Improving Pedestrians Traffic Priority via Grouping and Virtual Lanes in Shared Spaces (Short Paper)

Authors Yao Li , Vinu Kamalasanan, Mariana Batista, Monika Sester

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.67 MB
  • 8 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Yao Li
  • Institute of Cartography and Geoinformatics, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany
Vinu Kamalasanan
  • Institute of Cartography and Geoinformatics, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany
Mariana Batista
  • Institute of Transportation and Urban Engineering, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Germany
Monika Sester
  • Institute of Cartography and Geoinformatics, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany

Cite AsGet BibTex

Yao Li, Vinu Kamalasanan, Mariana Batista, and Monika Sester. Improving Pedestrians Traffic Priority via Grouping and Virtual Lanes in Shared Spaces (Short Paper). In 15th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (COSIT 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 240, pp. 27:1-27:8, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)


The shared space design is applied in urban streets to support barrier-free movement and integrate traffic participants (such as pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles) into a common road space. Regardless of the low-speed environment, sharing space with motor vehicles can make vulnerable road users feel uneasy. Yet, walking in groups increases their confidence as well as influence the yielding behavior of drivers. Therefore, we propose an innovative approach to support the crossing of pedestrians via grouping and project the virtual lanes in shared spaces. This paper presents the important components of the crowd steering system, discusses the enablers and gaps in the current approach, and illustrates the proposed idea with concept diagrams.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Human-centered computing → Mixed / augmented reality
  • shared space
  • urban traffic system
  • augmented reality
  • pedestrian grouping


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. David Auber, Patrick Mary, Morgan Mathiaut, Jonathan Dubois, Antoine Lambert, Daniel Archambault, Romain Bourqui, Bruno Pinaud, Maylis Delest, and Guy Melançon. Tulip: a scalable graph visualization framework. In Extraction et Gestion des Connaissances (EGC) 2010, pages 623-624. RNTI, 2010. Google Scholar
  2. Debjit Bhowmick, Stephan Winter, Mark Stevenson, and Peter Vortisch. Exploring the viability of walk-sharing in outdoor urban spaces. Computers, environment and urban systems, 88:101635, 2021. Google Scholar
  3. Steffen Busch, Alexander Schlichting, and Claus Brenner. Generation and communication of dynamic maps using light projection. In Proceedings of the ICA, volume 1, page 16, 2018. Google Scholar
  4. Hao Cheng, Yao Li, and Monika Sester. Pedestrian group detection in shared space. In 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pages 1707-1714, 2019. URL:
  5. Hao Cheng, Wentong Liao, Michael Ying Yang, Bodo Rosenhahn, and Monika Sester. Amenet: Attentive maps encoder network for trajectory prediction. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 172:253-266, February 2021. URL:
  6. Yuqing Du, Nicholas J Hetherington, Chu Lip Oon, Wesley P Chan, Camilo Perez Quintero, Elizabeth Croft, and HF Machiel Van der Loos. Group surfing: A pedestrian-based approach to sidewalk robot navigation. In 2019 international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pages 6518-6524. IEEE, 2019. Google Scholar
  7. Mahsa Ehsanpour, Fatemeh Saleh, Silvio Savarese, Ian Reid, and Hamid Rezatofighi. Jrdb-act: A large-scale multi-modal dataset for spatio-temporal action, social group and activity detection. arXiv preprint, 2021. URL:
  8. Roja Ezzati Amini, Christos Katrakazas, and Constantinos Antoniou. Negotiation and decision-making for a pedestrian roadway crossing: A literature review. Sustainability, 11(23), 2019. URL:
  9. Masahiro Furukawa, Hiromi Yoshikawa, Taku Hachisu, Shogo Fukushima, and Hiroyuki Kajimoto. "Vection field" for pedestrian traffic control. In Proceedings of the 2nd Augmented Human International Conference, pages 1-8, 2011. Google Scholar
  10. Ioannis Giannopoulos, Peter Kiefer, and Martin Raubal. Gazenav: gaze-based pedestrian navigation. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, pages 337-346, 2015. Google Scholar
  11. Victoria Hammond and Charles Musselwhite. The attitudes, perceptions and concerns of pedestrians and vulnerable road users to shared space: A case study from the uk. Journal of Urban Design, 18:78-97, 2013. Google Scholar
  12. Marc Hesenius, Ingo Börsting, Ole Meyer, and Volker Gruhn. Don't panic! Guiding pedestrians in autonomous traffic with augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services Adjunct, pages 261-268, 2018. Google Scholar
  13. Lin Hu, Jian Ou, Jing Huang, Yimin Chen, and Dongpu Cao. A review of research on traffic conflicts based on intelligent vehicles. Ieee Access, 8:24471-24483, 2020. Google Scholar
  14. Tianyu Huang, Mubbasir Kapadia, Norman I Badler, and Marcelo Kallmann. Path planning for coherent and persistent groups. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 1652-1659. IEEE, 2014. Google Scholar
  15. Vinu Kamalasanan and Monika Sester. Behaviour control with augmented reality systems for shared spaces. The International Archives of Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 43:591-598, 2020. Google Scholar
  16. Kamalasanan, Vinu and Feng , Yu and Sester , Monika. Improving 3D pedestrian detection for wearble sensor data with 2D human pose. URL:
  17. Arno Kamphuis and Mark H Overmars. Finding paths for coherent groups using clearance. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics symposium on Computer animation, pages 19-28, 2004. Google Scholar
  18. Auttapone Karndacharuk, Douglas J. Wilson, and Roger Dunn. A review of the evolution of shared (street) space concepts in urban environments. Transport Reviews, 34(2):190-220, 2014. URL:
  19. Norman Langner and Christian Kray. Assessing the impact of dynamic public signage on mass evacuation. In Proceedings of The International Symposium on Pervasive Displays, PerDis '14, pages 136-141, New York, NY, USA, 2014. Association for Computing Machinery. URL:
  20. Yao Li and Monika Sester. Group formation in shared spaces. AGILE: GIScience Series, 2:1-8, 2021. Google Scholar
  21. Wenhan Luo, Junliang Xing, Anton Milan, Xiaoqin Zhang, Wei Liu, and Tae-Kyun Kim. Multiple object tracking: A literature review. Artificial Intelligence, 293:103448, 2021. Google Scholar
  22. Simon Moody and Steve Melia. Shared space - research, policy and problems. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Transport, 167(6):384-392, 2014. Google Scholar
  23. Alexandre Robicquet, Amir Sadeghian, Alexandre Alahi, and Silvio Savarese. Learning social etiquette: Human trajectory understanding in crowded scenes. In European conference on computer vision, pages 549-565. Springer, 2016. Google Scholar
  24. Borja Ruiz-Apilánez, Kayvan Karimi, Irene García-Camacha, and Raúl Martín. Shared space streets: design, user perception and performance. Urban Design International, 22(3):267-284, 2017. Google Scholar
  25. Andrea Sassi, Claudio Borean, Roberta Giannantonio, Marco Mamei, Dario Mana, and Franco Zambonelli. Crowd steering in public spaces: Approaches and strategies. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing, pages 2098-2105, 2015. URL:
  26. Kota Yamaguchi, Alexander C Berg, Luis E Ortiz, and Tamara L Berg. Who are you with and where are you going? In CVPR 2011, pages 1345-1352. IEEE, 2011. Google Scholar
  27. Ronggang Zhou, William J. Horrey, and Ruifeng Yu. The effect of conformity tendency on pedestrians’ road-crossing intentions in china: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 41(3):491-497, 2009. URL:
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail