scenes, such as transfer metro stations.

In the realm of simulation and testing research, Hu et al. [21] conducted simulations using Building Exodus software to consider crowd structure, the number of entrances and exits, stair widths, and fire conditions during evacuations. Mei et al. [22] developed a subway emergency evacuation simulation system with Pathfinder software, establishing quantitative relationships between evacuation time, the number of evacuated passengers, passenger flow rates, and other critical parameters. This system provided an objective foundation for science-based emergency evacuation management. Qin et al. [23] used Pathfinder to simulate the impact of different fire scenarios on passenger flows within subway stations. They found that stair entrances experienced the highest evacuation pressure, while exit widths had minimal effect on relieving congestion. Wu et al. [24] formulated an evacuation equilibrium bi-level programming model considering the travel time of pedestrian facilities with varying congestion levels. They designed an improved particle swarm optimization algorithm and simulated the evacuation process using Fuxingmen station on the Beijing subway as a case study. Kallianiotis et al. [25] employed Pathfinder to simulate passenger evacuation processes at a rail station, analyzing the influence of path selection and speed on evacuation time. Li et al. [26] employed Pathfinder simulation software to simulate passenger evacuation Processes at railway stations, identifying evacuation bottlenecks. Although these simulation tools adequately support the design of actual subway stations, they require detailed modeling and parameter settings for specific stations, resulting in low evaluation efficiency.

Regarding factors affecting evacuation, Dong et al [27] introduced agent technology into a cellular automata model and used Matlab software to simulate and analyze the impact of panic levels, emergency guidance, and other factors on evacuations. Jiang et al. [28] used Exodus building simulation software to model the evacuation processes of subway stations in 16 cases. They confirmed that adjusting stair widths and controlling the number of evacuees can reduce congestion and improve evacuation speed. Song et al. [29] discussed the influence of guides on evacuation efficiency based on factors such as their number, position, walking direction, and influence range. Li et al. [30] systematically analyzed the influence of various factors on passengers’ psychological activities during emergency evacuations at subway stations, offering recommendations for guiding emergency evacuations based on these factors. Barron et al. [31] considered the characteristics of passengers’ travel choice behavior during emergencies. Dell’olio et al. [32] analyzed passenger behavior under different emergency scenarios and proposed crowd flow guidance measures using the Spanish railway as an example. Zhou [33] comprehensively analyzed and compared crowd evacuation guidance methods such as static signs, dynamic signs, trained leaders, mobile devices, mobile robots, and wireless sensor networks. Hong [34, 35] developed a probability equilibrium model that considered changes in travel time reliability caused by congestion and introduced the concept of a travel time budget to expand the probability equilibrium model. Most studies have primarily analyzed the evacuation effects of individual passenger flows, the research on the evacuation effects in complex transfer stations and the influence of personnel behavior characteristics are limited.

While significant advancements have been made in evaluating the emergency evacuation capabilities of subway stations, research on emergency evacuation time has yet to consider the influence of key facilities and obstacles comprehensively. Curve fitting of evacuation time for key bottleneck areas based on empirical formulas and experimental data cannot be readily applied to specific evacuation scenarios, and limited research has been conducted on overall evacuation times. Additionally, various uncertainties in subway station emergency evacuations, including human, construction, environmental, traffic, and management factors, pose challenges in employing traditional empirical formulas and computer simulation methods.

To address these challenges, this paper comprehensively considers the unique geographical structures of subway stations and divides the evacuation process into segments based on critical nodes. The influence of key facilities and obstacles is analyzed and incorporated into an overall evacuation time model, accounting for multiple factors within each segment. The developed theoretical model in this paper is validated by comparing its calculated values with simulated values using the Pathfinder software. By integrating these aspects, this research aims to enhance understanding of emergency evacuation dynamics and provide practical insights for improving safety and efficiency in metro systems.

Establishment of the evacuation time model

Research methodology

This research adopts a segmented research approach to develop models for different time periods within subway station evacuations. Through on-site investigations and a comprehensive analysis of common factors in subway station facility structures, it is deduced that key facility structures along the evacuation route encompass the subway train, platform, platform stairs, station hall, gates, and exit stairs. The evacuation process is segmented into five stages, corresponding to distinct periods: ① from subway train to platform; ② from platform to stairway entrance; ③ from platform stairs to station hall (including stair congestion time and travel time on the stairs); ④ from station hall to stairway (including congestion time at gates); ⑤ from station hall stairs to ground floor (including stair congestion time and travel time on the stairs).

The formula for computing evacuation time is formulated based on the total number of individuals within the subway station (including those on the subway train, platform, and station hall), the rate of pedestrian flow, and population density. The iterative accumulation of time is carried out in accordance with the principle of continuous pedestrian movement. Subsequently, the model’s outcomes are juxtaposed with the Pathfinder software’s calculations for subway station evacuations, demonstrating the model’s efficacy in elucidating crowd dynamics during emergency evacuations within subway stations. The technical roadmap for this study is depicted in Fig 1.

Fig 1. The technical roadmap.

Fig 1

Model assumptions

The segmented evacuation time model based on multifactor analysis under the following specific assumptions:

  • (1) Negligible Stair Traffic: Prior to the commencement of evacuation, the presence of individuals on the stairs is minimal and poses no obstruction to the evacuation process.

  • (2) Initial Evacuation Flow: At the onset of evacuation, the model does not account for the influence of passenger flow adjustments within the subway stations.

  • (3) Average Distribution of Individuals: The distribution of people within the subway, platform, and station hall follows an average pattern. This implies that subjective factors influence the selection of each elevator and passage, and all stairways and passages possess identical capacities.

  • (4) Escalator Mode Change: At the outset of evacuation, automatic escalators are halted and function as inclined walkways (stairs).

  • (5) Station Hall Exit Gates: During emergency evacuation, the gates on the station hall floor are fully open, and ticket gates are employed as evacuation exits.

  • (6) Station Hall to Ground Floor Stairs: The model does not consider hindrances to pedestrians posed by inflection points on stairs connecting the station hall to the ground floor.

  • (7) Transfer Station Stairs: Stairs connecting two platforms within a transfer station are not designated as planned evacuation routes for emergency situations.

Equations for calculating evacuation time

(1) t1: Time to evacuate from the subway to the platform

Previous investigators have focused on analyzing the relationship between the number of passengers and the evacuation time from the perspective of mathematical models and experimental research. Based on this research, it has been concluded that on a horizontal platform, the time required for all passengers to exit the subway can be calculated using the following equation [36]:

t1=s2n22Kw·2.2+e22.2-e2ln4.4e (1)
n=Nf (2)

(2) t2: Time to evacuate from the platform to the stairway entrance

The relationship between flow velocity and flow density was analyzed from a dynamics perspective, and it was concluded that the flow velocity in horizontal places satisfies the equations [37]:

v0=vm(αA+βB+γ) (3)
A=1.32-0.82lnρi (4)
B=3.0-0.76ρi (5)

where v0 refers to the horizontal flow rate of evacuated people on the platform floor in m/s, and vm is the maximum average flow rate in vm = 1.2m/s. In an emergency, the maximum average flow rate. The variables α, β refer to the contributed weight to the flow rate under the influence of the front and rear, left and right, and other factors, respectively. The values of α are 0.25 and 0.44, β is 0.014 and 0.088, and γ is 0.15 and 0.26. The average values of α, β, γ were selected as the final weights: α = 0.35, β = 0.05, and γ = 0.20 (rounded to two decimal places).

Time t2 is computed as

t2=Lv0 (6)

where L is the maximum distance from the crowd to the stairway entrance in m.

(3) t3: Time to travel the stairs from the platform

The time the crowd spends on the stairs is divided into two parts: the time for the crowd to travel the stairs and the congestion time on the platform floor at the stairway entrance.

Previous researchers [38] obtained the following expression for the time for everyone on the station floor to travel the stairs:

bm=8.04t311.37 (7)
t31=1.378.04m1b1 (8)

where b1 refers to the effective width of the stairs on the platform floor, which is the width in m actually used by pedestrians, and m1 is the total number of people on the platform floor in pers.

Time t32 is the time needed for everyone on the platform floor to travel the stairs, calculated as

t32=s3v3(1.57r1l1)12 (9)

where s3 is the horizontal stairway length on the platform floor in m, r1 is the stair rung height on the platform floor in m, l1 is the stair step height on the platform floor in m, and v3 is people’s stair-climbing speed in m/s.

(4) t4: Time to evacuate from the station hall floor to the exit

Based on the formula for calculating the time to evacuate from the platform floor to the stairway entrance and considering the congestion time for passengers to pass through the gates on the station hall floor, the time to evacuate from the station hall floor to the exit is calculated as

t4=t41+t42 (10)
v0=vm(αA+βB+γ)A=1.32-0.82lnρiB=3.0-0.76ρi (11)

Where the parameters and variables in Eq (9) are defined in the description of Eq (2) above, and

t41=s4v4 (12)
t42=1.378.04m2b2 (13)

where s4 is the maximum distance from the crowd to the safety exit in m, b2 is the effective width of the gate, which is to the actual width used in m, m2 is the total number of people on the station hall floor in pers, and m2 is the total number of people in the enclosed gate area in pers. The equation for m2 is

m2=n3·s3s2 (14)

where s2 is the actual usable floor area of the station hall in m2, and s3 is the usable enclosed gate area in m2.

(5) t5: Time to evacuate from the exit to the ground floor

This evacuation time is calculated using a method similar to the time for stair congestion and stair travel. Previous investigators [38] obtained the following formula for the congestion time t51 for everyone on the station hall floor to travel the exit stairs:

bm=8.04t311.37 (15)
t51=1.378.04m3b3 (16)

and the time for everyone on the station hall floor to travel the stairs is t52, calculated as

t52=s5v5(1.57rl)12 (17)

where the description of Eq (3) above provides the parameter descriptions for Eq (15).

(6) Additional equations used in the calculations are

Maximum evacuation capacity of the car doors:

q1=n1t1 (18)

Maximum evacuation capacity of platform stairs:

q1=n3t3 (19)

Maximum evacuation capacity of station hall stairs:

q1=n3t5 (20)

Maximum evacuation capacity of the station hall floor (including turnstiles):

q4=n3t4·s3s2 (21)

Based on the principle that the person closest to the exit (the first person to the ground) is safely evacuated first, the time for everyone in the subway station to reach the safety zone is taken as the total evacuation time ttotal:

textra=[(t4+t5-t2)·q2+(t4+t5-t1-t2)·q2]/q3 (22)
ttotal=[t4+t5]+t4+textra (23)

where textra is the time needed for the remaining people on the platform floor and the subway train to travel the exit stairs after the people on the station hall floor are evacuated, t4 + t5 is the time for the people on the station hall floor to be evacuated, and t4 is the time for the people on the platform floor and the subway train to pass through the station hall.

Analysis of experimental data and simulation results: A case study of evacuation time model

This section validates established evacuation time model through data analysis and simulations, demonstrating its real-world applicability in a specific subway station case study. The intricate station layout, featuring platforms, station halls, stairs, and exits, underscores emergency challenges. Visual representations lay the groundwork for thorough analysis and simulations, examining dynamics, bottlenecks, and evacuation scenarios.

Research case statement and visualization of the station layout

This case study centers on the Wulukou subway station located in Xi’an, China, as the focal point of this case study. The aim of this study is to employ our established model to calculate evacuation times and analyze passenger evacuation pathways within the subway station. The selected subway station serves as a pivotal transfer point for both metro Line 1 and Line 4, encompassing the platform areas of both lines, as well as the station hall floor which comprises both paid and non-paid sections. Specifically, the platform areas for Line 4 and Line 1 measure 1427 m2 and 1410 m2 respectively. The paid section of the station hall occupies an area of 1344 m2, with the non-paid area extending over 3380 m2. These spatial distributions are visually represented in Figs 24. In order to conduct emergency evacuation simulations, the Pathfinder software in conjunction with computer-aided design (CAD) techniques is normally utilized to meticulously craft the simulation environment.

Fig 2. Schematic diagram of the station hall floor.

Fig 2

Fig 4. Schematic diagram of the Line 1 platform floor.

Fig 4

Fig 3. Schematic diagram of the Line 4 platform floor.

Fig 3

Analysis of theoretical model values and evacuation time calculation

Evacuation time is calculated based on the established mathematical model by taking into account the actual conditions of Wulukou metro station. The distribution of evacuation facilities in the station includes stairs A, B, C, and D, as well as exits A, B, C, D, E, and F. Considering the specific characteristics of Wulukou subway station, the number of evacuees and other relevant parameters are determined for the calculation.

For the number of evacuees, the vehicle in Wulukou Subway Station is type B according to the real-time passenger flow and the particular geographical location of Wulukou Subway Station. Each car occupies an area of 52 m2. Considering the area occupied by the seats on both sides and the anti-fall handrails in the middle, the actual area of each car is 40 m2. There are six cars, and the platform is an island-style structure. During morning rush hours, the average density of passengers on the subway train is 3 pers/m2, during which passengers would be in contact with each other. Therefore, the total number of passengers in a train is N0 = 40 × 6 × 3 = 720 pers.

In the station hall area, considering the field data analysis, the number of people in the non-paid area is 338 pers, while the number in the paid area is 269 pers. The number of people on the Line 4 platform floor is 285 pers, while there are 282 pers on the Line 1 platform floor. According to the simulated evacuation conditions, with four trains arriving at the station simultaneously and the distribution of evacuees on the platform floor and the station hall floor unchanged, the total number of evacuees was 4054 pers.

According to the values in Eq (3), α = 0.35, β = 0.05,and γ = 0.20. Under emergency evacuation conditions [39], the maximum average flow rate of passengers is 1.2 m/s in Eq (3). Thus, the flow rate on the platform floor is obtained as 1.19 m/s. Survey data is analyzed according to the actual conditions, in which the step height of the stairs is r = 0.18 m, and the step width is b = 0.28 m. The horizontal length of the stairs is L = 27.65 m for Line 4 and L = 10.80 m for Line 1. The effective width of the four sets of stairs is 1.9 × 3 × 4 m, the maximum distance from the Line 4 platform floor to the stairway entrance is 46 m, and the maximum distance from the Line 1 platform floor to the stairway entrance is 33 m.

Considering the particular geographical structure of Wulukou Subway Station, the cumulative evacuation time of the platform floor of Line 4 and Line 1 is first calculated as T1 and T2. The final total evacuation time is

Ttotal=max{T1,T2} (24)

The established mathematical model is solved using the GUI function module of MATLAB [40], and the results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Theoretical model results.

Category Line 4 Line 1
Number of people in a train (pers) 1440 1440
Number of people on the platform floor (pers) 285 282
Number of people on the station hall floor (pers) 607 607
Evacuation capacity of the car doors (pers/sec) 8.58 8.57
Evacuation capacity of platform stairs (pers/sec) 9.39 12.99
Evacuation capacity of station hall stairs (pers/sec) 11.3 12.45
Evacuation capacity of the turnstile (pers/sec) 1.26 1.26
Time to exit the train (sec) 167.87 167.87
Time on the platform (sec) 30.35 21.72
Time on the stairs (sec) 53.72 48.8
Time on the station hall (sec) 120.52 120.52
Time of exit (sec) 87.74 87.74
Total time (sec) 341.92 291.97

Simulation experiment research and comparative analysis using pathfinder

Utilizing the Pathfinder software [41], a simulation of passenger flow at Xi’an Wulukou Metro Station under extreme emergency evacuation scenarios was conducted. Pathfinder, an agent-based evacuation simulation software developed by Thunderhead Engineering Company (USA), offers two distinct modes of movement simulation: the Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE) mode and the steering mode.

In the SFPE mode, the evacuation route is determined primarily by walking route length, whereby passengers opt for the nearest exit in terms of proximity. This mode automatically adjusts the passenger flow rate by gauging evacuation space density and the passenger flow is restricted by doors.

Conversely, the steering mode considers factors like route planning and passenger interactions. Evacuation routes are established based on evacuation distances and passenger proximity. In this mode, doors no longer act as flow restrictors, allowing passengers to complete ongoing movements and react to changing environmental conditions. Given its practical applicability to real-life situations, the steering mode was chosen for the simulation experiment in this study.

Fig 5 presents a comprehensive three-dimensional depiction of Wulukou Subway Station, showcasing the spatial arrangement of the Line 4 platform floor, the Line 1 platform floor, and the entirety of the station hall floor spanning both Line 1 and Line 4. The station’s layout assumes a distinctive T-shaped configuration, providing a clear overview of the architectural arrangement. Passenger distribution inside the subway station are shown in Table 2.

Fig 5. Three-dimensional view of the Wulukou subway station.

Fig 5

Table 2. Passenger distribution inside the subway station.

Subway station structure Inner structure Usable area (m2) Number of people
Platform floor Platform floor of Line 1 1410 282
Platform floor of Line 4 1427 285
Train on the left side of Line 4 312 720
Train on the right side of Line 4 312 720
Train on the left side of Line 1 312 720
Train on the right side of Line 1 312 720
Station hall Paid area 1344 269
Non-paid area 3380 338

Subsequently, Fig 6 offers insights into the distribution of passengers after an elapsed evacuation period of 50 seconds. Evidently, within this timeframe, passengers on both the platform floor and the station hall floor converge towards the stairway entrances, resulting in the emergence of a congestion point. Furthermore, passengers situated on the station hall floor exhibit a distinct gathering pattern around the gates, forming yet another bottleneck in the evacuation process.

Fig 6. The distribution of passengers after 50 seconds of evacuation time.

Fig 6

These visual representations provide a tangible illustration of the evolving dynamics within the station during emergency evacuation scenarios. The dynamic inter-play between passenger movements, bottlenecks, and congestion points serves as a valuable reference for understanding the intricacies of the evacuation process and underscores the significance of efficient route planning and bottleneck mitigation strategies.

Fig 7(a) is the distribution diagram of passenger flow on the subway system stairs, and Fig 7(c) is the distribution diagram of the cumulative evacuees in the subway system. Based on the analysis results, it can be concluded that the overall evacuation capacity has been improved. During the evacuation, the cumulative number of evacuees on the left stairs of C and D reaches their maximum values (474 and 478, respectively). The flow rate is recorded as 1.5∼2.5 pers/s, and the utilization rate increases as some passengers pass through the transfer station, traveling from the Line 4 platform floor to the Line 1 platform floor. According to the proximity principle, passengers prioritize the surrounding stairs (the left stairs of C and D). In this situation, the utilization rate of stairs A and B is lower than for stairs C and D because congestion is less likely to occur in Line 4 based on its relatively long walking distance on the platform floor and low passenger density.

Fig 7. Evacuee distribution maps of bottleneck points at the subway station.

Fig 7

Fig 7(b) is the distribution diagram of the passenger flow at the exits, and Fig 7(d) is the distribution diagram of the cumulative evacuees at the subway system exits. The passenger flow rate of Exit A is the largest throughout the evacuation at 3∼5 pers/s, and the cumulative number of evacuees is as high as 1,180. Further analysis also reveals that the gates close to Exit A are subject to more severe congestion, prolonging evacuation time. The Exits B, C, and G utilization rates are relatively high, with the cumulative number of evacuees at 686, 829, and 746, respectively. Exits E and F have the lowest utilization rates, with 163 and 23 cumulative evacuees.

The highest passenger flows during the 50∼60 s period are recorded for Exits E and F. However, they are idle with zero flow after 60 s. Therefore, guides could be added to relieve the pressure of bottleneck points and improve evacuation efficiency. Fig 8 shows that it would take 323.53 s to evacuate all the passengers at Wulukou Subway Station.

Fig 8. The relationship between remaining evacuees and required evacuation time.

Fig 8

In this simulation, the error between the calculated theoretical evacuation time and the value of the simulation experiment is

ε=|ttheoretical-tsimulation|ttheoretical×100%=|341.92-323.53|341.92×100%=5.4% (25)

The high degree of consistency between the results obtained from theoretical model and simulation experiment is achieved, which provides substantial validation of the effectiveness of the established mathematical model. The calculated evacuation time of 341.92 seconds is in good agreement with the predictions of the mathematical model with an error rate of 5.4% (< 10%). This outcome not only attests to the credibility of the mathematical model but also underscores the precision of the model in forecasting emergency evacuation times.

Conclusions

The conclusions from this study are summarized as follows:

  • (1) An emergency evacuation time model was developed for subway stations with complex structures by taking into account factors such as passenger flow rate, subway facility parameters, and crowd density. The model identified horizontal walking distance, flow rate, subway train size, and stair parameters as the main factors influencing evacuation time.

  • (2) The emergency evacuation model can predict the locations of bottleneck points. These bottleneck points are the gates > car doors > stairs (in descending order). “Arch-shaped” congestion is most likely to occur at the gates. The model provides a foundation for evaluating the emergency evacuation capacity of multiline sub-way transfer stations and defines as an effective reference for formulating emergency evacuation plans.

  • (3) The calculated evacuation time from the mathematical model closely aligned with the results obtained from the simulation experiment using the Pathfinder software, with an error rate of only 5.4%. This demonstrates the scientific validity and reliability of the emergency evacuation model proposed in this study.

To address issues of urban traffic congestion and enhance subway station safety, effective measures for emergency diversion and passenger flow control are recommended. Considering the structural and temporal characteristics of subway systems, this study introduced characteristic mathematical models for different evacuation routes, encompassing trains, platforms, stairs, gates, and station halls. By incorporating real-time changes in passenger flow, the total time evacuation model was derived re-cursively, enhancing calculation efficiency. The model offers theoretical and practical guidance for simulating large-scale passenger evacuations in complex environments.

Future research can expand upon the model by considering psychological factors affecting evacuees, evacuation signage at stations, and evacuation strategies for vulnerable populations. The added factors would further enhance the model’s comprehensiveness, practicality, and scientific rigor.

In summary, this study establishes an emergency evacuation time model for subway stations, providing insights into evacuation dynamics and aiding in the development of strategies to improve safety and efficiency in subway systems.

Data Availability

The paper does not involve specific passenger flow data. The data used in the simulation are derived from full passenger load conditions on a specific route and train. The corresponding emergency evacuation time is calculated through mathematical modeling and simulation experiments.

Funding Statement

This research was supported in part by the National Nature Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 52072044, in part by the National Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province under Grant No. 2021JQ-295. There was no additional external funding received for this study.

References

  • 1. Shi C, Zhong M, Nong X, et al. Modeling and safety strategy of passenger evacuation in a metro station in China. Safety Science, 2012; 50: 1319–1332. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.07.017 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Yang PZ, Li C, Chen DH. Fire emergency evacuation simulation based on integrated fire–evacuation model with discrete design method. Advances in Engineering Software, 2013; 65: 101–111. doi: 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2013.06.007 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Yang YX, Chen C, Qu L, Ren ML. Discussion on Some Problems of Evacuation from Metro Train Fire. China Safety Science Journal, 2006: 45–50. [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Chen YM, Wang C, Jeffrey BH, Zhang SJ. Emergency evacuation simulation at starting connection of cross-sea bridge: Case study on Haicang Avenue Subway Station in Xiamen Rail Transit Line. Journal of Building Engineering, 2020; 29: 1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101163 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Jin B, Wang J, Wang Y, Gu Y. Temporal and spatial distribution of pedestrians in subway evacuation under node failure by multi-hazards. Safety Science, 2020; 7: 1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104695 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Ding N, Chen T, Zhu Y, Lu Y. State of the art high rise building emergency evacuation behavior. Physical A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2021;561: 52–63. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2020.125168 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Jiang CS, Yuan F, Chow WK. Effect of varying two key parameters in simulating evacuation for subway stations in China. Safety Science, 2010; 4: 445–451. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.12.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Li Y, Wang XD, Sun S, Ma XL, Lu GQ. Forecasting short-term subway passenger flow under special events scenarios using multiscale radial basis function networks. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 2017; 77: 306–328. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2017.02.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Qu L, Chow WK. Platform screen doors on emergency evacuation in underground railway stations. Tunneling and Underground Space Technology, 2012; 30: 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.tust.2011.09.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Zhou M, Ge S, Liu J, Wang FY. Field observation and analysis of waiting passengers at subway platform—A case study of Beijing subway stations. Physical A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2020; 556C: 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Rostami R, Alaghmandan M. Performance-based design in emergency evacuation: From maneuver to simulation in school design. Journal of Building Engineering, 2020; 33: 1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101598 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Kallianiotis A, Papakonstantinou D, Arvelaki V, Benardos A. Evacuation method in underground metro station. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2018; 31: 526–534. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.06.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Jeon GY, Kim JY, Hong WH, Augenbore G. Evacuation performance of individuals in different visibility conditions. Fuel and Energy Abstracts, 2011; 5: 1094–1103. doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.11.010 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Chen SK, Liu S, Xiao X. M/G/c/c-based Model of Passenger Evacuation Capacity of Stairs and Corridors in Metro Stations. Journal of the China Railway Society, 2012; 34: 7–12. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8360.2012.01.002 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Chen YM, Gong JY. Algorithm for the Determination of Multi-factor Road Network Weight Based on Fuzzy Mathematics. Journal of Wuhan University (Information Science Edition), 2007; 10: 928–931. [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Xu WN, Wu Z. Mathematical model of passenger flow in the waiting hall of subway station. Journal of Railway Science and Engineering, 2005; 2: 70–75. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Togawa K. Study on fire escape based on the observations of multitude currents. Report No. 4, Building Research Institute, Ministry of Contruction, 1955: Tokyo.
  • 18. Dinenno PJ. SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering. 1995. [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Parisi DR, Gilman M, Moldovan H. A modification of the social force model can reproduce experimental data of pedestrian flows in normal conditions. Physica, A. Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 2009; 17: 3600–3608. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2009.05.027 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Zhou M, Dong HR, Petros A, Zhao YB, Wang FY. Guided crowd evacuation: approaches and challenges. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2019; 6: 1081–1094. doi: 10.1109/JAS.2019.1911672 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Hu K, Duan ZX. Simulation research on safe evacuation of island platform metro station personnel. Computer Engineering and Applications, 2014; 50: 261–266. [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Mei YL, Xie KF, Liu SS, Liu J. Analysis model and simulation of emergency evacuation capacity of dense crowds in subway stations. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology (Information and Management Engineering), 2018; 40: 370–375+382. [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Qin J, Liu C, Huang Q. Simulation on fire emergency evacuation in special subway station based on Pathfinder. Case Studies in Thermal Engineering, 2020; 21: 1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2020.100677 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Wu Y, Xu J, Jia LM, Qin Y. Estimation of emergency evacuation capacity for subway stations. Journal of transportation safety and security, 2018; 10: 586–601. doi: 10.1080/19439962.2017.1357059 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Kallianiotis A, Papakonstantinou D, Arvelaki V, Benardos A. Evaluation of evacuation methods in underground metro stations. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2018; 31: 526–534. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.06.009 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Li ZY, Tang M, Liang D, Zhao Z. Numerical simulation of evacuation in a subway station. International Conference on Performance- based Fire and Fire Protection Engineering, 2016; 135: 616–621.
  • 27.Dong WY. Cellular automaton model and simulation of fire evacuation based on agent technology. 2010 Third International Conference on Education Technology and Training, 2010: 236–239.
  • 28. Jiang CS, Yuan F, Chou WK. Effect of varying two key parameters in simulating evacuation for subway stations in China. Safety Science, 2010; 48: 445–451. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2009.12.004 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Song X, Zhang Z, Peng G, Shi G. Effect of authority figures for pedestrian evacuation at metro stations. Physica A: statistical mechanics and its applications, 2017; 465: 599–612. doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2016.08.015 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Li X, Hong L, Xu RH. Analysis on influence factors of psychological behavior of emergency evacuation passengers in rail transit stations. Urban Mass Transit, 2012; 04: 54–57. [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Barron A.; Melo P. C.; Cohen J. M. et al. Passenger-focused management approach to measurement of train delay impacts. Transportation Research Record, 2013, volume 2351. pp. 46–53. [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Dello’ Olio L, Ibeas A, Barreda R, Sanudo R. Passenger behavior in trains during emergency situations. Journal of Safety Research, 2013; 46: 157–166. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2013.05.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Zhou M, Dong HR, Ioannou PA, Zhao YB, Wang FY. Guided crowd evacuation: approaches and challenges. IEEE/ CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2019; 6: 1081–1094. doi: 10.1109/JAS.2019.1911672 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Hong KL, Tung YK. Network with degradable links: capacity analysis and design. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 2003; 37: 345–363. doi: 10.1016/S0191-2615(02)00017-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Hong KL, Luo XW, Siu BWY. Degradable transport network: travel time budget of travelers with heterogeneous risk aversion. Transportation Research Part B Methodological, 2006; 40: 792–806. doi: 10.1016/j.trb.2005.10.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Wu Z, Wang Y, Shen JY. Research on the Mathematical Model for the Evacuation Time of Passengers in the Waiting Hall of Subway Station. Journal of Fudan University (Natural Science Edition), 2006; 5: 594–598. JournalArticle/5aee2bc5c095d710d4128da1 [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Lu JA, Fang Z, Lu ZM, Zhao CM. Mathematical Model for the Evacuation Speed of People in Buildings. Engineering Journal of Wuhan University, 2002; 2: 66–70. [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Hu XL, Liu C, Chen XH. Computer Simulation of Safe Evacuation Time for People in High-rise Buildings. Journal of Chongqing University, 2004; 10: 105–108. CNKI:SUN:FIVE.0.2004-10-026 [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Zhao JL, Sun BY, Wang SS, Yuan J, Huang H. Simulation on emergency evacuation of crowd in Special subway Station based on Pathfinder. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2020; volume 16: 146–150. [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Wang YH. Virtual assessment model on emergency evacuation capacity of Beijing subway based on BP Neural Network Algorithm. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2012; 8: 5–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Wang F. Multi-Scenario Simulation of Subway Emergency Evacuation Based on Multi-Agent. International Journal of Simulation Modelling, 2021; 20: 387–397. doi: 10.2507/IJSIMM20-2-CO8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ahmed Mancy Mosa

20 Nov 2023

PONE-D-23-32821Data-driven Mathematical Simulation Analysis of Emergency Evacuation Time in Smart Station’s Operation Management.PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hui,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.Please consider all comments  Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 04 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ahmed Mancy Mosa, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

1. When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please update your submission to use the PLOS LaTeX template. The template and more information on our requirements for LaTeX submissions can be found at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/latex.

3. Please note that PLOS ONE has specific guidelines on code sharing for submissions in which author-generated code underpins the findings in the manuscript. In these cases, all author-generated code must be made available without restrictions upon publication of the work. Please review our guidelines at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/materials-and-software-sharing#loc-sharing-code and ensure that your code is shared in a way that follows best practice and facilitates reproducibility and reuse.

4. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement: 

This research was supported in part by the National Nature Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 52072044, in part by the National Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province under Grant No. 2021JQ-295.

Please provide an amended statement that declares all the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now.  Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement. 

Please include your amended Funding Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

6. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

7. Please amend either the title on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the title in the manuscript so that they are identical.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The research proposes a model for estimating evacuation time, which has been verified using the Pathfinder software. However, the paper lacks clarity regarding the specific formula that constitutes its primary contribution. The Eq(1) and (2) for the time required for evacuation from the subway to the platform, and if this is a contribution from reference 36. Similarly, the evacuation time from the platform to the stairway entrance appears to be linked to reference 37, and the time to traverse the stairs to reference 38. I think these things should be included in the "The technical roadmap for

this study is depicted in Fig 1.". It is hard to determine the suitability of the work for acceptance in PLOS ONE at its current stage.

Reviewer #2: This study contributes to a better understanding of evacuation dynamics and provides practical insights to improve safety and

efficiency in subway systems. The introduction provides a good overview of the problem and the motivation behind the research. The manuscript is well presented however only few details need to improve:

1.The methodology is adequately explained, but it would benefit from more details on the specific steps and calculations involved.

2. Include the data availability statement in the revised manuscript. The present manuscript does not explicitly state whether the authors have made all the data underlying the findings fully available.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Feb 16;19(2):e0298622. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298622.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


5 Jan 2024

Dear Editor and Reviewers:

Thank you very much for giving us an opportunity to revise our manuscript ID PONE-D-23-32821. We appreciate for the positive and constructive comments and suggestions to improve the present manuscript. We have revised the manuscript thoroughly as per the comments and the concerns raised by all reviewers. All the changes made in the revision are highlighted with the blue-color text. Also, we have incorporated comments given in the Reviewer Attachment.

The details of responses to reviewers’ comments and additional questions are listed as follows:

[Comment 1]

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

[Response 1]

Thank you very much for your advice.

As for Reviewer #1: In this study, the simulated data were normally adopted to validate the validity of the theoretical model. The calculated value and modeled value were in good agreement. In addition, the passenger density, walking speed and metro equipment were considered in theoretical calculation and numerical simulation to evaluate the needed evacuation time. Therefore, the obtained conclusions related to passenger factors (such as passenger flow rate, subway facility parameters and crowd density), facility factors (such as gates, car doors and stairs) and evacuation time are scientific and reasonable.

[Comment 2]

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

[Response 2]

I’m appreciated for your advice.

As for Reviewer #1: This study established an emergency evacuation time model specifically designed for subway stations with complex structures. The model considered multiple factors, including passenger flow rate, subway facility parameters, and crowd density, to accurately assess evacuation times. It also investigates the effect of horizontal walking distance, flow rate, subway train size and stair parameters on the overall evacuation process. On the one hand, the passenger walking speed, subway facilities and passenger density were studied to investigate their effects on the total evacuation time. For another, the effect of stairs and exits on passenger flow rate and accumulated evacuation passengers were also analyzed. Finally, the calculated evacuation time is in good agreement with simulated evacuation time totally. Therefore, the statistical analysis in this paper is appropriate and rigorous based on the above-mentioned research logicality.

[Comment 3]

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

[Response 3]

It is my pleasure having your comment.

As for Reviewer #1: The proposed passenger number of evacuations are obtained based on the previous research foundation(such as passenger density, walking speed and equipment parameters at emergence situation). In this case, this paper simulates the maximum evacuated passengers of four trains at the transfer station and the maximum capacity of the station hall and platform floor. Such efforts are fully consistent with the number of passengers in a real emergency evacuation situation. In addition, it can also reasonably calculate the maximum evacuation capacity of different platform structures based on the existing crowd flow pattern. Therefore, the obtained data and findings in this study are fully available.

[Comment 4]

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English? PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

[Response 4]

Thank you for your suggestions. To make the response and changes easier to identify where necessary, the editor’s and reviewers’ comments are presented with the response from author is presented in red, and the corresponding corrections in the revised manuscript are highlighted in blue.

In this study, we have changed the “subway” into “metro” to standardize the usage of words.

(1) Lines 13-14 page 1:

We have changed the “develops” into “establishes” to standardize the usage of words.

(2) Lines 20-22 page 1:

The calculated evacuation time from the mathematical model closely aligns with simulation results obtained using the Pathfinder software, confirming its scientific validity with an error rate of 5.4%.

The sentence is revised as follows:

The good consistency is achieved between the calculated evacuation time and simulated results using the Pathfinder software (with the relative error of 5.4%).

(3) Lines 22-23 page 1:

We have changed the “implementing” into “implemented” to standardize the usage of words.

(4) Lines 24-26 page 1:

Additionally, the research presents characteristic mathematical models for various evacuation routes, taking into consideration the structural and temporal characteristics of metro systems.

The sentence is revised as follows:

Additionally, the research presents characteristic mathematical models for various evacuation routes by considering the structural and temporal characteristics of metro systems.

(5) Lines 39 page 1:

We have changed the “encompassing” into “encompassed” to standardize the usage of words.

(6) Lines 42-46 page 2:

However, the unique architectural features of metro stations, such as limited construction space, airtightness, restricted ventilation, and limited visibility, give rise to a series of challenges during emergency situations, particularly passenger evacuations, including risks of congestion and stampedes.

The sentence is revised as follows:

However, the unique architectural features of metro stations, such as limited construction space, airtightness, restricted ventilation, and limited visibility, which give rise to a series of challenges especially for passenger evacuations, risks of congestion and stampedes.

(7) Lines 59-60 page 1:

However, due to the complexity and diversity of metro stations, traditional methods exhibit limitations in accurately predicting evacuation times.

The sentence is revised as follows:

However, traditional methods exhibit limitations in accurately predicting evacuation times due to the complexity and diversity of metro stations.

(8) Lines 73-74 page 2:

We have changed the “development” into “developed” to standardize the usage of words.

(9) Lines 89-91 page 1-2:

Although existing research has made progress in analyzing passenger and emergency evacuation flows in metro stations, there is still room for improvement in evaluating the impact of key facilities, obstacles, and overall evacuation processes.

The sentence is revised as follows:

Although existed research has made progress in analyzing passenger and emergency evacuation flows in metro stations, the improvement in evaluating the impact of key facilities, obstacles, and overall evacuation processes is still lacking.

(10) Lines 106-109 page 3:

While these studies primarily focused on actual measurements and empirical formula construction for single bottleneck areas, further research is needed to address the complexities of highly intricate scenes, such as metro stations.

The sentence is revised as follows:

While these studies primarily focused on actual measurements and established empirical formula for single bottleneck areas, further research is needed to address the complexities of highly intricate scenes, such as transfer metro stations.

(11) Lines 147-150 page 3-4:

Most studies have primarily analyzed the evacuation effects of individual passenger flows, with limited research on the evacuation effects in complex transfer stations and the influence of personnel behavior characteristics.

The sentence is revised as follows:

Most studies have primarily analyzed the evacuation effects of individual passenger flows, the research on the evacuation effects in complex transfer stations and the influence of personnel behavior characteristics are limited.

(12) Lines 164-168 page 4:

The theoretical model developed in this paper is validated by comparing its results with simulations conducted using the Pathfinder software. By integrating these aspects, this research aims to enhance our understanding of emergency evacuation dynamics and provide practical insights for improving safety and efficiency in metro systems.

The sentence is revised as follows:

The developed theoretical model in this paper is validated by comparing its calculated values with simulated values using the Pathfinder software. By integrating these aspects, this research aims to enhance understanding of emergency evacuation dynamics and provide practical insights for improving safety and efficiency in metro systems.

(13) Lines 190-191 page 5:

The segmented evacuation time model, developed through multifactor analysis, operates under the following specific assumptions:

The sentence is revised as follows:

The segmented evacuation time model based on multifactor analysis under the following specific assumptions:

(14) Lines 313-314 page 8:

We have changed the “our” into “established” to standardize the usage of words.

(15) Lines 320-321 page 8:

We have changed the “our” into “this” to standardize the usage of words.

(16) Lines 328-329 page 8:

we utilize the Pathfinder software in conjunction with computer-aided design (CAD) techniques to meticulously craft the simulation environment.

The sentence is revised as follows:

The Pathfinder software in conjunction with computer-aided design (CAD) techniques is normally utilized to meticulously craft the simulation environment.

(17) Lines 340-341 page 9:

Evacuation time is calculated based on the established mathematical model, taking into account the actual conditions of Wulukou metro station.

The sentence is revised as follows:

Evacuation time is calculated based on the established mathematical model by taking into account the actual conditions of Wulukou metro station.

(18) Lines 380-381 page 11:

we conducted a simulation of passenger flow at Xi’an Wulukou Metro Station under extreme emergency evacuation scenarios

The sentence is revised as follows:

A simulation of passenger flow at Xi’an Wulukou Metro Station under extreme emergency evacuation scenarios was conducted

(19) Lines 386-388 page 11:

This mode automatically adjusts the passenger flow rate by gauging evacuation space density, with doors acting as flow-restricting elements.

The sentence is revised as follows:

This mode automatically adjusts the passenger flow rate by gauging evacuation space density and the passenger flow is restricted by doors.

(20) Lines 420-423 page 12:

In this situation, the utilization rate of stairs A and B is lower than for stairs C and D because congestion is less likely to occur in Line 4 because of its relatively long walking distance on the platform floor and low passenger density.

The sentence is revised as follows:

In this situation, the utilization rate of stairs A and B is lower than for stairs C and D because congestion is less likely to occur in Line 4 based on its relatively long walking distance on the platform floor and low passenger density.

(21) Lines 441-443 page 13:

The high degree of consistency between the results obtained from the emergency evacuation simulation experiment and the theoretical model provides substantial validation of the effectiveness of the established mathematical model.

The sentence is revised as follows:

The high degree of consistency between the results obtained from theoretical model and simulation experiment is achieved, which provides substantial validation of the effectiveness of the established mathematical model.

(22) Lines 443-444 page 13:

The calculated evacuation time of 341.92 seconds, as derived from the research, aligns closely with the predictions of the mathematical model, with an error rate of 5.4% that falls below the 10% threshold.

The sentence is revised as follows:

The calculated evacuation time of 341.92 seconds is in good agreement with the predictions of the mathematical model with an error rate of 5.4 % (<10 %).

(23) Lines 456 page 14:

We have changed the “is” into “defines as” to standardize the usage of words.

(24) Lines 470-471 page 14:

These additions would further enhance the model's comprehensiveness, practicality, and scientific rigor.

The sentence is revised as follows:

The added factors would further enhance the model's comprehensiveness, practicality, and scientific rigor.

[Comment 5]

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This research proposes a model for estimating evacuation time, which has been verified using the Pathfinder software. However, the paper lacks clarity regarding the specific formula that constitutes its primary contribution. The Eq(1) and (2) for the time required for evacuation from the subway to the platform, and if this is a contribution from reference 36. Similarly, the evacuation time from the platform to the stairway entrance appears to be linked to reference 37, and the time to traverse the stairs to reference 38. I think these things should be included in the "The technical roadmap for this study is depicted in Fig 1.". It is hard to determine the suitability of the work for acceptance in PLOS ONE at its current stage.

Reviewer #2: This study contributes to a better understanding of evacuation dynamics and provides practical insights to improve safety and efficiency in subway systems. The introduction provides a good overview of the problem and the motivation behind the research. The manuscript is well presented however only few details need to improve:

1. The methodology is adequately explained, but it would benefit from more details on the specific steps and calculations involved.

2. Include the data availability statement in the revised manuscript. The present manuscript does not explicitly state whether the authors have made all the data underlying the findings fully available.

[Response 5]

Thank you very much for your advice.

As for Reviewer #1: The evacuation process is divided into five stages, corresponding to distinct periods: ① from subway train to platform; ② from platform to stairway entrance; ③ from platform stairs to station hall (including stair congestion time and travel time on the stairs); ④ from station hall to stairway (including congestion time at gates); ⑤ from station hall stairs to ground floor (including stair congestion time and travel time on the stairs). As for different evacuation stage, the corresponding evacuation model is established based on the previous researches and findings (Such as Refs. [36]-[38]). Generally, passenger evacuation at metro station is mainly included the above-mentioned five stages. The built numerical models can apply single platform and a transfer station with multiple intersected routes. Therefore, the established evacuation models are universal and applicable.

As for Reviewer #2:

Aiming at Q1, the GUI interface developed by MATLAB version 2022a is obtained by importing the relevant calculation models at each evacuation stage. This method has a high solution efficiency and precision. Additionally, the total evacuation time is our research object due to the validation with numerical modeling in the subsequent chapters. Therefore, the utilized solution in this study is reasonable and acceptable.

Aiming at Q2, in this study, this paper simulates the evacuated people at a subway transfer station under the condition of large passenger flow. The proposed passengers have made clear and specific statement in Analysis of Theoretical Model Values and Evacuation Time Calculation Part based on the reasonable analysis and previous researches foundation. Therefore, the available data is scientific and significant.

[Comment 6]

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[Response 6]

Thank you for your valuable suggestions. The relevant comments from the editor and reviewers were carefully modified point to point. Please see the attached file. We deeply appreciate your consideration of our manuscript and look forward to your suggestions on this revised manuscript. Please don’t hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Ahmed Mancy Mosa

29 Jan 2024

Data-driven Mathematical Simulation Analysis of Emergency Evacuation Time in Smart Station’s Operation Management.

PONE-D-23-32821R1

Dear Dr. Hui,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ahmed Mancy Mosa, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: N/A

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The author revised the manuscript with more clarity than the last time. I think the manuscript is suitable to publish in PLOS ONE.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Ahmed Mancy Mosa

8 Feb 2024

PONE-D-23-32821R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Hui,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ahmed Mancy Mosa

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    The paper does not involve specific passenger flow data. The data used in the simulation are derived from full passenger load conditions on a specific route and train. The corresponding emergency evacuation time is calculated through mathematical modeling and simulation experiments.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES