लाइव
Humanity EngineCellular View
BPM
T+00:00
Cellular view

The cellular view of a march

A crowd that already agrees, moving together. Shared purpose raises contact; the column keeps everyone walking.

The conditions of this room

Four numbers decide what a crowd does: how tightly it is packed, how loud it is, how fast alcohol arrives, and how much attention is available for the people beside you. Everything below is either a published figure or derived from one.

2.2 p/m²
Crowd density
Fruin F — crowd force propagates
Fruin (1971), Pedestrian Planning and Design
0.54 m/s
Walking speed
down from 1.34 m/s unimpeded
Weidmann (1993), Transporttechnik der Fussganger, ETH Zurich
92 dB(A)
Sound level
speech survives across a group
Lane & Tranel (1971), J. Speech Hear. Res.; Hall (1966)
1.14 m
Speech range
intimate to personal zone
Hall (1966), The Hidden Dimension
0.1/person/h
Alcohol served
1 mg/100 ml after four hours
Widmark (1932); NIAAA standard drink definition
55%
Attention available
for the people physically beside you
Modelled parameter — see the note on attention below
45%
Just passing through
moving with a destination rather than standing
Modelled parameter
4 people
Conversation ceiling
speech groups fission beyond this
Dunbar, Duncan & Nettle (1995), Human Nature 6(1)

What those conditions do to people

Crowd-counting methodology puts a dense marching crowd at around 2.5 people per square metre; this model uses 2.2. A march is unusual among crowds in that everyone in it has already self-selected for agreement, which is a strong prior for contact between strangers.

Working against that is the column itself. Roughly 45 percent of a march is in transit at any moment, because a march that stops is no longer a march. Attention sits at 0.55 — split between the people alongside and whatever the crowd is moving toward.

The two forces roughly cancel: 9.94 encounters per person per hour, below a carnival and well below a nightclub, but with a large connected component of 330 people. A march builds a smaller number of connections across a wider spread of the crowd — which is close to what a movement is for.

What the model produces

Measured output from a standard run: 1,200 people, 4 hours of venue time, fixed seed, no parameter overrides. Every room on this site is run under identical conditions, so these figures are a like-for-like comparison rather than a set of individually flattering runs.

9.94
Encounters per person per hour
23,857
Encounters in four hours
9,023
Bridges between separate groups
383
Lasting ties left behind
330
Largest connected group
522
Encounters that soured

The crowd is a simulation and is presented as one. What is not invented are its constants: walking speed against density, the proxemic zones, the collapse of speech range with noise, the Widmark blood-alcohol curve and the conversational group limit all come from published work, cited above and listed in full in the engine.

Real places like this

Every gathering below is modelled as this kind of room. Attendance figures are published numbers for the period stated.

Questions

How do you count a protest crowd?

By area and density. Crowd scientists estimate the occupied area and apply a density figure — around 2.5 people per square metre for a dense marching crowd, less for a loose one.

How large was the 2017 Women's March in Washington?

Around 470,000 participants in Washington DC, according to crowd-counting estimates by Pressman and Chenoweth.

Do protests build social networks?

In this model they build a wide but shallow one: fewer encounters than most venues, but a large connected component, because contact spreads across the crowd rather than concentrating in pockets.

How this is modelled

Each person is one cell with a position, a body mass, a Widmark distribution ratio, an openness trait and a reserve of energy. They walk at the speed the local density allows, drink at the rate the room serves, and when two of them stay within speech range long enough, a bond forms. Most bonds are nothing.

What separates an encounter that creates something from one that does not is whether it bridges two groups that were not previously connected. A tie inside an existing group mostly restates what that group already knows; a tie across a gap carries information neither side had. That distinction is Granovetter's, and it is the mechanic the whole model turns on.

One parameter has no citation and should be read as an assumption: attention, the share of a person available to whoever is beside them rather than to a stage, a road or a rite. It is the variable that separates a street crossing from a dancefloor at similar density, and it is the one this model asserts rather than borrows.

Weidmann (1993), Transporttechnik der Fussganger, ETH Zurich
Fruin (1971), Pedestrian Planning and Design
Hall (1966), The Hidden Dimension
Lane & Tranel (1971), J. Speech Hear. Res.; Hall (1966)
Widmark (1932); NIAAA standard drink definition
Sayette et al. (2012), Psychological Science 23(8)
Dunbar, Duncan & Nettle (1995), Human Nature 6(1)
Granovetter (1973), The Strength of Weak Ties, AJS 78(6)

The other rooms