Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Automation and Logistics
Qingdao, China September 2008
Real-Time Traffic Management under Emergency
Evacuation Based on Dynamic Traffic Assignment
Yue-ming Chen
Department of Automation
Tsinghua University
Beijing, 100084, P.R.China
chenym04@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn
Abstract - Effective evacuation traffic management is
crucial to maximize the utilization of transportation
systems and to minimize the fatalities and losses. A new
approach for real-time traffic management under
emergency evacuation is proposed in this paper. Distinct
from the well-studied evacuation planning, real-time
traffic management for evacuation aims at dynamically
controlling traffic flow under evacuation in such a way
that certain system objective like minimization of
evacuation time could be achieved. The proposed
approach is based on dynamic traffic assignment by
considering the traffic network under evacuation as a
dynamic system. First, the dynamic system optimal traffic
assignment model based on the shortest emergency
evacuation time is established. Second, the optimal
solution to the optimal problem is obtained by using
Pontryagin minimum principle. Finally, a numerical
example is given to illustrate that the proposed approach
can be effectively carried out in emergency evacuation.
Index Terms - Traffic management. Emergency
evacuation. Dynamic traffic assignment. Pontryagin
minimum principle.
I. INTRODUCTION
As a rapid increase of population and the number of
vehicles in China in recent years, the impact on the surface
transportation system of traffic accidents becomes more
serious than ever before. Especially, man-made or natural
disasters, either predictable or not, could result in severe life
losses and property damages. Emergency evacuation, a mass
movement of people and their properties from
disaster-impacted areas to safe areas, has been studied and
practiced for decades as one major means of countermeasures
to mitigate these calamitous consequences. Undertaking this
difficult task primarily relies on the efficient utilization of
roadway capacities and Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS) technologies, effective coordination of traffic
management equipment and available emergency aid
resources. Most of the existing emergency evacuation
management researches focus on the planning stage [1,2,3,4],
Moreover, due to the distinct features of different types of
disasters, specific planning models and approaches have been
developed for various evacuation scenarios, including nuclear
plant crisis [5], hurricane [6,7], flooding [8], and fire [9], etc.
Although evacuation planning is important for
emergency evacuation management, it is practically
978-1-4244-2503-7/08/$20.00 © 2008 IEEE
1376
De-yun Xiao
Department of Automation
Tsinghua University
Beijing, 100084, P.R.China
xiaody@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn
impossible to give good preparedness for each disaster
scenario due to the highly dynamic and uncertain features
involved in extreme events. Past experience has shown that
ineffective traffic management during evacuation could result
in severe traffic jams and life losses. Therefore, effective
real-time traffic management for emergency evacuation is
important to maximize the utilization of the transportation
system and minimize fatalities and losses. As a result, there is
an urgent demand for emergency management agencies
(EMAs) to search ways to manage the evacuation traffic
efficiently and effectively in real time. An EMA is often
faceed with control and routing strategies that typically
involve four critical operational decisions [10], including:
(1)decide where to evacuate people (destinations); (2)decide
on the best routes to take (route); (3)determine how to regulate
flow rates on these routes (traffic assignment); and
(4)determine the rate at which evacuees are allowed to enter
the network from different areas of the region (phased
departure schedule). Obviously, these decisions are
interdependent and it is methodologically and computationally
challenging to make such decisions simultaneously and in a
coherent manner.
The major challenge presented in emergency evacuation
management is the optimal utilization of all the routes exiting
the disaster-impacted according to their limitation in number
and capacity. In most cases, it is inconvenient to construct new
routes or increase roadway capacities, so identifying ways to
maximize the utilization of the existing transportation network
becomes more important. For this evacuation application, it is
particularly important to establish an evacuation model which
is based on dynamic network modeling techniques by
considering the traffic network under evacuation as a dynamic
system. This model should also have a simple structure that
can be solved efficiently and quickly so that the optimal
solution can be obtained soon after the disaster happens. The
Dynamic Traffic Assignment (DTA) methodology can be used
to address this problem. Most of the existing analytical
formulations of DTA are extensions of their equivalent static
formulations and seem to have two main disadvantages [11]:
(a)they cannot adequately capture all realities of street
networks due to simplifications; and (b) they tend to be
adaptive for realistic networks. DTA modeling techniques can
be generally classified into simulation based and analytical
approaches. Simulation based DTA refers to mathematical
programming based models in which vehicular traffic
dynamics and the link/path travel time are estimated through
try and error method, whereas analytical DTA models are
often modeled as a mathematical programming or variational
inequality problem in which the link travel times are estimated
through closed-form path performance functions. For detailed
discussion regarding research efforts in DTA, we refer to
reviews by Mahmassani [12], Peeta [13] and Tao [14].
Although DTA models are not originally developed for
evacuation planning or operation purposes, they contain
critical capabilities that bridge the gap in dynamic traffic
representation and time-dependent traffic assignment and flow
controls.
The main contribution of this paper is that it proposes a
system optimal traffic assignment model based on the shortest
emergency evacuation time that responds to disasters rapidly
and effectively, by determining traffic assignment adaptable to
continuously changing road conditions. The evacuation
procedure is adjusted and updated by real-time information
obtained from sensors and other surveillance technologies.
Another contribution is that this proposed modeling procedure
can also be integrated with either simulation-based or
analytical DTA frameworks.
This paper is organized as follows. The next section
presents the dynamic system optimal traffic assignment model.
In section 3, the necessary conditions for an optimal solution
are derived by using the Pontragin minimum principle.
Simulation studies are provided in the next section, followed
by concluding remarks and future study directions.
II. MODEL FORMULATION
The discussions in this section focus on techniques to
establish a system optimal (SO) DTA model. First of all, it is
important to define the network into zones. Typical zoning
schemes are the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) used for
transportation planning purposes, or zip codes. Each TAZ will
be identified as an evacuation zone (EZ), intermediate zone
(IZ), or safe zone (SZ) based on TAZ approach. Defining the
perimeter of a hot zone requires knowledge of the
spatial-temporal progression of the disaster, target evacuation
horizon and possibly the terrain barrier characteristics [15].
Generally there are several ways to define the evacuation zone,
the perimeter of the evacuation zone in our emergency
evacuation management problem is assumed to be given.
Then we discuss the properties of the dynamic system,
i.e., the traffic network and flow under evacuation. With
reference to Fig. 1, the notations used are defined as follows:
A = set of all links;
N = set of all nodes;
T = time period studied, t ∈ [0, T ] ;
1377
Fig. 1 Node-Link relationship
I(j) = set of nodes which are tail nodes of links pointing
to node j;
O(j) = set of nodes which are head nodes of links
outgoing from node j;
x jk (t ) = number of vehicles traveling on link (j, k) at time
t (state variable);
α jk (t ) = splitting rate of flows routing from node j to link
(j, k) (control variable);
d j (t ) = local source of traffic demand, i. e., the number of
vehicles entering the network at node j and at time t;
g jk ( x jk ) = exit flow rate proportion on link (j, k), which is
assumed to be concave, twice differentiable, monotonically
increasing function of x jk ;
u jk = capacity of link (j, k), i. e., the number of cars that
can be served per time unit; u jk is assumed to be a constant;
for more complicated cases such as junctions with traffic
signals, a periodical function may be adopted.
Note that the traffic volume is defined as the number of
vehicles present on the queueing segment of the arc at some
instant in time, and the traffic flow rate is defined as the
number of vehicles passing a fixed point on the arc per unit
time. Also, note that all flow variables are taken to be
continuous throughout the analysis. We assume that if the link
is not empty then the intensity of the outgoing flow can be
closely approximated by a function of the link state x jk (t ) , i.
e., u jk g jk ( x jk ) for link (j, k). For g jk (⋅) describing a real
system, it must be positive and its values must belong to (0, 1)
for x jk ∈ [0, ∞] .
Many types of the exit flow function have been proposed
for the development of dynamic traffic assignment models, but
little attention has been paid to the junction delay. Most of
these proposed exit flow function g jk (⋅) are independent of
the flows of the other links in the network and are presumed
that the flow is uniformly distributed on each link. However, it
is more realistic to set g jk ( x jk ) as a function of vehicle
number of the queue formed at the link end, especially in the
evacuation where the traffic is becoming much more
congested. For simplicity, we assume g jk ( x jk ) to be a
concave, twice differentiable, monotonically increasing
function of the number of vehicles distributed uniformly on
the link. Lasdon and Luo [16] also assumed that the exit
function is concave over its domain 0 ≤ x jk ≤ u jk . These
assumptions are necessary and important for the optimality
condition of the proposed model.
The dynamic evolution of the state of each link can be
described by the following first order linear differential
equation [17]:
ª º
x jk (t ) = −u jk g jk ( x jk ) + α jk (t ) « d j (t ) + ¦ uij gij ( xij ) »
¬ i∈I ( j ) ¼ , (1)
( j , k ) ∈ L, t ∈ [ 0, T ]
 x jk (0) = x (0) following conditions (7)-(9):
jk , for initial values, ( j , k ) ∈ L , (2)
Min H [ x* (t ), α (t ), λ * (t )] = H [ x* (t ), α * (t ), λ * (t )] , (7)
0 ≤ α jk (t ) ≤ 1, ( j , k ) ∈ L, t ∈ [ 0, T ] , (3) α

¦ α jk (t ) = 1, ( j , k ) ∈ L, t ∈ [ 0, T ] . (4) s. t. (3)-(4), ª¬ x* (t ), α * (t ) º¼ , t ∈ [ 0, T ] .
k ∈O ( j )
∂H ª º
The dynamic system optimal traffic assignment model is λ jk (t ) = − = −1 + u jk g ′jk ( x jk ) «λ jk (t ) − ¦ α kl λkl »
then formulated as a continuous-time optimal problem, which ∂x jk ¬ l∈O ( k ) ¼ , (8)
will be referred to as the dynamic system optimal problem J:
T
( j, k ) ∈ L, t ∈ [ 0, T ]
min J= ¦ ³0 x jk (t )dt . (5) λ jk (T ) = 0, ( j , k ) ∈ L . (9)
( j , k )∈L

s. t. (1)-(4)
Problem J is an objective function which aims to
minimize the total system travel time that would be spent by
delivering all the evacuees to safe zones under emergency
evacuation management. From the definitions of the notations,
the constraints and the performance index J is just described, it
shows that the network considered is to be operated in the
following manner: (a) all the traffic demands at modes in EZ
are allowed to enter the network, not to be removed or rejected
and the traffic flows outside EZ are blocked from entering EZ;
(b) a vehicle arrived at each node would make a decision to
select the next link, such decision is given by the optimal
splitting rate; (c) the optimal splitting rate is obtained by
minimizing the performance index J and which implied that
vehicle would obey the signal at each intersection to choose
travel path from current node to the destination; (d) such path
cost is calculated at the time when the decision is made.
The constraints (1)-(4) ensure that the flows at each link
will exit from the link at a later time by its link travel time.
However, the link travel time is not pre-determined and should
be updated in an iterative procedure such as the traffic
monitoring and sensing system called diagonalization
Equation (8) is the costate equation for link (j, k). For the
general optimal problems, the solution procedure is as follows:
1). From (7), to obtain the optimal control variable
α * = U [ x(t ), λ (t ) ] ;
2). Replacing the α in (8) with α * , solving a two-point
boundary-value problem (i.e.,the state and costate equations (1)
and (8) with the conditions (2) and (9) in order to obtain
x* (t ) and λ * (t ) ;
3). The optimal control variable is defined as
α * = U ª¬ x* (t ), λ * (t ) º¼ when the convergence criterion is met.
However, the two-point boundary-value problem here is
very difficult to be solved because of the complexity of (8)
and the necessity of integrating state and costate equations in
such a way that the condition (7) has to be satisfied.
From the structure of the Hamiltonian function (6) and
the minimization problem (7), it is found that the problem can
be reformulated on the node basis. Therefore, (7) can be
re-written as
Min ¦ λ jk (t ) ⋅
α jk
k ∈O ( j )

technique used by Ran [18] et al. Here, the link travel time is ­° ª º ½° , (10)
calculated when determining the shortest instantaneous travel ® −u jk g jk ( x jk ) + α jk (t ) « d j (t ) + ¦ uij gij ( xij ) » ¾
cost path. Therefore, the flow conservation on a link that a °¯ ¬ i∈I ( j ) ¼ °¿
vehicle entering a link at a certain time must exit from the link for each node j ∈ N , and this is equivalent to
at a later time is not required here but this has already been
­° ª º ½°
implied in the proposed model. Min ¦ ®α jk (t )λ jk (t ) « d j (t ) + ¦ uij gij ( xij ) » ¾ . (11)
α jk
k ∈O ( j ) ¯° ¬ i∈I ( j ) ¼ ¿°
III. DERIVATION OF OPTIMALITY CONDITIONS
Since the value of the second bracket of (11) is not
In this section, the optimality conditions for an optimal depending on α jk , (11) may become
solution of the problem J will be derived. The usual procedure
to apply the Pontryagin minimum principle, developed by Min ¦ α jk (t )λ jk (t ) . (12)
α jk
k ∈O ( j )
Budelis and Bryson [19] for the case where the state
differential equations contain a time delay in the control s. t. (3)-(4), j ∈ N , t ∈ [ 0, T ] .
variables, will be followed. To this end, the Hamiltonian
function for the problem J is first constructed as:
Let inf
k ∈O ( j )
{λ } = λˆ , j ∈ N ; from
jk j (3) and (4), then

H [ x(t ), α (t ), λ (t )] = ¦ x jk (t ) + ¦ λ jk (t ) ⋅ ¦ α jk (t )λ jk (t ) = λˆ j , j ∈ N , t ∈ [ 0, T ] . (13)
( j , k )∈L ( j , k )∈L k ∈O ( j )

­ ½ . (6) Thus, the solution of (11) is

−u g
® jk jk jk ( x ) + α ( t )( d (t ) + ¦ ij ij ij ¾
u g ( x ))
¯
jk j
i∈I ( j ) ¿ ­0, if λ jk > λˆ j ;
°°
Where λ jk (t ) is the adjoint variable associated with the α jk (t ) = ®1, if λ jk = λˆ j ; (14)
state differential equation (1) for link (j, k), t ∈ [ 0, T ] . °
°̄undefined, otherwise.
According to the Pontryagin minimum principal, the
optimal solution of problem J must satisfy (1)-(4) and the In other words, when λ jk = λˆ j exists for many links

1378
(more than one) outgoing from node j, the values of their
optimal control variables cannot be determined uniquely by
solving the linear programming problem (12).
The SO model formulation is advantageous in modeling
emergency evacuations because its optimal solution
encompasses all multidimensional decisions needed for
evacuation operation. This LP formulation, however, does not
prevent vehicle holding at nodes, which is cumbersome for
regular traffic operation, but has a particular meaning in the
context of evacuation. Vehicle holding may be interpreted as
the utilization of control measures to regulate flow on
particular roadways and/or intersections by emergency
management officers in order to implement the evacuation
solution. By limiting access at strategic locations, it may be
feasible to move the system’s true performance towards the
solved objective function.
IV. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
After computing the evacuation routes to dispatch the
evacuees to safe zone, the next step should be finding an
approach to control the evacuation signals at the intersections,
for directing the traffic flow in the proper directions, in a safe
manner. We adopt the model proposed by Yang [20] to control
the signal in each intersection.
min z = {d (C , x), E (C , x)} . (15)
s. t.
C qr ( x − yr )2 x2
d (C , x) = + , (16)
2 x 2 (1 − yr ) 2(1 − x)
y r ( x − yr )
E (C , x) = , (17)
2 x 2 ( yr − x 2 )
C ( x − Y ) = Lx, 0.8 ≤ x ≤ 0.9 , (18)
C ≥ Cmin , (19)
where d (C , x) and E (C , x) represent delay function and
parking rate function; qr is flow rate and yr is flow ratio in
phase r; x denoting intersection saturation; C represent cycle
time; Cmin is the minimum cycle time.
The design of this signal model consists of an arrow
pointing in each of the possible outgoing directions. These
arrows can take on any one of the three traditional traffic
colors, namely red, yellow and green, at different times. A red
arrow is equivalent to a traditional “do not enter” sign; and the
incoming traffic should halt in the corresponding direction.
Similarly, a green arrow gives the incoming traffic the right of
way to proceed in that direction. A yellow arrow specifies a
transitional stage and the incoming traffic should slow down
and prepare to stop.
In this section, a numerical example is presented to
TABLE I GEOMETRIC CHARACTERISTICS OF EXAMPLE NETWORK
AB AC
Travel time function 15+x 10+x
No. of lanes 2 2
Speed limit (feet/second) 50 50
Maximun flow(Vph) 5400 4680
Fig. 2 Example network
illustrate a potential application of the modeling techniques
discussed in the preceding sections. The test network is a
seven-node network as illustrated in Fig. 2. The first step of
the modeling process is to define the evacuation zone (EZ),
intermediate zone (IZ) and safe zone (SZ) perimeters. Thus,
node A is defined as the evacuation source node at which the
total number of evacuees is assumed known. Evacuees are
considered safe when they reach node E, F, or G. The network
topology characteristics are summarized inTab.1. All links
have two lanes, with a total maximum flow from 3960 to 5400
vehicle per hour (vph). It should be noted that the number of
evacuees to be evacuated is assumed to be known and we
assume that the total number is 128 here.
The optimal route-flow solution, as listed in Table II,
indicates that after 245 iterations, all 128 evacuation flow
units reach the safe zone with an optimal total system travel
time of 223.797 seconds. The solution shows that six
evacuation routes have been constructed to deliver evacuees to
safe zone. More importantly, the model solution indicates how
much flow should be assigned to each destination.
For evacuation purposes, proactively managing demand
and implementing the corresponding traffic control strategies
is a more meaningful operational concept than passively
predicting and reacting to demand because the performance
degradation of a transportation network nonlinearly increases
with the level of network traffic loading. Undoubtedly,
controlling evacuation demand is a significant practical
challenge; understanding how the extent of noncompliance
affects the model effectiveness also requires further research.
Real-time traffic data information obtained from sensors
and other surveillance technologies are used to adjust and
update the optimal solution. Updated information can always
be incorporated into the next calculation since the
reoptimization of the model is cyclic. Updating the optimal
solution is essential and brings the following two
advantages[21] ; first, it prevents congestion, by avoiding
AD BE BF CE CG DF DG
10+x 5+3x 8+2x 6+3x 8+3x 6+3x 8+3x
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
50 50 50 50 50 50 50
4680 4320 3960 4200 4000 4200 4000
1379

TABLE II OPTIMAL ROUTE-FLOW SOLUTION
ABE ABF ACE ACG ADF
Evacuees in each route 19 27 21 20 21
Total iterations 245
Total evacuation time 223.797
delivering the evacuees into those already crowded links; and
secondly, it decreases congestion by directing traffic on
currently congested routes to disperse on alternative routes.
V CONCLUDING REMARKS AND FUTURE TOPICS
Due to the unexpected and stochastic characters of disasters, it
is absolutely necessary to be able to respond with flexibility
and coordination whenever necessary. In this paper, we
present an approach for real-time traffic management under
emergency evacuation based on dynamic traffic assignment.
Distinct from previous planning models, the proposed
approach aims to operate in real time and dynamic so that
current prevailing traffic states can be utilized to more
effectively guide traffic under evacuation. Simulation studies
showed that the proposed approach is capable of real time
evacuation. Moreover, this method is applicable to further
considering such as reduced roadway capacities due to
earthquake damage, road blocks, and out-of-service roads.
Based on the updated data information obtained from sensors
and other surveillance technologies, evacuating vehicles can
be reassigned to new safe zone in order to continuously
reoptimize the evacuation operation.
This paper assumes the dynamic OD demand matrix is
given and fixed during the entire evacuation process. Due to
highly dynamic feature of evacuation, dynamic OD demands
will change as the evacuation evolves. With the traffic
monitoring and sensing system, prevailing traffic information
is expected to be available during the emergency evacuation
process. Therefore, there is a potential to dynamically update
evacuation OD demands based upon real-time collected traffic
data. Real-time operational issues such as reoptimization
implementation and the update of network initial conditions at
each reoptimization are also currently being studied.
ACKNOWLDGMENT
This research was granted and supported by the National
Key Technologies Research and Development Program
(No.2005BA414B09 and No. 2007BAK12B15) of China.
Meanwhile, we shall also acknowledge the help and
cooperation of Beijing Traffic Management Bureau. The
authors assume the responsibility for the facts presented,
viewpoints expressed, and accuracy of the data in this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] B. Wolshon, E.Urbina, C. Wilmot, M. Levitan, “Review of policies and
practices for Hurricane evacuation. I: Transportation planning,
preparedness, and response”, Natural Hazards Review, vol.6, no.2, pp.
129-142, August 2005.
[2] B. Wolshon, E.U. Hamilton, M. Levitan, C. Wilmot, “Review of policies
and practices for Hurricane evacuation. II: Traffic operations, management,
and control”, Natural Hazards Review, vol. 6, no. 3, pp.143-161, August
2005.
[3] D. Helbin, “Theoretical foundation of macroscopic traffic models”,
Physica A: Statistical and Theoretical Physics, vol. 219, no. 3-4, pp.
ADG 375-390, October 1995.
20 [4] B. Wolshon, “Emergency transportation preparedness, management, and
response in urban planning and development”, Journal of Urban Planning
and Development, vol. 133, no.1, pp. 1-2, March 2007.
[5] A.G. Hobeika, “TEDSS - A software for evacuating people around nuclear
power stations”, Proceedings of the International Conference on
Applications of Advanced Technologies in Transportation Engineering.
United States, pp. 688-695, August 2002.
[6] K. Tanaka, T. Nagatani, H. Hanaura, “Traffic congestion and dispersion in
hurricane evacuation”, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its
Applications,, vol. 376, no. 1-2, pp. 617-627, March 2007.
[7] H. Fu, G. Wilmot, “Sequential logit dynamic travel demand model for
hurricane evacuation”, Transportation Research Record, no. 1882, pp.
19-26, 2004.
[8] F. Li, P. Feng, “Model and application of evacuation system for flood
control”, Journal of Tianjin University Science and Technology, vol. 40,
no. 6, pp. 731-735, June 2007.
[9] C. Lu, W. Weng, R. Yang, S. Shen, H, Yuan, “Fire evacuation model based
on motor schema and cellular automaton”, Journal of Tsinghua University,
vol. 47, no. 12, pp. 2163-2167, December 2007.
[10] Y. Chiu, H. Hong, J. Villalobos, B. Gautam, “Modeling no-notice mass
evacuation using a dynamic traffic flow optimization model”, IIE
Transactions, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 83-94, January 2007.
[11] A. Ziliaskopoulos, “Linear programming model for the single destination
system optimum dynamic traffic assignment problem”, Transportation
Science, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 37-49, February 2000.
[12] H. Mahmassani, “Dynamic network traffic assignment and simulation
methodology in advanced system management applications”, Networks
and Spatial Economics, vol. 1, no. 3-4, pp. 67–292, September 2001.
[13] S. Peeta, A. Ziliaskopoulos, “Foundations of dynamic traffic assignment:
the past, the present and the future”, Networks and Spatial Economics,
vol. 1, no. 3-4, pp. 233–265, September 2001.
[14] R. Tao, V. Sisiopiku, “Comparison of traffic assignment models for ITS
applications”, Proceedings of the Conference on Traffic and
Transportation Studies, China, pp. 154-161, 2000.
[15] J. You, Z. Nedovic-Budic, T. Kim, “GIS-based traffic analysis zone
design: Technique (Part I)”, Transportation Planning and Technology,
vol. 21, no. 1-2, pp. 45-68, 1997.
[16] L. Lasdon, S. Luo, “Computational experiments with a system optimal
dynamic traffic assignment model”, Transportation Research Part C:
Emerging Technologies, vol.2, no. 2, pp. 109-127, June 1994.
[17] W. Lam, H. Huang, “Dynamic user optimal traffic assignment model for
many to one travel demand”, Transportation Research Part B:
Methodological, vol. 29B, no. 4, pp. 243-259, August 1995..
[18] B. Ran, D. Boyce, L. LeBlanc, “A new class of instantaneous dynamic
user-optimal traffic assignment models”, Operations Research, vol. 4, no.
1, pp. 192-202, January 1993.
[19] J. Budelis, A. Bryson, “Some optimal control results for
differential-difference systems”, IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, vol. AC-15, no. 2, pp.237-241, April 1970.
[20] J. Yang, D. Yang., “Optimized signal time model in signaled intersection,
Journal of Tongji University, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 789-794, July 2001.
[21] Y. Chen, D. Xiao, “Evacuation model and algorithms for emergency
management system”, International Conference on Transportation
Engineering 2007, China, pp. 3171-3177, 2007.
1380