Mnmal tme problem for dscrete crowd models wth a localzed ector feld Mchel Duprez Morgan Morancey Francesco Ross arx:1703.080493 [math.ap] 20 Mar 2018 Abstract In ths work, we study the mnmal tme to steer a gen crowd to a desred confguraton. The control s a ector feld, representng a perturbaton of the crowd elocty, localzed on a fxed control set. We characterze the mnmal tme for a dscrete crowd model, both for exact and approxmate controllablty. Ths leads to an algorthm that computes the control and the mnmal tme. We fnally present a numercal smulaton. I. INTRODUCTION In recent years, the study of systems descrbng a crowd of nteractng agents has drawn a great nterest from the control communty. A better understandng of such nteracton phenomena can hae a strong mpact n seeral key applcatons, such as road traffc and egress problems for pedestrans. For few reews about ths topc, see e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Besde the descrpton of nteractons, t s now releant to study problems of control of crowds,.e. of controllng such systems by actng on few agents, or on a small subset of the confguraton space. The nature of the control problem reles on the model used to descrbe the crowd. In ths artcle, we focus on dscrete models, n whch the poston of each agent s clearly dentfed; the crowd dynamcs s descrbed by a large dmensonal ordnary dfferental equaton, n whch couplngs of terms represent nteractons. For control of such models, a large lterature s aalable, see e.g. reews [8], [9], [10], as well as applcatons, both to pedestran crowds [11], [12] and to road traffc [13], [14]. The key aspect of such crowd models, s that agents are consdered dentcal, or ndstngushable. Thus, control problems need to take nto account that each confguraton s ndeed defned modulo a permutaton of agents. Snce n general the number of agents s large, t s then nterestng to fnd methods n whch control goals (controllablty, optmal control) are reached wthout computng all the permutatons. In the present work, we study the followng dscrete model, where the crowd s descrbed by a ector wth nd components (n, d N ) representng the postons of n agents n the space R d. The natural (uncontrolled) ector Ths work has been carred out n the framework of Archmède Labex (ANR-11-LABX-0033) and of the A*MIDEX project (ANR-11-IDEX- 0001-02), funded by the Inestssements d Aenr French Goernment programme managed by the French Natonal Research Agency (ANR). M. Duprez and M. Morancey are wth Ax Marselle Unersté, CNRS, Centrale Marselle, I2M, Marselle, France mduprez@math.cnrs.fr morgan.morancey@un-amu.fr F. Ross s wth Dpartmento d Matematca Tullo Le-Cta, Unerstà degl Stud d Padoa, Va Treste 63, 35121 Padoa, Italy francesco.ross@math.unpd.t feld s denoted by : R d R d, assumed Lpschtz and unformly bounded. We act on the ector feld n a fxed subdoman ω of the space, whch wll be a nonempty open conex subset of R d. The admssble controls are thus functons of the form 1 ω u : R d R + R d. The dynamcs s gen by the followng ordnary dfferental equaton { ẋ (t) = (x (t)) + 1 ω (x (t))u(x (t), t), x (0) = x 0. (1) where X 0 := {x 0 1,..., x 0 n} R d s the ntal confguraton of the crowd. Ths representaton wth confguratons can be appled only f the dfferent agents are consdered dentcal or nterchangeable, as t s often the case for crowd models wth a large number of agents. The functon +1 ω u represents the elocty ector feld actng on the crowd X := {x 1,..., x n }. Thus we can modfy ths ector feld only on a gen nonempty open subset ω of the space R d. Ths knd of control s one of the orgnalty of our research. Such constrant s hghly non-tral, snce the control problem s non-lnear. At the best of our knowledge, mnmal tme problems n ths settng hae not been studed. Notce that (1) represents a specfc crowd model, as the elocty feld s gen, and nteractons between agents are not taken nto account. Neertheless, t s necessary to understand control propertes for such smple equatons as a frst step, before dealng wth ector felds dependng on the crowd tself. Moreoer, one can consder ths problem as the local perturbaton of an nteracton model along a reference trajectory descrbed by. The frst queston about control of (1) s to descrbe controllablty results,..e whch confguratons can be steered from one to another. We soled ths problem n [15], whose man results are recalled n Secton II. When controllablty s ensured, t s then nterestng to study mnmal tme problems. Indeed, from the theoretcal pont of ew, t s the frst problem n whch optmalty condtons can be naturally defned. More related to applcatons descrbed aboe, mnmal tme problems play a crucal role: egress problems can be descrbed n ths settng, whle traffc control s often descrbed n terms of mnmzaton of (maxmal or aerage) total trael tme. For dscrete models, the dynamcs can be wrtten n terms of fnte-dmensonal control systems. For ths reason, mnmal tme problems can sometmes be addressed wth classcal (lnear or non-lnear) control theory, see e.g. [16], [17], [18]. Our man am here s to dere a method that takes nto account the ndstngushablty of agents, wthout passng through the computaton of all possble permutatons.
Classcal methods are then not adapted. For ths reason, our man results presented n Secton II wll explctly dentfy fast algorthms to fnd mnmzng permutatons. Moreoer, these effcent methods wll be also useful for numercal methods, presented n Secton IV. REMARK 1.1: Another releant approach fo crowds modelng s gen by contnuous models. There, the dea s to represent the crowd by the spatal densty of agents; n ths settng, the eoluton of the densty soles a partal dfferental equaton of transport type. Nonlocal terms (such as conolutons) model the nteractons between the agents. For the few aalable results of control of such systems, see e.g. [19], [20], [21], [15], [22]. Ths paper s organsed as follows. In Sec. II, we ge the settng and our man results about the mnmal tme for (exact and approxmate) controllablty for (1). These results are proed n Sec. III. Fnally, n Sec. IV we ntroduce an algorthm to compute the nfmum tme for approxmate control of dscrete models and ge a numercal example. II. MAIN RESULTS To ensure the well-posedness of System (1), we search a control 1 ω u satsfyng the followng condton: CONDITION 1 (Carathéodory condton): Let 1 ω u be such that for all t R, x 1 ω u(x, t) s Lpschtz, for all x R d, t 1 ω u(x, t) s measurable and there exsts M > 0 such that 1 ω u M. In ths settng, System (1) s well defned. Then, the flow can be properly defned. DEFINITION 1: We defne the flow assocated to a ector feld w : R d R + R d satsfyng the Carathéodory condton as the applcaton (x 0, t) Φ w t (x 0 ) such that, for all x 0 R d, t Φ w t (x 0 ) s the unque soluton to { ẋ(t) = w(x(t), t) for a.e. t 0, x(0) = x 0. One of the key propertes of solutons to System (1) s that they cannot separate or merge partcles. Thus, the general nterestng settngs for crowd models s the one of dstnct confguratons as defned below. DEFINITION 2: A confguraton X = {x 1,..., x n } s sad to be dsjont f x x j for all j. Snce we deal wth eloctes + 1 ω u satsfyng the Carathéodory condton, f X 0 s a dsjont confguraton, then the soluton X(t) to System (1) s also a dsjont confguraton at each tme t 0. From now on, we wll assume that the followng condton s satsfed by ntal and fnal confguratons. CONDITION 2 (Geometrc condton): Let X 0, X 1 be two dsjont confguratons n R d satsfyng: () For each {1,..., n}, there exsts t 0 > 0 such that Φ t 0 (x 0 ) ω. () For each {1,..., n}, there exsts t 1 > 0 such that Φ t 1 (x 1 ) ω. The Geometrc Condton 2 means that the trajectory of each partcle crosses the control regon forward n tme and the trajectores of each poston of the target confguraton crosses the control regon backward n tme. It s the mnmal condton that we can expect to steer any ntal condton to any target. Indeed, we proed n [15] that one can approxmately steer an ntal to a fnal confguraton of the System (1) f they satsfy the Geometrc Condton 2. In the sequel, we wll defne the followng functons for all x R d and j {0, 1}: t 0 (x) := nf{t R + : Φ t (x) ω}, t 1 (x) := nf{t R + : Φ t(x) ω}, t 0 (x) := nf{t R + : Φ t (x) ω}, t 1 (x) := nf{t R + : Φ t(x) ω}. It s clear that t always holds t j (x) t j (x). In some stuatons, ths nequalty can be strct. For example, n Fgure 1, t holds t 1 (x 1 1) < t 1 (x 1 1). Moreoer, n ths specfc case these functons can een be dscontnous wth respect to x. x 0 1 Fg. 1. Example of dfference between t 1 (x 1 1 ) and t1 (x 1 1 ). For smplcty, we use the notatons x 1 1 ω x 1 1 t j := t j (x j ) and tj := tj (x j ), (2) for {1,..., n} and j {0, 1}. We then defne { M e (X 0, X 1 ) := max{t 0, t1 : = 1,..., n}, Ma (X 0, X 1 ) := max{t 0, t1 : = 1,..., n}. We now state our frst man result. THEOREM 2.1: Let X 0 := {x 0 1,..., x 0 n} and X 1 := {x 1 1,..., x 1 n} be dsjont confguratons satsfyng the Geometrc Condton 2. Arrange the sequences {t 0 } and {t 1 j } j to be ncreasngly and decreasngly ordered, respectely. Then M e (X 0, X 1 ) := max {1,...,n} t0 + t 1 (3) s the nfmum tme T e (X 0, X 1 ) for exact control of System (1) n the followng sense: () For each T > M e (X 0, X 1 ), System (1) s exactly controllable from X 0 to X 1 at tme T,.e. there exsts a control 1 ω u : R d R + R d satsfyng the Carathéodory condton and steerng X 0 exactly to X 1. () For each T (Me (X 0, X 1 ), M e (X 0, X 1 )], System (1) s not exactly controllable from X 0 to X 1. () There exsts (at most) a fnte number of tmes T [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )] for whch System (1) s exactly controllable from X 0 to X 1. We ge a proof of Theorem 2.1 n Secton III. We now turn to approxmate controllablty. We wll use the followng dstance between confguratons.
DEFINITION 3: Consder X 0 := {x 0 1,..., x 0 n} and X 1 := {x 1 1,..., x 1 n} two confguratons of R d and defne the dstance ( n ) X 0 X 1 1 := nf σ S n n x0 x 1 σ(), =1 where S n s the set of permutatons on {1,..., n}. Ths dstance 1 clearly takes nto account the ndstngushablty of agents, n the sense that ts alue does not depend on the orderng of X 0, X 1. We now state our second man result. THEOREM 2.2: Let X 0 := {x 0 1,..., x 0 n} and X 1 := {x 1 1,..., x 1 n} be dsjont confguratons satsfyng the Geometrc Condton 2. Arrange the sequences {t 0 } and {t 1 j} j to be ncreasngly and decreasngly ordered, respectely. Then M a (X 0, X 1 ) := max {1,...,n} t0 + t 1 s the nfmum tme T a (X 0, X 1 ) for approxmate controllablty of System (1) n the followng sense: () For each T > M a (X 0, X 1 ), System (1) s approxmately controllable from X 0 to X 1 at tme T,.e. for any ε > 0, there exsts a control 1 ω u satsfyng the Carathéodory condton such that the assocated soluton X(t) to System (1) satsfes X(T ) X 1 < ε. () For each T (M a (X 0, X 1 ), M a (X 0, X 1 )], System (1) s not approxmately controllable from X 0 to X 1. () There exsts (at most) a fnte number of tmes T [0, M a (X 0, X 1 )] for whch System (1) s approxmately controllable from X 0 to X 1. We ge a proof of Theorem 2.2 n Secton III. In both theorems, controllablty can occur at small tmes but t s a ery specfc stuaton whch s not entrely due to the control. See Remark 3.1 for examples. REMARK 2.1: It s well know that the notons of approxmate and exact controllablty are equalent for fnte dmensonal lnear systems, when the control acts lnearly, see e.g. [24]. We remark that t s not the case for System (1), whch hghlghts the fact that we are dealng wth a nonlnear control problem. The dfference s ndeed related to the fact that for exact and approxmate controllablty, tangent trajectores ge dfferent behaors. For example, n Fgure 1, f we denote by X 0 := {x 0 1} and X 1 := {x 1 1}, then t holds M a (X 0, X 1 ) < M e (X 0, X 1 ) due to the presence of a tangent trajectory. An approxmate trajectory s represented as dashed lnes n the case T (M a (X 0, X 1 ), M e (X 0, X 1 )) n Fgure 1. III. PROOFS OF MAIN RESULTS In ths secton, we proe Theorem 2.1 and 2.2 A. Mnmal tme for exact controllablty We frst obtan the followng result: PROPOSITION 1: Let X 0 := {x 0 1,..., x 0 n} R d and X 1 := {x 1 1,..., x 1 n} R d be two dsjont confguratons satsfyng the Geometrc Condton 2. Consder the sequences {t 0 } and {t 1 } gen n (2). Then M e (X 0, X 1 ) := mn max {1,...,n} t0 + t 1 σ() (4) σ S n s the nfmum tme T e (X 0, X 1 ) to exactly control System (1) n the sense of Theorem 2.1. Proof: We frst proe the result correspondng to Item () of Theorem 2.1. Let T := M e (X 0, X 1 ) + δ wth δ > 0. For all {1,..., n}, there exst s 0 (t 0, t0 + δ/3) and s 1 (t1, t1 + δ/3) such that y0 := Φ (x 0 s 0 ) ω and y1 := Φ (x 1 s 1 ) ω. Item (), Step 1: The goal s to buld a flow wth no ntersecton of the trajectores x (t), x j (t) wth j. For all, j {1,..., n}, we defne the cost K j (y 0, s 0, y 1 j, s 1 j) := (y 0, s 0 ) (y 1 j, T s 1 j) R d+1 f s 0 < T s 1 j and K j(y 0, s0, y1 j, s1 j ) := otherwse. Consder the mnmzaton problem: 1 nf π B n n n K j (y 0, s 0, yj 1, s 1 j)π j, (5),j=1 where B n s the set of the bstochastc n n matrces,.e. the matrces π := (π j ) 1,j n satsfyng, for all, j {1,..., n}, n =1 π j = 1, n j=1 π j = 1, π j 0. The nfmum n (5) s fnte snce T > M e (X 0, X 1 ). The problem (5) s a lnear mnmzaton problem on the closed conex set B n. Hence, as a consequence of Kren-Mlman s Theorem (see [25]), the functonal (5) admts a mnmum at an extremal pont of B n,.e. a permutaton matrx. Let σ be a permutaton, for whch the assocated matrx mnmzes (5). Consder the straght trajectores y (t) steerng y 0 at tme s0 to yσ() 1 at tme T s1 σ(), that are explctly defned by y (t) := T s1 σ() t T s 1 σ() y s0 0 + t s 0 T s 1 σ() y s0 σ() 1. (6) We now proe by contradcton that these trajectores hae no ntersecton: Assume that there exst and j such that the assocated trajectores y (t) and y j (t) ntersect. If we assocate y 0 and yj 0 to yσ(j) 0 and yσ() 0 respectely,.e. we consder the permutaton σ T,j, where T,j s the transposton between the th and the j th elements, then the assocated cost (5) s strctly smaller than the cost assocated to σ (see Fgure 2). Ths s n contradcton wth the fact that σ mnmzes (5). (y 0, s0 ) (y 0 j, s0 j ) (y 1 σ(j), T s1 σ(j) ) (y 1 σ(), T s1 σ() ) 1 Ths dstance concdes wth the Wassersten dstance for emprcal measures (see [23, p. 5]). Fg. 2. An optmal permutaton.
Item (), Step 2: We now defne a correspondng control sendng x 0 to x 1 σ() for all {1,..., n}. Consder a trajectory z satsfyng: z (t) := Φ t (x 0 ) for all t (0, s0 ), y (t) for all t (s 0, T s1 σ() ), Φ t T (x1 ) for all t (T s1 σ(), T ). The trajectores z hae no ntersecton. Snce ω s conex, then, usng the defnton of the trajectory y (t) n (6), the ponts y (t) belong to ω for all t (s 0, T s1 σ() ). For all {1,..., n}, choose r, R satsfyng 0 < r < R and such that for all t (s 0, T s1 σ() ) t holds B r (z (t)) B R (z (t)) ω and, for all t (0, T ) and, j {1,..., n}, t holds B R (z (t)) B Rj (z j (t)) =. Such rad r, R exst as a consequence of the fact that we deal wth a fnte number of trajectores that do not cross. The correspondng control can be chosen as a C functon satsfyng yσ() 1 y0 T s 1 σ() f t (s0, T s1 σ() ) s0 and x B r (z (t)), u(x, t) := f t (s 0 u(x, t) := 0, T s1 σ() ) and x B R (z (t)), u(x, t) := 0 f t (s 0, T s1 σ() ). Ths control then satsfes the Carathéodory condton and each -th component of the assocated soluton to System (1) s z (t), thus u steers x 0 to x1 σ() n tme T. Item (): Assume that System (1) s exactly controllable at a tme T > Me (X 0, X 1 ), and consder σ the correspondng permutaton defned by x (T ) = x 1 σ(). The dea of the proof s that the trajectory steers x 0 to ω n tme t0, then t moes nsde ω for a small but poste tme, then t steers a pont from ω to x σ() n tme t1 σ(), hence T > t0 + t1 σ(). Fx an ndex {1,..., n}. Frst recall the defnton of t 0, t1 σ() and obsere that t holds both T > t0 and T > t 1 σ(). Then, the trajectory x (t) satsfes 2 x (t) ω for all t (0, t 0 ), as well as x (t) ω for all t (T t 1 σ(), T ). Moreoer, we proe that t exsts τ (0, T ) for whch t holds x (τ ) ω. By contradcton, f such τ does not exst, then the trajectory x (t) neer crosses the control regon, hence t concdes wth Φ t (x 0 ). But n ths case, by defnton of t 0 as the nfmum of tmes such that Φ t (x 0 ) ω and recallng that t 0 < T, there exsts τ (t 0, T ) such that t holds x (τ ) = Φ τ (x 0 ) ω. Contradcton. Also obsere that ω s open, hence there exsts ɛ such that x (τ) ω for all τ (τ ɛ, τ + ɛ). We merge the condtons x (t) ω for all t (0, t 0 ) (T t 1 σ(), T ) wth x (τ) ω for all τ (τ ɛ, τ + ɛ ) wth a gen τ (0, T ). Ths mples that t holds t 0 < τ < T t 1 σ(), hence T > t 0 + t 1 σ(). 2 These estmates hold een f x 0 ω, for whch t holds t0 = 0. Such estmate holds for any {1,..., n}. Thus, usng the defnton of M e (X 0, X 1 ), t holds T > M e (X 0, X 1 ). Item (): By defnton of Me (X 0, X 1 ), there exsts l {0, 1} and m {1,..., n} such that Me (X 0, X 1 ) = t l m. We only study the case l = 0, snce the case l = 1 can be recoered by reersng tme. By defnton of t 0 m, the trajectory Φ t (x 0 m) satsfes Φ t (x 0 m) ω for all t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )]. Then, for any choce of the control u localzed n ω, t holds Φ +1ωu t (x 0 m) = Φ t (x 0 m),.e. the choce of the control plays no role n the trajectory startng from x 0 m on the tme nteral t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )]. Obsere that t holds (Φ t (x 0 m)) 0 for all t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )], due to the fact that the ector feld s tme-ndependent and the trajectory Φ t (x 0 m) enters ω for some t > Me (X 0, X 1 ). We now proe that the set of tmes t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )] for whch exact controllablty holds s fnte. A necessary condton to hae exact controllablty at tme t s that the equaton Φ t (x 0 m) = x 1 admts a soluton for some tme t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )] and ndex {1,..., n}. Then, we am to proe that the set of tmes-ndexes (t, ) solng such equaton s fnte. By contradcton, assume to hae an nfnte number of solutons (t, ). Snce the set {1,..., n} s fnte, ths mples that there exsts an ndex I and an nfnte number of (dstnct) tmes t k [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )] such that Φ t k (x 0 m) = x 1 I. By compactness of [0, M e (X 0, X 1 )], there exsts a conergng subsequence (that we do not relabel) t k t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )]. Snce s contnuous, we can compute (Φ t (x 0 m)) by usng the defnton and takng the subsequence t k t, that ges (Φ t (x 0 Φ t m)) = lm k (x 0 m) Φ t (x 0 m) k t k t = 0. Ths s n contradcton wth the fact that (Φ t (x 0 m)) 0 for all t [0, Me (X 0, X 1 )]. Formula (4) leads to the proof of Theorem 2.1. Proof of Theorem 2.1. Consder M e (X 0, X 1 ) gen n (4). By relabelng partcles, we assume that the sequence {t 0 } {1,...,n} s ncreasngly ordered. Let σ 0 be a mnmzng permutaton n (4). We buld recursely a sequence of permutatons {σ 1,..., σ n } as follows: Let k 1 be such that t 1 σ s a maxmum of the set 0(k 1) {t1 σ,..., 0(1) t1 σ 0(n) }. We denote by σ 1 := σ 0 T 1,k1, where T,j s the transposton between the -th and the j-th elements. It holds t 0 k 1 + t 1 σ 0(k 1) max{t0 1 + t 1 σ 0(1), t0 1 + t 1 σ 1(1), t0 k 1 + t 1 σ 1(k 1) }. Thus σ 1 mnmzes (4) too, snce t holds max {1,...,n} {t0 + t 1 σ } max 0() {1,...,n} {t0 + t 1 σ }. 1() We then buld terately the permutaton σ k. The sequence {t 1 σ n(1),..., t1 σ n(n) } s then decreasng and σ n s a mnmzng permutaton n (4). Thus M e (X 0, X 1 ) = M e (X 0, X 1 ). Wth Theorem 2.1, we ge an explct and smple expresson of the nfmum tme for exact controllablty of dscrete models. Ths result s also useful for numercal smulatons of Secton IV.
B. Mnmal tme for approxmate controllablty We now proe Theorem 2.2, whch characterzes the nfmum tme for approxmate control of System (1). Proof of Theorem 2.2. We frst proe Item (). As for Theorem 2.1, we frst proe that the mnmal tme s M a (X 0, X 1 ) := mn max {1,...,n} t0 + t 1 σ(). σ S n Indeed, as n the proof of Theorem 2.1, the permutaton method mples M a (X 0, X 1 ) = M a (X 0, X 1 ). Ths pont s left to the reader. Frst assume that T > M a (X 0, X 1 ). Let ε > 0. For each x 1, we proe the exstence of ponts y1 satsfyng y 1 x 1 ε and y := Φ t 1 (y 1 ) ω. (7) For each x 1, obsere that the Geometrc Condton 2 mples that ether x 1 ω or that the trajectory enters ω backward n tme. In the frst case, defne y 1 := x 1. In the second case, remark that (Φ t(x 1 )) s nonzero for a whole nteral t [0, t], wth t > t 1, and Φ (x 1 t 1 ) ω, hence the flow Φ ( ) s a dffeomorphsm n a neghborhood of x 1 t 1. Then, there exsts y 1 Rd such that (7) s satsfed. We denote by Y 1 := {y1, 1..., yn}. 1 For all {1,..., n}, snce y ω, then t 1 (y 1) t1, hence M e (X 0, Y 1 ) M a (X 0, X 1 ) < T. Proposton 1 mples that we can exactly steer X 0 to Y 1 at tme T wth a control u satsfyng the Carathéodory condton. Denote by X(t) the soluton to System (1) for the ntal condton X 0 and the control u. It then holds X 1 X(T ) = X 1 Y 1 n =1 1 n y1 x 1 ε. We now proe Item (). Consder a control tme T > M a (X 0, X 1 ) at whch System (1) s approxmately controllable. We am to proe that t satsfes T > M a (X 0, X 1 ). For each k N, there exsts a control u k satsfyng the Carathéodory condton such that the correspondng soluton X k (t) to System (1) satsfes X 1 X k (T ) 1/k. (8) We denote by Yk 1 := {yk,1 1,..., y1 k,n } the confguraton defned by yk, 1 := X k,(t ), where X k, s the -th component of X k. Snce X 0 s dsjont and u k satsfes the Carathéodory condton, then Yk 1 s dsjont too. We now proe that t holds T > M e (X 0, Y 1 k ). (9) Snce T > Ma (X 0, X 1 ), then (9) s equalent to T > t 1 (y1 k, ) for all {1,..., n}. By contradcton, assume that there exsts j {1,..., n} such that t 1 (yk,j 1 ) T. Assume that t 1 (yk,j 1 ) > T, the case t1 (yk,j 1 ) = T beng smlar snce ω s open. Then for any t [0, T ] t holds Φ t(yk,j 1 ) ω. Thus, the localzed control does not act on the trajectory,.e. for each t [0, T ] t holds Φ t(yk,j 1 ) = Φ+1ωu k t (yk,j 1 ). Snce yk,j 1 = Φ+1ωu k T (x 0 j ) = Φ T (x0 j ), then Φ t (x 0 j ) ω for all t [0, T ]. Ths s a contradcton wth the fact that t 0 j M a (X 0, X 1 ) < T. Thus (9) holds. Snce Y 1 k = X k(t ), then Proposton 1 mples that T > M e (X 0, Y 1 k ). (10) For each control u k, denote by σ k the permutaton for whch t holds yk, 1 = Φ +1ωu k T (x 0 σ k ()). Up to extract a subsequence, for all k large enough, σ k s equal to a permutaton σ. Inequalty (8) mples that for all {1,..., n} t holds y 1 k, x 1 σ(). (11) k Snce t 1 (yk, 1 ) M e (X 0, Yk 1 ) < T, up to a subsequence, for a s 0, t holds t 1 (y 1 k,) k s. (12) Usng (11), (12) and the contnuty of the flow, t holds Φ t 1 (yk, 1 )(y1 k, ) Φ s (x 1 σ() ) 0. k The fact that Φ t 1 (yk, 1 )(y1 k, ) ω for each = 1,..., n leads to Φ s (x 1 σ() ) ω. Thus t1 (x 1 σ() ) lm k t1 (yk, 1 ). Denotng δ := (T M e (X 0, X 1 ))/2, usng (10), we obtan M a (X 0, X 1 ) max {1,...,n} t 0 + t1 σ() max {1,...,n} t 0 + t1 (yk,σ() 1 ) + δ = M e (X 0, Y 1 k ) + δ < T. We fnally proe Item () of Theorem 2.2. Let T (0, M a (X 0, X 1 )) be such that System (1) s approxmately controllable. For any ε > 0, there exsts u ε such that the assocated trajectory to System (1) satsfes X ε (T ) X 1 < ε. (13) There exsts j {1,..., n} such that t holds t 0 (x 0 j ) = Ma (X 0, X 1 ) > T or t 1 (x 1 j ) = M a (X 0, X 1 ) > T. Assume that t 0 (x 0 j ) = M a (X 0, X 1 ) > T, the case t 1 (x 1 j ) = Ma (X 0, X 1 ) beng smlar. Defne x ε,j (t) := Φ +1ωuε t (x 0 j ). Inequalty (13) mples that t exsts k {1,..., n} such that x ε,j (T ) x 1 k ε < ε. (14) As t 0 (x 0 j ) > T, the trajectory Φ t (x 0 j ) does not cross the control set ω for t [0, T ), hence x ε,j (T ) = Φ +1ωuε T (x 0 j) = Φ T (x 0 j) does not depend on ε. Defne R := 1 2 mn p,q x 1 p x 1 q, that s strctly poste snce X 1 s dsjont. For each ɛ < R, estmate (14) ges k ε = k ndependent on ε and x ε,j (T ) = Φ t (x 0 j ) = x1 k. Use now the proof of Item () n Proposton 1 to proe that the equaton Φ t (x 0 j ) = x1 k admts a fnte number of solutons (t, k) wth t [0, t 0 (x 0 j )] and k {1,..., n}. REMARK 3.1: We llustrate Item () wth two examples. Fgure 3 (left). The ector feld s (1, 0), thus uncontrolled trajectores are rght translatons. The tme Me (X 0, X 1 ) at whch we can act on the partcles and the mnmal tme M e (X 0, X 1 ) are respectely equal
to 1 and 2. We obsere that System (1) s nether exactly controllable nor approxmately controllable on the whole nteral [0, M e (X 0, X 1 )). Fgure 3 (rght). The ector feld s ( y, x), thus uncontrolled trajectores are rotatons wth constant angular elocty. The tme M e (X 0, X 1 ) at whch we can act on the partcles and the mnmal tme M e (X 0, X 1 ) are respectely equal to 3π/4 and π. We remark that System (1) s exactly controllable, then approxmately controllable, at tme T = π/2 [0, M e (X 0, X 1 )). 1 x 1 1 x 0 1 x 1 1 ω ω x 0 1 Fg. 3. Examples n the case T (0, M e (X 0, X 1 )). IV. ALGORITHM AND NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS We consder a crowd descrbed by a dscrete confguraton X(t) whose eoluton s gen by System (1). We present the followng algorthm to compute numercally the tme and the control realzng the exact controllablty between two confguratons satsfyng the Geometrc Condton 2. Algorthm 1 Mnmal tme problem for exact controllablty Step 1: Computaton of the mnmal tme (3). Step 2: Computaton of an optmal permutaton to steer X 0 to X 1 mnmzng (5). Step 3: Computaton of the control u and the soluton X to System (1) on (0, T ). The analyss and conergence of ths method for contnuous crowds wll be studed n the forthcomng paper [22]. We now ge a numercal example n dmenson 2, for whch we sole the mnmal tme problem wth Algorthm 1. Consder := (1, 0), the control regon ω represented by the rectangle n Fgure 4 and the ntal and fnal confguratons X 0, X 1 gen n the frst and fourth pctures of Fgure 4. We control the crowd at tme T = T e (X 0, X 1 ) + δ, wth δ = 0.1. REFERENCES [1] R. Axelrod, The Eoluton of Cooperaton: Resed Edton. Basc Books, 2006. [2] N. Bellomo et al., Acte Partcles, Volume 1: Adances n Theory, Models, and Applcatons, ser. Modelng and Smulaton n Scence, Engneerng and Technology. Sprnger Internatonal Publshng, 2017. [3] S. Camazne, Self-organzaton n Bologcal Systems, ser. Prnceton studes n complexty. Prnceton Unersty Press, 2003. [4] E. Crstan et al., Multscale modelng of pedestran dynamcs, 2014. [5] D. Helbng and R. Calek, Quanttate Socodynamcs: Stochastc Methods and Models of Socal Interacton Processes, ser. Theo. and Dec. Lb. B. Sprnger Neth., 2013. [6] M. Jackson, Socal and Economc Networks. Prnc. Un. Press, 2010. [7] R. Sepulchre, Consensus on nonlnear spaces, Ann. re. n contr., ol. 35, no. 1, pp. 56 64, 2011. Fg. 4. Soluton at tme t = 0, t = 2.58, t = 5.18 and t = T = 7.75. [8] F. Bullo et al., Dstrbuted Control of Robotc Networks: A Mathematcal Approach to Moton Coordnaton Algorthms, ser. Prnc. Ser. n Appl. Math. Prnc. Un. Press, 2009. [9] V. Kumar et al., Cooperate Control: Block Island Workshop on Cooperate Control, ser. Lecture Notes n Control and Informaton Scences. Sprnger Berln Hedelberg, 2004. [10] L. Zhyun et al., Leader follower formaton a complex Laplacan, Automatca, ol. 49, no. 6, pp. 1900 1906, 2013. [11] A. Ferscha and K. Za, Lfebelt: Crowd eacuaton based on brotactle gudance, IEEE Peras. Comp., ol. 9, no. 4, pp. 33 42, 2010. [12] P. Luh et al., Modelng and optmzaton of buldng emergency eacuaton consderng blockng effects on crowd moement, IEEE Trans. on Autom. Sc. and Eng., ol. 9, no. 4, pp. 687 700, 2012. [13] C. Canudas de Wt et al., Graph constraned-ctm obserer desgn for the Grenoble south rng, IFAC Proceedngs Volumes, ol. 45, no. 24, pp. 197 202, 2012. [14] A. Hegy et al., Specalst: A dynamc speed lmt control algorthm based on shock wae theory, n Intel. Transp. Syst. IEEE, 2008, pp. 827 832. [15] M. Duprez et al., Approxmate and exact controllablty of the contnuty equaton wth a localzed ector feld, Submtted, 2017. [16] A. A. Agrache and Y. Sachko, Control theory from the geometrc ewpont. Sprnger Scence & Busness Meda, 2013, ol. 87. [17] V. Jurdjec, Geometrc control theory. Cam. un. press, 1997, ol. 52. [18] E. D. Sontag, Mathematcal control theory: determnstc fnte dmensonal systems. Sprnger Scence & Busness Meda, 2013, ol. 6. [19] B. Pccol et al., Control to flockng of the knetc Cucker-Smale model, J. Math. Anal., ol. 47, no. 6, pp. 4685 4719, 2015. [20] M. Capongro et al., Mean-feld sparse Jurdjec-Qunn control, Math. Models Methods Appl. Sc., ol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1223 1253, 2017. [21], Sparse Jurdjec-Qunn stablzaton of dsspate systems, Automatca J. IFAC, ol. 86, pp. 110 120, 2017. [22] M. Duprez et al., Mnmal tme problem for crowd models wth a localzed ector feld, In preparaton, 2018. [23] C. Vllan, Topcs n optmal transportaton, ser. Graduate Studes n Mathematcs. AMS, Prodence, RI, 2003, ol. 58. [24] J.-M. Coron, Control and nonlnearty, ser. Mathematcal Sureys and Monographs. Prodence, RI: AMS, 2007, ol. 136. [25] M. Kren and D. Mlman, On extreme ponts of regular conex sets, Studa Math., ol. 9, pp. 133 138, 1940.