Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

(a), (b) In-passenger-flow Nin(s,t) and out-passenger-flow Nout(s,t) of each subway station s during the time window 9:00 a.m.–9:15 a.m. of a typical weekday in 2014.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Distributions of passenger-flow show heterogenous patterns in different subway stations. (a) is for in-passenger-flow Nin(s,t), (b) is for out-passenger-flow Nout(s,t).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Anomalous passenger flow detection for “Window of World” subway station.

(a) Out-passenger-flows of the “Window of World” subway station over the whole observation period. Anomalous flows and ordinary flows are discriminated by the green line fε. (b) Red circles represent anomalous out-passenger-flow of the station during the time window 7:00 p.m.–7:15 p.m., while blue circles represent passenger flows under ordinary traffic conditions.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Predictive results versus ground-truth data for subway station “Window of World” when nstep = 1.

(a) Results for a typical weekday. (b) Results for a day when mass events occurred near the station.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 1.

The average error of the four models when nstep = 1.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 5.

Performance of four models when predicting out-passenger-flow records in subway station “Window of World” on December 30, 2014.

(a-h) When the prediction was made 1 to 8 time windows ahead of the target time window, respectively.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Performance of four models when predicting out-passenger-flow records in subway station “Window of World” on December 31, 2014.

(a-h) When the prediction was made 1 to 8 time windows ahead of the target time window, respectively.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 2.

The average error of the four models.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 7.

Performance analysis of the predictive models.

(a), (b), (c) Performance of the four predictive models under the ordinary out-passenger flow condition for all stations during the whole test period. (d), (e), (f) Same as (a), (b), and (c), but for the results under the anomalous out-passenger flow condition.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 3.

The average error of all in-passenger-flow of all stations.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

The average error of all Out -passenger-flow of all stations.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

The average error of all in-passenger-flow (nstep = 2).

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

The average error of all Out -passenger-flow (nstep = 2).

More »

Table 6 Expand