Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 38 references

IoT Performance for Maritime Passenger Evacuation

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Delayed IoT guidance can raise cruise-ship evacuation time by 50 percent.

desk verdict A plausible sensitivity study showing stale guidance hurts evacuation, but the headline 50% penalty is not tied to any real-world delay duration. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13508 v1 pith:GIEJ3KZ7 submitted 2025-01-23 cs.NI

Yuting Ma , Erol Gelenbe , Kezhong Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.NI
keywords maritimeevacuationInternetofThingsinformationlagprobabilitydelaycruiseshipsimulationadaptivenavigationstrategycommunicationpedestrian
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the time it takes to evacuate a cruise ship depends not only on the layout and passenger behavior, but also on the speed and reliability of the IoT and ICT system that sends navigation instructions. It simulates a real ship, the Yangtze Gold 7, using the deadline-aware Adaptive Navigation Strategy (ANT) routing algorithm, and introduces a per-node probability that the instruction shown to evacuees is one navigation step out of date. The central quantitative result is that when every node delivers one-step-old guidance, the average evacuation time over all starting points rises by about 50 percent relative to the ideal case with no lag. Because the available evacuation time on passenger ships is tight, the paper argues, network congestion inside the ship is a safety issue, not just a performance nuisance.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the pair of parameters 'information lag' (IL) and 'probability of delay' (PoD). IL=1 means a node's displayed directions are computed from evacuee positions one navigation step in the past, an idealization of any communication or computation delay in the guidance loop; PoD is the per-node probability that the node is in that stale state. The rest of the framework—the ANT path planner, the AnyLogic pedestrian simulator, and the Yangtze Gold 7 graph with 346 nodes, 600 passageway segments, and 5 staircases—is the vehicle that turns this parameter into a quantitative reading of evacuation time.

What would settle it

Re-run the same ANT/AnyLogic simulation with the one-step per-node delay replaced by delays drawn from a measured congested shipboard network (or a queueing model with the same mean delay), and compare the full-delay average evacuation time to the PoD=0 baseline; reproducing the 50% penalty is required for the claim, and a materially different ratio would show the one-step model is the source of the number.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a one-step information lag in the delivery of evacuee guidance is enough to measurably worsen evacuation, and that the degradation grows with the probability of delay. In the simulator, each node is marked as having information lag IL=1 with a probability PoD, meaning the directions it displays are computed from evacuee positions one time step earlier; otherwise IL=0, meaning directions are based on current positions. Averaging over 100 independent runs and all 346 nodes, the authors find a quasi-linear increase in mean evacuation time as PoD rises to 0.5, then a more gradual increase, reaching a 50% penalty at PoD=1. Passengers starting in cabins see a stronger effect, passengers in the restaurant a milder one, and the penalty persists whatever the number of evacuees.

Load-bearing premise

The numbers rest on treating every communication delay as exactly one navigation step, independent from node to node, with the same probability everywhere; if real delays are longer, correlated, or sometimes lost messages rather than late ones, the 50% penalty will not transfer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the one-step lag is representative, then evacuation-time computations that assume instant instructions are systematically optimistic, and the 50% penalty is a worst-case bound of that optimism.
  • The result gives network designers a concrete target: cutting the probability of delay has a large effect in the low-to-mid range, so even partial network improvements yield meaningful evacuation-time reductions.
  • Because the penalty is largest for cabin-originating passengers, the communication system should be provisioned to keep the most remote or interior compartments from falling into a stale state.
  • The persistence of the penalty across all passenger counts means congestion in the corridor and congestion in the network both matter, so the two must be co-designed.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the one-step, independent per-node delay model is replaced by correlated congestion—for example, a failed switch that freezes many signs at once—the average penalty could be larger than 50% because stale answers would cluster instead of being isolated.
  • The nearly linear region at low PoD suggests the largest return on investment comes from improving already-fast parts of the network before congestion becomes widespread, a prioritization the paper does not explicitly draw.
  • The same 50% benchmark could be used as a rough planning number for any centrally guided pedestrian evacuation in a building with a comparable guidance loop, though its exact value would need recalibration.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper simulates passenger evacuation on a graph model of the Yangtze Gold 7 cruise ship using the ANT navigation algorithm embedded in AnyLogic. It introduces a per-node 'probability of delay' (PoD) that determines whether each node's guidance is based on current evacuee locations (IL=0) or on locations one simulation step older (IL=1). The central quantitative result, reported in Section III-A, is that the average evacuation time from all 346 nodes increases with PoD, and at PoD=1 the average evacuation time is 50% higher than at PoD=0. The paper also reports separate results for cabin passengers, restaurant passengers, and different total passenger counts, all showing that larger PoD increases evacuation time, and concludes that IoT/ICT delays can significantly hinder ship evacuation.

Significance. If the central quantitative claim is properly anchored, the paper makes a useful contribution: it applies an existing deadline-aware navigation algorithm to a real cruise-ship layout, runs 100 independent simulations per setting, reports standard deviations and confidence intervals, and does not fit any parameters to produce the main result. The direction of the effect—stale guidance increases evacuation time—is intuitive and robust, and the paper is one of the few attempts to quantify IoT/ICT-induced information staleness in maritime evacuation. The main limitation is that the 'one-step' information lag is never mapped to a wall-clock duration, so the headline 50% penalty cannot currently be compared with concrete communication delay budgets or used as a system design target.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section III, Section III-A] The definitions of IL and PoD in Section III do not state the wall-clock duration of the 'one step' that constitutes an information lag. Evacuation times are reported in seconds, but the lag is only defined as 'one step' in the simulation. Thus the headline result in Section III-A that PoD=1 raises average evacuation time by 50% is not anchored to any concrete IoT/ICT delay such as a sensor sampling interval, server computation time, or packet delay. The ratio may change if the step duration is redefined, and no comparison with a communication delay budget is possible. Please define the step duration in seconds, justify it from the system parameters in Section II-B, or report results for a range of step durations.
  2. [Section II-C and Section III] Section II-C states that 'the initial locations of the evacuees are randomized in each round,' whereas Section III says the 100 simulations are 'under the same initial conditions.' These statements are contradictory. If the first is true, the averages and confidence intervals in Figures 2-5 include variability from initial placement; if the second is true, the randomness is only in the PoD realizations. Please clarify which experimental design was used and report the statistics accordingly.
  3. [Section III and Section II-B] The model represents all IoT/ICT imperfections by a single per-node independent Bernoulli event that makes the advice one step stale. It does not include packet loss, correlated congestion, variable delay durations, or partial message content, although Section I mentions 'lost or delayed messages' and Section II-B mentions 'packet losses.' The resulting 50% figure is therefore a property of a stylized staleness model, not a system-level estimate. Please add a sensitivity/robustness discussion (for example, varying the step duration, the delay distribution, and the traversal-speed assumptions) and explicitly state which impairments are outside the model.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] There is a grammatical error: 'This paper presents explores the impact' should be 'This paper explores the impact.'
  2. [Section I] The text contains 'trANTportation' in the paragraph on maritime transportation; this appears to be an unintended typo.
  3. [Section II-A] The simulator is referred to as 'AnLogic' in one place and 'AnyLogic' in others; please make the spelling consistent.
  4. [Section III-A] The paper would benefit from a small table with the numerical values behind the 50% claim, including means and confidence intervals for PoD=0 and PoD=1, since the figure alone makes verification difficult.
  5. [Section III] The description that the curves show 'a quasi-linear increase ... and a more gradual increase' is not supported by any quantitative fit; please provide the slope or another summary statistic if this characterization is meant to be precise.
  6. [Figure 5 caption] The caption ends with 'as compared to the ideal case w P oD= 0'; the word 'with' is missing, and the formatting of P oD should be normalized throughout the paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the 50% evacuation-time penalty is an emergent simulation result, not a fitted or self-referential derivation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim – that IoT/ICT-induced information lag raises average evacuation time, up to 50% at PoD=1 – is obtained from an event-driven simulation on a real cruise-ship layout, with ANT providing routing decisions. No model parameter is fitted to reproduce the headline number; PoD is an input swept from 0 to 1, and the evacuation-time curves are measured outputs with confidence intervals. The definition of IL=1 as advice based on one-step-old evacuee locations does make the delayed case 'stale' by construction, but the qualitative and quantitative effect of that staleness on evacuation time is not derived from the definition; it emerges from the simulation dynamics and could in principle have been small, negligible, or even beneficial in other layouts. The citations to prior work, including the authors' own ANT paper [30], supply the navigation algorithm used as a component; they do not assert or contain the paper's delay-impact conclusion, and none is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as a substitute for the simulations. The missing wall-clock duration of one simulation step is a modeling/anchoring limitation (correctness risk), not circularity, because the penalty ratio is computed within the same step convention. Thus there is no load-bearing self-citation, no fitted input renamed as prediction, and no step where an equation reduces to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a suite of modeling assumptions from the AnyLogic pedestrian model, the ANT algorithm inherited from prior work, and a newly introduced one-step information-lag model. No free parameter is fitted to produce the 50% result; all parameters are externally set or swept. The most fragile assumption is the ad hoc IL/PoD delay model, which is not validated against measurements.

free parameters (4)
  • Probability of delay (PoD) = 0 to 1, swept
    Per-node probability of one-step information lag; a simulation variable chosen to model network congestion, not fitted to data.
  • Worst-case and typical traversal speeds = 0.067 m/s and 0.67 m/s
    Chosen in Section II-A to represent worst-case and normal walking speeds; not fitted to measured data.
  • Evacuation deadline TD = 30 minutes
    Derived in Section II-A from IMO/MSC guidelines with TS=60, TA=5, TEL=25; an external standard, not a fitted constant.
  • Ship layout graph = 346 nodes, 600 passageway segments, 5 staircases
    Representation of the Yangtze Gold 7 cruise ship floors; chosen by the authors from the real vessel, not fitted.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption AnyLogic pedestrian library with social force model accurately represents passenger movement in a ship evacuation.
    Invoked in Section II as the basis for simulating evacuee motion; the realism of all results depends on this model.
  • domain assumption ANT algorithm assumes known hazard propagation (velocity and direction) and known typical/worst-case edge delays.
    Stated as a feature of ANT in Section II; the navigation recommendations in the simulation rely on this information being available in principle.
  • ad hoc to paper Per-node information delay is independent and identically distributed with probability PoD of being one step stale.
    Introduced in Section III to model communication congestion; this is a stylized modeling choice without empirical validation from real ship networks.
  • domain assumption IMO/MSC circular MSC.1/Circ.1238 provides correct values for survival time, alarm delay, and embarkation time.
    Used in Section II-A to set TD=30 minutes; treated as an authoritative external standard.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of IoT Performance for Maritime Passenger Evacuation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GIEJ3KZ7

@misc{pith2026250113508,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: IoT Performance for Maritime Passenger Evacuation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GIEJ3KZ7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13508}
}
read the original abstract

The safe and swift evacuation of passengers from Maritime Vessels, requires an effective Internet of Things(IoT) as well as an information and communication technology(ICT) infrastructure. However, during emergencies, delays in IoT and ICT systems that guide evacuees, can impair the evacuation process. This paper presents explores the impact of the key IoT and ICT elements. The methodology builds upon the deadline-aware adaptive navigation strategy (ANT), which offers the path segment that minimizes the evacuation time for each evacuee at each decision instant. The simulations on a real cruise ship configuration, show that delays in the delivery of correct instructions to evacuees can significantly hinder the effectiveness of the evacuation. Our findings stress the need to design robust and computationally fast IoT and ICT systems to support the evacuation of passengers in ships, and underscores the key role played by the IoT in the success of passenger evacuation and safety.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.13508 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic description of the layout for the Yangtze Gold 7 Cruise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The average evacuation time, in seconds, from all [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The average evacuation time in seconds, taken by passengers [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The average evacuation time in seconds, with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Future research on cyber-physical emer- gency management systems,

    E. Gelenbe and F.-J. Wu, “Future research on cyber-physical emer- gency management systems,” Future Internet, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 336– 354, 2013

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    Emergency evacua- tion simulation and management optimization in urban residential communities,

    H. Chu, J. Yu, J. Wen, M. Yi, and Y . Chen, “Emergency evacua- tion simulation and management optimization in urban residential communities,” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 795, 2019. 226 246 266 286 306 326 346 366 386 406 426 446 Number of evacuees 400 425 450 475 500 525 550 575 600Average evacuation time PoD=0.0 PoD=0.2 PoD=0.4 PoD=0.6 PoD=0.8 PoD...

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    Why they escape: Mining prioritized fuzzy decision rule in crowd evacuation,

    L. Luo, B. Zhang, B. Guo, J. Zhong, and W. Cai, “Why they escape: Mining prioritized fuzzy decision rule in crowd evacuation,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 19 456–19 470, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Development in building fire detection and evacuation system-a comprehensive review,

    G. S. Birajdar, R. Singh, A. Gehlot, and A. K. Thakur, “Development in building fire detection and evacuation system-a comprehensive review,”Int. J. Electr . Comput. Eng.(IJECE), vol. 10, pp. 6644–6654, 2020

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Crowd monitoring: State-of-the-art and future directions,

    U. Singh, J.-F. Determe, F. Horlin, and P. De Doncker, “Crowd monitoring: State-of-the-art and future directions,” IETE Technical Review, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 578–594, 2021

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Optimal route selection model for fire evacuations based on hazard prediction data,

    M. Choi and S. Chi, “Optimal route selection model for fire evacuations based on hazard prediction data,” Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory , vol. 94, pp. 321–333, 2019

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    A survey of algorithms and systems for evacuating people in confined spaces,

    H. Bi and E. Gelenbe, “A survey of algorithms and systems for evacuating people in confined spaces,” Electronics, vol. 8, no. 6,

    work page

  8. [8]

    Intelligent evacuation management systems: A review,

    A. M. Ibrahim, I. Venkat, K. Subramanian, A. T. Khader, and P. D. Wilde, “Intelligent evacuation management systems: A review,”ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) , vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1–27, 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Emergency navigation without an infrastructure,

    E. Gelenbe and H. Bi, “Emergency navigation without an infrastructure,” Sensors, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 15 142–15 162, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/14/8/15142

    2014

  2. [10]

    Bim-gis integration and crowd simulation for fire emergency management in a large diffused university,

    S. Meschini, D. Accardo, M. Locatelli, L. Pellegrini, L. C. Tagliabue, G. M. Di Giuda et al. , “Bim-gis integration and crowd simulation for fire emergency management in a large diffused university,” PROCEEDINGS OF THE... ISARC , pp. 357–364, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Evacuation simulation and emergency management optimization in urban residential communi- ties,

    H. Chu, J. Yu, J. Wen, and Y . Huang, “Evacuation simulation and emergency management optimization in urban residential communi- ties,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science , vol. 234, no. 1. IOP Publishing, 2019, p. 012040

    2019

  4. [12]

    Evacuation simulation of an ro-ro passenger ship considering the effects of inclination and crew’s guidance,

    S. Fang, Z. Liu, S. Zhang, X. Wang, Y . Wang, and S. Ni, “Evacuation simulation of an ro-ro passenger ship considering the effects of inclination and crew’s guidance,” Proceedings of the institution of mechanical engineers, part M: journal of engineering for the maritime envir...

    2023

  5. [13]

    A survey of crowd evacuation on passenger ships: Recent advances and future challenges,

    K. Liu, Y . Ma, M. Chen, K. Wang, and K. Zheng, “A survey of crowd evacuation on passenger ships: Recent advances and future challenges,” Ocean Engineering , vol. 263, p. 112403, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    Studies on emergency evacuation management for maritime transportation,

    P. A. Sarvari, E. Cevikcan, A. Ustundag, and M. Celik, “Studies on emergency evacuation management for maritime transportation,” Maritime Policy & Management , vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 622–648, 2018

    2018

  7. [15]

    Data-driven bayesian network for risk analysis of global maritime accidents,

    H. Li, X. Ren, and Z. Yang, “Data-driven bayesian network for risk analysis of global maritime accidents,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety , vol. 230, p. 108938, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Simpli- fied and advanced approaches for evacuation analysis of passenger ships in the early stage of design,

    C. Nasso, S. Bertagna, F. Mauro, A. Marin `o, and V . Bucci, “Simpli- fied and advanced approaches for evacuation analysis of passenger ships in the early stage of design,” Brodogradnja: Teorija i praksa brodogradnje i pomorske tehnike , vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 43–59, 2019

    2019

  9. [17]

    Numerical analysis and staircase layout optimisation for a ro-ro passenger ship during emergency evacuation,

    X. Wang, Z. Liu, S. Loughney, Z. Yang, Y . Wang, and J. Wang, “Numerical analysis and staircase layout optimisation for a ro-ro passenger ship during emergency evacuation,” Reliability Engineer- ing & System Safety , vol. 217, p. 108056, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Determinants, methods, and solutions of evacuation models for passenger ships: A systematic literature review,

    H. Arshad, J. Emblemsv ˚ag, G. Li, and R. Ostnes, “Determinants, methods, and solutions of evacuation models for passenger ships: A systematic literature review,” Ocean Engineering , vol. 263, p. 112371, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Guidelines for evacuation analysis for new and existing passenger ships,

    I. M. Organization, “Guidelines for evacuation analysis for new and existing passenger ships,” MSC. 1/Circ. 1238 , 2016

    2016

  12. [20]

    An integrated method for assessing passenger evacuation performance in ship fires,

    Q. Xie, S. Guo, Y . Zhang, C. Wang, C. Ma, and Q. Li, “An integrated method for assessing passenger evacuation performance in ship fires,” Ocean Engineering , vol. 262, p. 112256, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Simulation of evacuation in an inclined passenger vessel based on an improved social force model,

    S. Fang, Z. Liu, X. Wang, J. Wang, and Z. Yang, “Simulation of evacuation in an inclined passenger vessel based on an improved social force model,” Safety science , vol. 148, p. 105675, 2022

    2022

  14. [22]

    A novel method for the risk assessment of human evacuation from cruise ships in maritime transportation,

    X. Wang, G. Xia, J. Zhao, J. Wang, Z. Yang, S. Loughney, S. Fang, S. Zhang, Y . Xing, and Z. Liu, “A novel method for the risk assessment of human evacuation from cruise ships in maritime transportation,” Reliability Engineering & System Safety , vol. 230, p. 108887, 2023

    2023

  15. [23]

    Emergency evacuation simulation study based on improved yolov5s and anylogic,

    C. Niu, W. Wang, H. Guo, and K. Li, “Emergency evacuation simulation study based on improved yolov5s and anylogic,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 9, p. 5812, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    A modelling approach to human navigation in con- strained spaces,

    A. Desmet, “A modelling approach to human navigation in con- strained spaces,” PhD Dissertation, Dept. of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Imperial College London , 2014

    2014

  17. [25]

    Application of collective move- ment in real life scenarios: Overview of current flocking solutions,

    B. Wiandt, A. Kokuti, and V . Simon, “Application of collective move- ment in real life scenarios: Overview of current flocking solutions,” Scalable Comput. Pract. Exp. , vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 233–248, 2015

    2015

  18. [26]

    On oscillation-free emergency navigation via wireless sensor networks,

    L. Wang, Y . He, W. Liu, N. Jing, J. Wang, and Y . Liu, “On oscillation-free emergency navigation via wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing , vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 2086– 2100, 2014

    2014

  19. [27]

    Emergency response simulation using wireless sensor networks,

    A. Filippoupolitis et al., “Emergency response simulation using wireless sensor networks,” in Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Ambient Media and Systems , ser. Ambi-Sys ’08. Brussels, BEL: ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social- Informatics and Telecom...

    2008

  20. [28]

    Wireless sensor networks for emergency navigation,

    Y .-C. Tseng, M.-S. Pan, and Y .-Y . Tsai, “Wireless sensor networks for emergency navigation,” Computer, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 55–62, 2006

    2006

  21. [29]

    Directional navigation improves opportunistic communication for emergencies,

    A. Kokuti and E. Gelenbe, “Directional navigation improves opportunistic communication for emergencies,” Sensors, vol. 14, no. 8, pp. 15 387–15 399, 2014. [Online]. Available: https: //www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/14/8/15387

    2014

  22. [30]

    Ant: Deadline-aware adaptive emergency navigation strategy for dynamic hazardous ship evacuation with wireless sensor networks,

    Y . Ma, K. Liu, M. Chen, J. Ma, X. Zeng, K. Wang, and C. Liu, “Ant: Deadline-aware adaptive emergency navigation strategy for dynamic hazardous ship evacuation with wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Access , vol. 8, pp. 135 758–135 769, 2020

    2020

  23. [31]

    Rapid routing with guaranteed delay bounds,

    S. Baruah, “Rapid routing with guaranteed delay bounds,” in 2018 IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS) . IEEE, 2018, pp. 13– 22

    2018

  24. [32]

    Wireless energy transfer in ris-aided cell-free massive mimo systems: Opportunities and challenges,

    E. Shi, J. Zhang, S. Chen, J. Zheng, Y . Zhang, D. W. K. Ng, and B. Ai, “Wireless energy transfer in ris-aided cell-free massive mimo systems: Opportunities and challenges,” IEEE Communications Mag- azine, vol. 60, no. 3, pp. 26–32, 2022

    2022

  25. [33]

    Faster activity and data detection in massive random access: A multiarmed bandit approach,

    J. Dong, J. Zhang, Y . Shi, and J. H. Wang, “Faster activity and data detection in massive random access: A multiarmed bandit approach,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 9, no. 15, pp. 13 664–13 678, 2022

    2022

  26. [34]

    Send: A situation- aware emergency navigation algorithm with sensor networks,

    C. Wang, H. Lin, R. Zhang, and H. Jiang, “Send: A situation- aware emergency navigation algorithm with sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing , vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1149–1162, 2016

    2016

  27. [35]

    Emergency evacuation simulation and management optimization in urban residential communities,

    H. Chu, J. Yu, J. Wen, M. Yi, and Y . Chen, “Emergency evacuation simulation and management optimization in urban residential communities,” Sustainability, vol. 11, no. 3, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/795

    2019

  28. [36]

    Emergency guiding and monitoring applications in indoor 3d environments by wireless sensor networks,

    M.-S. Pan, C.-H. Tsai, and Y .-C. Tseng, “Emergency guiding and monitoring applications in indoor 3d environments by wireless sensor networks,” International Journal of Sensor Networks , vol. 1, no. 1-2, pp. 2–10, 2006

    2006

  29. [37]

    Ern: Emergence rescue navigation with wireless sensor networks,

    S. Li, A. Zhan, X. Wu, and G. Chen, “Ern: Emergence rescue navigation with wireless sensor networks,” in2009 15th International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems . IEEE, 2009, pp. 361–368

    2009

  30. [2019]

    Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/8/6/711

    [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/8/6/711

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.