Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development of human-in-the-loop experiment system to extract evacuation behavioral features: A case of evacuees in nuclear emergencies

  • Younghee Park (Graduate School of Artificial Intelligence, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Soohyung Park (Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) ;
  • Jeongsik Kim (Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute) ;
  • Byoung-jik Kim (Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety) ;
  • Namhun Kim (Graduate School of Artificial Intelligence, Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology)
  • Received : 2022.12.12
  • Accepted : 2023.02.24
  • Published : 2023.06.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Evacuation time estimation (ETE) is crucial for the effective implementation of resident protection measures as well as planning, owing to its applicability to nuclear emergencies. However, as confirmed in the Fukushima case, the ETE performed by nuclear operators does not reflect behavioral features, exposing thus, gaps that are likely to appear in real-world situations. Existing research methods including surveys and interviews have limitations in extracting highly feasible behavioral features. To overcome these limitations, we propose a VR-based immersive experiment system. The VR system realistically simulates nuclear emergencies by structuring existing disasters and human decision processes in response to the disasters. Evacuation behavioral features were quantitatively extracted through the proposed experiment system, and this system was systematically verified by statistical analysis and a comparative study of experimental results based on previous research. In addition, as part of future work, an application method that can simulate multi-level evacuation dynamics was proposed. The proposed experiment system is significant in presenting an innovative methodology for quantitatively extracting human behavioral features that have not been comprehensively studied in evacuation. It is expected that more realistic evacuation behavioral features can be collected through additional experiments and studies of various evacuation factors in the future.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Nuclear Safety Research Program through the Korea Foundation of Nuclear Safety (KoFONS) and granted financial resources from the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC), Republic of Korea (No. 2003020-0120-CG100 & No. 2106009). The financial support provided by the Institute of Information & Communications Technology Planning & Evaluation (IITP) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (No.2020-0-01336, Artificial intelligence graduate school support (UNIST)) is also gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Korean Nuclear Safety Commission, Act on Physical Protection and Radiological Emergency, 2022 (Article 20-2 & 17-2), South Korea.
  2. Korean Nuclear Safety Commission, Regulations on Radiation Emergency Measures for Nuclear Operators, 2019 (Article 4-7 & 16), South Korea.
  3. U.S. NRC, Criteria for Development of Evacuation Time Estimate Studies, NUREG/CR-7002, 2021.
  4. J. Lee, J.J. Jeong, W. Shin, E. Song, C. Cho, The estimated evacuation time for the emergency planning zone of the Kori nuclear site, with a focus on the precautionary action zone, J. Radiat. Prot. Res. 41 (2016) 196-205, https://doi.org/10.14407/jrpr.2016.41.3.196.
  5. Japanese Cabinet Office (In Charge of Nuclear Disaster Prevention), Estimation of Evacuation Time on the Accreditation of Nuclear Disaster Basic Consideration Methods and Procedures Guide, 2016.
  6. J. Chen, J. Yu, J. Wen, C. Zhang, Z.E. Yin, J. Wu, S. Yao, Pre-evacuation time estimation based emergency evacuation simulation in urban residential communities, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16 (2019) 4599, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16234599.
  7. The National Diet of Japan, The Official Report of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, 2012.
  8. South Korea, National Radiological Anti-disaster Plan, 2020-2024, p. 2020.
  9. T. Morita, S. Nomura, T. Furutani, C. Leppold, M. Tsubokura, A. Ozaki, S. Ochi, M. Kami, S. Kato, T. Oikawa, Demographic transition and factors associated with remaining in place after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster and related evacuation orders, PLoS One 13 (2018), e0194134.
  10. J. Kim, B.J. Kim, N. Kim, Perception-based analytical technique of evacuation behavior under radiological emergency: an illustration of the Kori area, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 53 (2021) 825-832, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.08.012.
  11. J.E. Kang, M.K. Lindell, C.S. Prater, Hurricane evacuation expectations and actual behavior in hurricane lili, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 37 (4) (Apr. 2007) 887-903, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00191.x.
  12. M. Kinateder, E. Ronchi, D. Gromer, M. Muller, M. Jost, M. Nehfischer, A. Muhlberger, P. Pauli, Social influence on route choice in a virtual reality tunnel fire, Transp. Res. F 26 (2014) 116-125, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.06.003.
  13. A. Shendarkar, K. Vasudevan, S. Lee, Y.J. Son, Crowd simulation for emergency response using BDI agents based on immersive virtual reality, Simul. Modell. Pract. Theor. 16 (2008) 1415-1429, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2008.07.004.
  14. C. Chen, H. Wang, M.K. Lindell, M.C. Jung, M.R.K. Siam, Tsunami preparedness and resilience: evacuation logistics and time estimations, Transp. Res. D 109 (2022), 103324, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103324.
  15. S. Arias, A. Mossberg, D. Nilsson, J. Wahlqvist, A study on evacuation behavior in physical and virtual reality experiments, Fire Technol. 58 (2022) 817-849, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-021-01172-4.
  16. L. Yang, X. Wang, J.J. Zhang, M. Zhou, F.Y. Wang, Pedestrian choice modeling and simulation of staged evacuation strategies in Daya Bay nuclear power plant, IEEE Trans. Comput. Soc. Syst. 7 (2020) 686-695, https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.2020.2979531.
  17. Y. Hwang, G. Heo, Development of a radiological emergency evacuation model using agent-based modeling, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 53 (2021) 2195-2206, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2021.01.007.
  18. Gijang-Gun Busan, Action Manual for On-Site Measures in the Field of Nuclear Power Plant Safety, Radiation Leakage), 2020.
  19. Ulsan. Ulju-Gun, Action Manual for On-Site Measures in the Field of Nuclear Power Plant Safety, Radiation Leakage, 2020.
  20. Ulsan, Action Manual for On-Site Measures in the Field of Safety Shin-Kori/Saeul Nuclear Power Plant, Radiation Leakage, 2020.
  21. Google Earth, Google, Available at: https://earth.google.com.
  22. M.K. Lindell, R.W. Perry, The protective action decision model: theoretical modifications and additional evidence, Risk Anal. 32 (2012) 616-632, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01647.x.
  23. M.K. Lindell, S. Arlikatti, S.-K. Huang, Immediate behavioral response to the June 17, 2013 flash floods in Uttarakhand, North India, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct 34 (Mar. 2019) 129-146, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.11.011.
  24. N.Y. Yun, M. Hamada, Evacuation behavior and fatality rate during the 2011 Tohoku-oki earthquake and tsunami, Earthq. Spectra 31 (2015) 1237-1265, https://doi.org/10.1193/082013EQS234M.
  25. D. Saredakis, A. Szpak, B. Birckhead, H.A.D. Keage, A. Rizzo, T. Loetscher, Factors associated with virtual reality sickness in head-mounted displays: a systematic Review and meta-analysis, Front. Hum. Neurosci. 14 (Mar. 2020), https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00096.
  26. X.B. Do, Fukushima nuclear sisaster displacement: how far people moved and determinants of evacuation destinations, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduc. 33 (2019) 235-252, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.10.009.
  27. M.K. Lindell, P. Murray-Tuite, B. Wolshon, E.J. Baker, Large-Scale Evacuation, Routledge, New York, 2019.
  28. M.K. Lindell, J.H. Sorensen, E.J. Baker, W.P. Lehman, Community response to hurricane threat: estimates of household evacuation preparation time distributions, Transp. Res. D 85 (2020), 102457, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102457.
  29. Z. Fang, W. Song, J. Zhang, H. Wu, Experiment and modeling of exit-selecting behaviors during a building evacuation, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 389 (2010) 815-824, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2009.10.019.
  30. F. Renaud, J. Bogardi, O. Dun, K. Warnder, Control, Adapt or Flee: How to Face Environmental Migration, UNU-EHS, Bonn, 2007.
  31. S. Cutter, K. Barnes, Evacuation behavior and three mile Island, Disasters 6 (1982) 116-124, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7717.1982.tb00765.x.
  32. D.J. Zeigler, S.D. Brunn, J.H. Johnson, Evacuation from a nuclear technological disaster, Geogr. Rev. 71 (1981) 1, https://doi.org/10.2307/214548.
  33. Y. Zhang, Z. Chai, G. Lykotrafitis, Deep reinforcement learning with a particle dynamics environment applied to emergency evacuation of a room with obstacles, Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 571 (2021), 125845, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2021.125845.
  34. H.J. Kim, R. Lee, Examining radiation emergency preparedness among the citizens of Busan, South Korea: based on the IDEA framework, Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 83 (Dec. 2022), 103432, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103432.