Method and device for coordinating driving maneuvers between motor vehicles

Abstract

Method for coordinating driving maneuvers between motor vehicles (10, 20, 30) within a common local environment (1), wherein each of the motor vehicles (10, 20, 30) continuously updates at least one planned driving trajectory (11, 21, 31) for an intended driving maneuver by means of a maneuver planning device (2) of the respective motor vehicle (10, 20, 30) and communicates by means of a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3) in the environment (1), wherein the maneuver planning devices (2) each go through update cycles comprising the following steps: a) retrieving (100) planned driving trajectories of intended driving maneuvers of the other motor vehicles in the surrounding area (1) which were received via the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3); b) comparing the received planned travel trajectories with one's own planned travel trajectory and determining (200) whether there is a conflict between one's own planned travel trajectory and the received planned travel trajectories; c) determining (300), if a conflict was determined during the comparison of travel trajectories between the vehicle's own planned travel trajectory and one of the received planned travel trajectories of another motor vehicle, a prioritized motor vehicle (20; 30) that is prioritized to carry out an intended driving maneuver according to its conflicting planned travel trajectory (21; 31), and a non-priority motor vehicle (10; 20) that is not prioritized to carry out an intended driving maneuver according to its conflicting planned travel trajectory (11; 21); d) determining (400) a number of potential cooperation trajectories by a maneuver planning device (2) of a priority motor vehicle (20; 30) which are free of conflict with the planned travel trajectory of the non-priority motor vehicle (10; 20), wherein the potential cooperation trajectories (22a, 22b, 22c; 32a, 32b, 32c) are evaluated with costs according to a cost function and in comparison to a cost limit value of the priority motor vehicle (20; 30); e) checking (700), if a conflict between a most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) from the number of potential cooperation trajectories and a received planned travel trajectory (31) of a third motor vehicle (30) was determined during a conflict check (600), whether an alternative cooperation trajectory exists among the potential cooperation trajectories which is free of conflict with the planned travel trajectory (31) of a third motor vehicle (30) and whose costs comply with the cost limit of the preferential motor vehicle (20); f) transmitting (810), if an alternative cooperation trajectory (22a) exists, the alternative cooperation trajectory (22a) together with the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) as a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of the priority motor vehicle (20).

Description

Technical FieldThe invention relates to a method and a maneuver-adjusting device for decentrally adjusting driving maneuvers between motor vehicles.Prior ArtWO 2017 / 076 593 A1 discloses a method for decentrally tuning driving maneuvers of at least two motor vehicles. In this method, a planned trajectory and a desired trajectory are transmitted from a first motor vehicle to a second motor vehicle by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication. In the second motor vehicle, a travel trajectory of the second motor vehicle is compared with the desired trajectory of the first motor vehicle. The travel trajectory of the second motor vehicle is adapted to an adapted travel trajectory as long as the desired trajectory of the first motor vehicle collides with the travel trajectory of the second motor vehicle and as long as a total cost function is optimized by the adaptation. The total cost function comprises at least one cost function of the first and of the second motor vehicle.DE 10 2018 109 885 A1 also describes a method for cooperatively tuning driving maneuvers between at least one vehicle and a foreign vehicle, in which cost values of both vehicles are used for ascertaining a cooperation trajectory. The cost values of each vehicle are related to a collision-free reference trajectory that the respective vehicle is allowed to drive while complying with the applicable priority rules.DE 10 2018 217 775 A1 discloses a method for preparing a maneuver planning of at least one vehicle.Furthermore, DE 10 2015 220 481 A1 describes a method for cooperatively tuning driving maneuvers.DE 10 2018 002 675 A1 discloses a method for tuning driving maneuvers between motor vehicles which is based on a mutual exchange of driving trajectories between participating vehicles by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication. A maneuver adjustment is based on an individual cost function and on a cost limit value of a preferred motor vehicle.Brief Description of the InventionAgainst this background, the object of the invention is to provide an alternative efficient cooperative coordination of driving maneuvers between at least two motor vehicles, which is distinguished by a comparatively slender message transmission with a reduced amount of information.Accordingly, a method for tuning driving maneuvers between motor vehicles is proposed according to the main claim, as well as by a maneuver planning device, a computer program, as well as by a computer program product according to the independent claims. Further embodiments are the subject matter of the respective dependent claims.According to a first aspect of the invention, the object is achieved by a method for tuning driving maneuvers between motor vehicles within a common local environment, wherein each of the motor vehicles continuously updates at least one planned driving trajectory for an intended driving maneuver by means of a maneuver planning device of the respective motor vehicle and communicates by means of a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device in the common local environment of the motor vehicles. The maneuver planning device of each motor vehicle runs through update cycles, wherein an update cycle comprises at least the following steps: a) retrieving planned travel trajectories of intended driving maneuvers of the respective other motor vehicles in the environment, which were received via the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device; b) comparing the received planned travel trajectories with a dedicated planned travel trajectory and ascertaining whether a conflict exists between the dedicated planned travel trajectory and the received planned travel trajectories; c) determining, if a conflict has been determined in the comparison of driving trajectories between the own planned driving trajectory and one of the received planned driving trajectories of another motor vehicle, a pre-authorized motor vehicle that is pre-authorized to carry out an intended driving maneuver according to its conflicting planned driving trajectory and a non-pre-authorized motor vehicle that is not pre-authorized to carry out an intended driving maneuver according to its conflicting planned driving trajectory; d) determining, by a maneuver planning device of a pre-authorized motor vehicle, a number of potential cooperation trajectories that are conflict-free with respect to the planned driving trajectory of the non-pre-authorized motor vehicle, wherein the potential cooperation trajectories are evaluated at costs according to a cost function and in comparison to a cost limit value of the pre-authorized motor vehicle; e) checking, if a conflict has been established in the case of a conflict check between a most cost-effective cooperation trajectory from the number of potential cooperation trajectories and a received planned travel trajectory of a third motor vehicle, whether an alternative cooperation trajectory exists among the potential cooperation trajectories, one is conflict-free with the planned travel trajectory of the third motor vehicle and the costs of which meet the cost limit value of the preferred motor vehicle; f) transmitting, if an alternative cooperation trajectory exists, to the alternative cooperation trajectory together with the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory as a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of the preferred motor vehicle (20).The term trajectory is to be understood in the sense of the invention as a mathematical description of a movement in path and time, with which in particular driving maneuvers of motor vehicles can be described. A trajectory projected into the future thus allows a prediction of a local position of a motor vehicle as a function of a future point in time.A planned driving trajectory describes a driving maneuver intended by the respective motor vehicle, with which a closest intermediate target is to be reached as efficiently as possible. However, the planned driving trajectory cannot always be followed, in particular if an intended driving maneuver would result in a collision with other motor vehicles. In the case of an imminent collision between two motor vehicles, one of the planned travel trajectories conflicts with a planned travel trajectory of another motor vehicle. Thus, at least one of the two motor vehicles can resolve the imminent collision and must adapt its planned travel trajectory to a conflict-free trajectory.In order to tune driving maneuvers with which such an imminent collision can be resolved, the maneuver planning devices of the motor vehicles are each connected to a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device with which the continuously updated driving trajectories between the at least two motor vehicles are continuously exchanged. The exchange of planned travel trajectories is preferably carried out cyclically at a specific repetition frequency, i.e. after a defined repetition time (engl. Repetition Time (RT)). An update cycle may be synchronized with the repetition frequency of the transmission. Alternatively or additionally, event-oriented triggering is also possible.One concept behind the first aspect of the invention is that each of the motor vehicles exchanges the planned driving trajectory planned and continuously updated with its maneuver planning device for an intended driving maneuver by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication with the other motor vehicles in a common local environment. As long as the exchanged planned travel trajectories do not conflict with one another, there is no need for action. Each motor vehicle drives its intended driving maneuver according to its planned driving trajectories. The planned travel trajectories are divided into time slots whose time length corresponds to the repetition time. With each continuous update of the travel trajectories, a first time slot is transferred to a travel control and the travel trajectory is projected by a new time slot accordingly into the future. Only two mutually conflicting travel trajectories and an associated imminent collision between two motor vehicles have a need for action. This is to be resolved cooperatively with the method according to the invention. In this respect, a conflict between two planned travel trajectories can be regarded as an implicit cooperation request.The resolution of an imminent collision between two motor vehicles, which is recognized by a conflict between the planned driving trajectories projected into the future, is initially based on the idea that one of the two motor vehicles in each case is pre-empted with respect to the other motor vehicle when carrying out the planned driving maneuvers. The pre-authorised motor vehicle can thus react to the imminent collision by offering a cooperation trajectory, while the non-pre-authorised motor vehicle must avoid the imminent collision with an avoidance trajectory in case of doubt.A maneuver adjustment according to the first aspect of the invention is further based on the idea that a cooperative adjustment involving more than two motor vehicles can always be transferred to a corresponding number of parallel cooperative adjustments of intended driving maneuvers with two motor vehicles each. That is to say, a cooperative maneuver adjustment between, for example, three motor vehicles can be transferred to a first adjustment with a non-authorised motor vehicle and a authorised motor vehicle and to a cascaded second cooperative adjustment in turn with a authorised motor vehicle and a non-authorised motor vehicle. A respective motor vehicle that was preferred during a preceding cooperative maneuver adjustment may be in the role of an unpredicted motor vehicle during a subsequent adjustment in a cascade of maneuver adjustments.A further idea of the first aspect of a maneuver adjustment method according to the invention in the case of an participation of more than two motor vehicles is that a cooperation within the scope of a first adjustment may or may not be dependent on a successful cooperation of a downstream second adjustment. A motor vehicle that is pre-authorized within the scope of a first coordination can therefore behave in a different cooperative manner by offering a collision-free alternative cooperation trajectory or only the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory that is subject to a successful second coordination with a further motor vehicle. Thus, there are different levels of cooperation that can be classified as strictly cooperative, conditionally cooperative, and non-cooperative, respectively.If a preferred motor vehicle of a first coordination could ascertain an alternative cooperation trajectory for an unnecessant cooperation, the right of priority for the originally intended driving maneuver is abandoned by transmitting the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory instead of a updated dedicated planned driving trajectory. The preferred motor vehicle is therefore necessarily cooperative in this case, i.e. it will cooperate at least by means of the conflict-free alternative cooperation trajectory, namely even if the cooperation trajectory most cost-effective for the preferred motor vehicle does not become conflict-free. The maneuver planning device of the non-preferred motor vehicle can establish a self-planned driving trajectory that has become collision-free in an update cycle following the transmission, so that the intended driving maneuver can be implemented.The cost function can be used to estimate the effort for each of the determined potential cooperation trajectories that arises with respect to the planned travel trajectory of the preferred motor vehicle. The cost function can take into account, for example, time, energy requirements and / or further factors. In principle, a cooperation trajectory with the lowest possible costs for a cooperation offer to an unauthorized motor vehicle is always sought.The decision as to whether or not a pre-authorized motor vehicle offers a most cost-effective and / or an additional alternative cooperation trajectory in favor of a conditional or obligatory cooperation with an non-pre-authorized motor vehicle is essentially dependent on the cost limit value of a pre-authorized motor vehicle. The cost function and the cost limit are individual decision criteria of a preferred motor vehicle which do not have to be able to be checked for the other motor vehicle or vehicles.The method according to the invention is characterized, inter alia, by explicit finalization of a maneuver adjustment between a respective non-pre-emptible and a pre-emptible motor vehicle. Cooperation is legally and equitably concluded by the pre-emptible motor vehicle as soon as the pre-emptible motor vehicle cancels its originally confluent planned travel trajectory and no longer transmits it in updated form.With the additional information about the existing alternative cooperation trajectory, it is made clear to the other motor vehicles in the environment that a preferred motor vehicle of a maneuver adjustment will resolve a maneuver conflict specifically with the transmitted alternative cooperation trajectory.According to a development of the method, if an alternative cooperation trajectory does not exist or could not be ascertained, the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory can be transmitted together with a updated dedicated travel trajectory as a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of the pre-authorized motor vehicle.By the paired transmission of a cooperation trajectory together with a prescribed dedicated planned travel trajectory, a non-authorised motor vehicle of a first coordination is signalled that a authorised motor vehicle is waiting for a decision with respect to a downstream second cooperation request and that the first cooperation request can still be successfully decided. The preferred motor vehicle is thus only conditionally cooperative in this case and initially reserves the right to move for the originally intended driving maneuver by transmitting the updated own planned driving trajectory. The information can be taken into account with regard to planning for an avoidance trajectory for the purpose of collision avoidance by the non-preferred first motor vehicle, at least as long as a subsequent further maneuver adjustment has not yet been decided.A second cooperation request may also be dependent on a result of a downstream third cooperation. The present method allows a number of cascaded tuning among two motor vehicles each.According to a development of the method, the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory can be transmitted as an updated planned travel trajectory, provided that or as soon as a conflict freedom, i.e. no conflict, has been established between the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory and the planned travel trajectory of a third motor vehicle during the conflict check.According to a correspondingly underlying traffic situation and the absence of the need for cascaded second maneuver adjustment, the imminent collision with an unauthorized motor vehicle can be finalized directly, i.e. with the completion of a running update cycle, by a cooperative second motor vehicle.According to a development of the method, the own planned travel trajectory of the pre-empted motor vehicle can be updated by updating and transmitted as an updated planned travel trajectory by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device in the environment, provided or as soon as it has been established during a cost check that none of the potential cooperation trajectories complies with the cost limit value of the pre-empted motor vehicle.By transmitting a dedicated planned travel trajectory updated by means of forward driving alone, i.e. without itself making a dedicated cooperation request to a further motor vehicle, the pre-authorized motor vehicle can directly signal that it is not cooperative.For a correct interpretation of a respective cooperation level, which is indirectly signaled by the type and number of updated driving trajectories transmitted by a pre-authorized motor vehicle, the maneuver planning device of an non-pre-authorized motor vehicle only needs to take into account a temporal offset between the mutually isochronous repetition or update cycles of the individual maneuver planning and communication devices of the adjacent motor vehicles in the common local environment. An indirectly signaled cooperation level can be recognized by the maneuver planning device of a non-predictive motor vehicle after a cooperation request by two repetition or update cycles.According to a development of the method, a maneuver planning device of an unauthorized motor vehicle, i.e. a maneuver planning device which has identified itself during a coordination as a maneuver coordination of an unauthorized motor vehicle, can update its own planned travel trajectory by updating and transmit it by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device.Thus, an unauthorized motor vehicle can initially actively maintain its cooperation request in each repetition or update cycle. If the planned driving trajectory updated by updating is conflict-free, for example, due to a specific traffic situation, the intended driving maneuver may still possibly be implemented.According to a development of the preceding aspect, an avoidance trajectory can furthermore be determined and / or updated by a maneuver planning device of the non-authorised motor vehicle, which avoidance trajectory is conflict-free with respect to the received planned travel trajectory of the authorised motor vehicle.This ensures that a maneuver planning device of an unauthorized motor vehicle always complies with a right of preference of another motor vehicle and can take it into account in good time for the comfort of the driver's own.Consequently, according to a development of the preceding aspect, the dedicated planned travel trajectory of the non-preferred motor vehicle can be replaced by the avoidance trajectory and transmitted by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device as an updated planned travel trajectory, provided that a triggering event is ascertained by the maneuver planning device.An unauthorized motor vehicle involved only in a first cooperative maneuver adjustment can thus at any time withdraw a cooperation request as soon as the determined avoidance trajectory has become more cost-effective than the planned travel trajectory, for example. A limit value for a time to collision can be used as a triggering event.According to a development of the method, a tuning counter can be incremented if a conflict between the own planned travel trajectory and one of the received planned travel trajectories of another motor vehicle was established during the comparison of travel trajectories.The tuning counter may serve, for example, as a trigger event for a withdrawal of a cooperation request. Furthermore, the tuning counter could also be used for a watchdog timer ("watchdog timer") with regard to a current maneuver tuning.According to a further aspect of the invention, the object is achieved by a maneuver planning device for a motor vehicle for planning and tuning driving maneuvers with motor vehicles in a common environment, comprising a data interface for a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device and a computing unit and a program code for carrying out the method described above.According to a further aspect of the invention, the object is achieved by a computer program which, when it is executed on a computing unit within a maneuver planning device, instructs the respective computing unit to execute the method.According to a further aspect of the invention, the object is achieved by a computer program product having a program code for carrying out the method, which is stored on a medium readable by a computer.BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING FIGURESFurther features and details are evident from the following description, in which--possibly with reference to the drawing--at least one exemplary embodiment is described in detail. Features described and / or depicted form the subject matter alone or in any meaningful combination, optionally also independently of the claims, and can in particular additionally also be the subject matter of one or more separate application / s. Identical, similar and / or functionally identical parts are provided with the same reference numerals. FIG. 1 shows an initial situation of a traffic situation which is to be resolved by means of cooperative maneuver matching between three motor vehicles. FIG. 2 generally illustrates the freedom space of a cooperative vehicle. FIG. 3 shows the freedom space for a cooperative second motor vehicle according to the specific initial situation. FIG. 4 shows two alternatives for resolving a first conflict between two planned driving maneuvers. FIG. 5 shows a flow chart for cooperative maneuver matching between motor vehicles. FIG. 6 shows the freedom space for a cooperative third motor vehicle according to the specific initial situation. FIG. 7 shows a resolution of the traffic situation involving an unconditionally cooperative second motor vehicle. FIG. 8 shows two alternatives for resolving the traffic situation involving a conditionally cooperative second motor vehicle. FIG. 9 shows a traffic situation on the left in the image after a failed maneuver adjustment between three motor vehicles on the right in the image. FIG. 10 shows a motor vehicle having a maneuver-adjusting device and a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device.DESCRIPTION OF THE EMBODIMENTSFIG. 1 shows a traffic situation, on the basis of which the method according to the invention for cooperatively tuning driving maneuvers is to be explained. A section of a road with three continuous lanes is shown for a direction of travel in a local environment 1 of a driveway with a merging lane. A first motor vehicle 10 drives on the merging lane in order to merge it into the moving traffic on the right lane with the aid of a subsequent driving maneuver. Based on the road profile and on the basis of a current position, speed and direction of movement, a merging maneuver must be planned by means of a maneuver planning device 2 of the first motor vehicle 10. A planned driving trajectory 11 for this driving maneuver intended by the first motor vehicle 10 at the current point in time results from a corresponding planning. This first planned travel trajectory 11 is then communicated in the local environment 1 by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication.A second motor vehicle 20 travels in the right lane of the multi-lane road according to the situation shown. As can be seen on the basis of a second planned travel trajectory 21, which was planned by a maneuver planning device 2 of the second motor vehicle 20 and communicated by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication in the local environment 1, the second motor vehicle 20 intends to follow its lane, i.e. the right-hand travel lane, further. A third motor vehicle 30 is travelling in the middle lane of the three-lane road and is intended to likewise follow its lane further according to a communicated third planned travel trajectory 31.The planned travel trajectory 11 for the intended lane change or merging maneuver of the first motor vehicle 10 and the planned travel trajectory 21 for the intended lane keeping maneuver of the second motor vehicle 20 describe that the first motor vehicle 10 and the second motor vehicle 20 reach the same local position of the road section at the same future point in time and would therefore collide with one another, provided that both driving maneuvers would be carried out as intended. Although the moving traffic on the continuous lanes of a multi-lane road fundamentally has priority over vehicles on a merging lane, it is helpful in many situations to assist a non-priority motor vehicle in merging onto the continuous right lane. With regard to the traffic situation illustrated in FIG. 1, this means that the second motor vehicle 20, which is basically authorized to drive in, could cooperatively adapt its intended driving maneuver 21 in order to assist in the classification of the first motor vehicle 10 from the merging lane into the flowing traffic on the right continuous lane.FIG. 2 illustrates the freedom space that a cooperative vehicle 50 generally has to respond to a need for cooperation or a request for cooperation of another vehicle not shown in FIG. 2. A cooperative vehicle 50 is defined as a pre-authorized vehicle compared to a vehicle in need of cooperation and is allowed to execute its own intended driving maneuver in accordance with the traffic regulation. The right of priority of the pre-emptible vehicle 50 would have to be taken into account accordingly by a vehicle in need of cooperation, which is therefore defined as an non-pre-emptible vehicle. The non-preferred vehicle must always avoid a collision regardless of its intended driving maneuver. In the case of an imminent collision, the intended driving maneuver would have to be adapted accordingly with regard to speed and / or course. The preferred vehicle 50 can adapt its speed and / or change its lane based on an originally intended driving maneuver, which is described by means of a planned driving trajectory 51, in order to offer a cooperation to an non-preferred vehicle. The idea behind a cooperation between two vehicles is that a pre-authorized vehicle 50 can adapt its driving maneuver, which is basically authorized for the front, in favor of an non-pre-authorized vehicle in order to resolve an imminent collision. If the effort for maneuver adaptation is relatively high for the preferred vehicle 50, it will offer a cooperation as the cooperative vehicle 50.As is illustrated in FIG. 2, a preferred vehicle 50 on a multi-lane road can positively react to a cooperation requirement of another vehicle starting from its originally intended driving maneuver, which is described by the planned trajectory 51, with eight possible cooperation trajectories 52. The clearance of a cooperative vehicle includes maneuvers with a) increasing, b) holding, or c) slowing the speed, and possibly combined with lane changes. A non-cooperative vehicle would update its original planned travel trajectory 51 to an updated travel trajectory 51'.It is clear from FIG. 3 that the general freedom space for a cooperative vehicle 50 can be significantly limited on the basis of a specific traffic situation. The second motor vehicle 20 can identify an imminent collision by comparing the received planned travel trajectory 11 of the first motor vehicle 10 with its own planned travel trajectory 21. The second motor vehicle 20 could offer three possible cooperation trajectories 22 a, 22 band 22 cin the role of a cooperative motor vehicle as a result of traffic situation in order to resolve a collision. A first cooperation trajectory 22 adescribes a braking maneuver while maintaining the current lane. A second cooperation trajectory 22 bdescribes a lane change maneuver from the right to the middle lane of the three-lane road without a substantial change in a current speed. However, the second cooperation trajectory 22 bis considered for cooperation with the first motor vehicle 10 only if the third motor vehicle 30 supports the second motor vehicle 20 during cooperation, since the planned travel trajectory 31 and the second cooperation trajectory 22 bshould lead to colliding driving maneuvers between the second motor vehicle 20 and the third motor vehicle 30.A third cooperation trajectory 22 cdescribes a combined braking and lane change maneuver.As will become clear from the description which follows, co-operations in road traffic in which more than two vehicles are involved can always be traced back to a number of parallel co-operations in road traffic with in each case two vehicles, i.e. to a co-operation between in each case one pre-authorised vehicle and one non-pre-authorised vehicle.Each of the planned travel trajectories 11, 21 and 31 must be continuously updated during the time profile in accordance with the steady position changes of the moving motor vehicles and communicated again in the environment 1 accordingly by means of a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3. Valid or updated planned travel trajectories are transmitted and received by the vehicle-to-vehicle communication devices 3 of the motor vehicles 10, 20 or 30 cyclically, i.e. preferably periodically at a defined repetition time. A repetition time may comprise, for example, 100 ms.An update cycle, during which planned travel trajectories are updated by a respective maneuver planning device 2, can be synchronized with the repetition cycle of an associated vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3 and can take place with a period of 100 ms or a recovery frequency of 10 Hz. However, update and repetition cycles do not necessarily have to be synchronous. Both an update and a transmission of planned travel trajectories could alternatively and / or additionally also be triggered on an event basis (event triggered).FIG. 5 shows a flow chart with a sequence of steps for an update cycle, which is traversed by the maneuver planning devices 2 of each motor vehicle for updating the own planned travel trajectory and which enables a cooperative coordination of received, planned travel trajectory of the other motor vehicles. Cooperative maneuver matching can take up more than one update cycle, so that the step sequence shown can be run through several times, if necessary, until a conflict with respect to intended driving maneuvers between two or more motor vehicles is resolved.The mode of operation of a cooperative maneuver adjustment is explained on the basis of the traffic situation shown in FIG. 1 and on the basis of the flow chart shown in FIG. 5.The three motor vehicles 10, 20 and 30 illustrated in FIG. 1 each transmit to one another, by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication, a current planned driving trajectory 11, 21 and 31, with which in each case an intended driving maneuver of the corresponding motor vehicle is described. The planned and communicated travel trajectories of the respective other motor vehicles are captured as a message by a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3 of each motor vehicle. In a first step 100, current received planned travel trajectories are retrieved from a reception buffer of the assigned vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3 by the respective maneuver planning device 2 of the motor vehicles 10, 20 and 30.In a subsequent comparison step 200, the received planned travel trajectories of the respective other motor vehicles are each compared with the own planned travel trajectory, wherein the own planned travel trajectory is in each case checked for a freedom from conflict with the received planned travel trajectories. Freedom from conflict of planned driving trajectories means that the corresponding intended driving maneuvers would not lead to a collision of the associated motor vehicles. According to the traffic situation shown in FIG. 1, third motor vehicle 30 thus receives planned travel trajectories 11 and 21, which are each compared with its own planned travel trajectory 31. In comparison step 200, maneuver planning device 2 of third motor vehicle 30 establishes that own planned travel trajectory 31 is not in conflict with either of the other two planned travel trajectories 11 and 21 received. The maneuver planning device 2 of the third motor vehicle 30 consequently establishes that the third motor vehicle 30 is initially not involved in a cooperative coordination of driving maneuvers with another motor vehicle. Thus, the own scheduled travel trajectory 31 can be updated based on the valid scheduled travel trajectory 31 scheduled in an immediately preceding update cycle by updating in step 250. The updated, planned travel trajectory 31 is finally communicated in step 710 by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication to all other motor vehicles of the environment 1.The first motor vehicle 10 and the second motor vehicle 20 each determine, by means of their maneuver planning devices 2, in step 200, that the own planned travel trajectory 11 or 21 conflicts with the travel trajectory 21 or 11 received from the respective other motor vehicle. Thus, both motor vehicles 10 and 20 specify a need for cooperation.In step 300, maneuver planning devices 2 of first and second motor vehicles 10 and 20 each perform an analysis of the traffic situation, which may be carried out, for example, using map-based and sensor-based environmental analysis, so that in conjunction with the applicable priority rules, it is respectively established which of the two motor vehicles is pre-emptible or non-pre-emptible for carrying out its intended driving maneuver according to the planned driving trajectory. According to the applicable traffic rules, a lane may only be changed if other road users are not hazardous. On the basis of this rule and situation analysis, it is respectively detected in parallel by both maneuver planning devices 2 that first motor vehicle 10 is the non-authorised motor vehicle and that second motor vehicle 20 is the authorised motor vehicle. The first planned travel trajectory 11 which conflicts with the second planned travel trajectory 21 is evaluated by both maneuver planning devices 2 as a cooperation request of the non-authorised first motor vehicle 10 to the authorised second motor vehicle 20.Upon the detection of a cooperation requirement, a cooperative maneuver adjustment between the first and second motor vehicles 10 and 20 begins, which may extend over a plurality of update cycles, i.e. over a plurality of, for example, 100 ms time intervals. In step 300, provision may be made for an cooperation counter to be incremented by a counting step which can furthermore serve for controlling the cooperative maneuver adjustment. A previously initialized cooperation counter is activated in the first update cycle after a cooperation requirement is detected by increasing it from zero to the value one, for example.The non-preferred first motor vehicle 10 can thus update its own, i.e. the first planned travel trajectory 11 by updating it, based on the currently valid planned travel trajectory 11 that was planned in an immediately preceding update cycle in step 350. The first planned travel trajectory 11 updated by updating continues to conflict with the received currently valid second planned travel trajectory 21 of the pre-authorized second motor vehicle 20. The still conflicted, updated first planned travel trajectory 11 can and should also be interpreted as a maintained cooperation request of the first motor vehicle 10.The non-preferred first motor vehicle 10 must always avoid a collision during a matching of its intended driving maneuver with the preferred motor vehicle 20. For this purpose, an avoidance trajectory 12 can be planned by the maneuver planning device 2 of the non-preferred first motor vehicle 10 during step 350. Such an avoidance trajectory 12 for a collision-free driving maneuver can be used if the conflict between the first planned driving trajectory 11 and the second planned driving trajectory 21 is not resolved, or not timely, with a cooperation offer by the pre-authorized second motor vehicle 20.In step 400, maneuver planning device 2 of preferred second motor vehicle 20 ascertains a number of potential cooperation trajectories that are collision-free with respect to planned first travel trajectory 11 of non-preferred motor vehicle 10. As has already been explained in connection with FIG. 3, in the present example, the first potential cooperation trajectory 22 aand alternatively the second and third potential cooperation trajectories 22 band 22 care considered for the preferred first motor vehicle 10 due to traffic situation in order to resolve the detected conflict cooperatively. The potential cooperation trajectories are evaluated with respect to the second planned travel trajectory in each case at costs corresponding to a cost function of the pre-authorized motor vehicle 20. The cost function can be used to estimate the cost of each of the determined potential cooperation trajectories 22 a, 22 band 22 crelative to the planned travel trajectory 21 of the pre-empted motor vehicle 20. The cost function can include, for example, time, energy requirements and / or further factors.In the potential cooperation trajectories 22 a, 22 band 22 cillustrated in FIG. 3, it can be assumed that the effort for a first potential cooperation maneuver according to the first cooperation trajectory 22 ais relatively high, since the pre-empted second motor vehicle 20 would have to invest time and kinetic energy for cooperation with the non-pre-empted first motor vehicle 10 by the braking maneuver. The second potential cooperation trajectory 22 bis less complicated for the preferred motor vehicle 20, since a lane change would only cost a comparatively small restriction on comfort. The third potential cooperation trajectory 22 cis obviously the most expensive alternative, since here the costs for a corresponding braking maneuver add up with a comfort limitation.In connection with step 500, the second potential cooperation trajectory 22 bis identified as the most cost-effective alternative from the number of the three potential cooperation trajectories. The costs for the second potential cooperation trajectories 22 bare compared with a cost limit value of the preferred second motor vehicle 20. If it has been determined in step 500 that the cost limit value is complied with, the second cooperation trajectory 22 bis determined or selected as the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory.If, on the other hand, it has been determined that the cost limit value is not complied with, a cooperation with the non-pre-empted first motor vehicle 10 is not considered for the pre-empted second motor vehicle 20. In this case, in step 720, the second planned travel trajectory 21 is updated by updating and subsequently communicated in the environment 1.If a most cost-effective cooperation trajectory has been ascertained in step 500, a check is subsequently made in step 600 as to whether the selected, in turn most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bis in conflict with one of the received planned travel trajectory of a third motor vehicle of surroundings 1.FIG. 3 illustrates that the two intended driving maneuvers described by the second cooperation trajectory 22 band by the third scheduled driving trajectory 31 could or would lead to a collision between the second and the third motor vehicle 20 and 30. The maneuver planning device 2 of the preferred second motor vehicle 20 consequently establishes a conflict between the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 band the planned travel trajectory 31 of the third motor vehicle 30.As a result of the maneuver conflict determined in step 600, it is checked in step 700 whether an alternative cooperation trajectory exists from the number of potential cooperation trajectories determined in step 400, which is conflict-free with respect to the planned travel trajectory 31 of the third motor vehicle 30 and whose costs meet the cost limit value of the preferred motor vehicle 20.If no alternative cooperation trajectory exists or could be ascertained which cumulatively satisfies both of the conditions mentioned, in step 800 the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 band together with a updated own planned travel trajectory 21 are communicated as a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of a pre-authorized motor vehicle 20 in the common environment 1 by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3.If, on the other hand, an alternative cooperation trajectory has been found that both complies with the cost limit value of the second motor vehicle 20 and is conflict-free with the planned travel trajectory 31 of the third motor vehicle 30, at least the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bis transmitted in step 810 as an updated planned travel trajectory of the second motor vehicle 20 in the common environment 1. According to the present example situation, the second most favorable cooperation trajectory 22 ais identified as an alternative cooperation trajectory of the second motor vehicle 20.During the transmission, in step 810, the ascertained second most favorable cooperation trajectory 22 acan optionally be communicated together with the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bas a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of the preferred motor vehicle 20 in the common environment 1.FIG. 4 shows the two alternatives of an updated representation of the traffic situation known from FIG. 1 at a point in time after the planned travel trajectories of all three motor vehicles 10, 20 and 30 have been updated by means of the maneuver planning devices 2 and communicated again in the common environment 1 by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication devices. During the repetition time lasting 100 ms, the motor vehicles have moved on the multi-lane road in the direction of travel with respect to the local positions shown in FIG. 1. At a travel speed of, for example, around 90 km / h, approximately 2.5 m are covered. Consequently, the temporal horizon of the projection of intended driving maneuvers has been updated by a repetition interval into the future.As is shown on the left in FIG. 4 a, the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bhas been transmitted together with the second most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 aas a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of the pre-authorized motor vehicle 20 in the environment 1.FIG. 4 b illustrates a situation when no suitable alternative communication trajectory could be found. Consequently, according to step 800, the updated planned travel trajectory 21 was transmitted together with the most cost-effective second cooperation trajectory 22 bas a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of the pre-authorized motor vehicle 20 in the environment 1.It can be seen from the two illustrations of FIG. 4 that the second cooperation trajectory 22 bfor the most cost-effective, i.e. the preferred cooperative driving maneuver of the second motor vehicle 20, would not be implementable without an active assistance of the third motor vehicle 30. The second motor vehicle 20 is not preferred with respect to the third motor vehicle 30 in order to carry out a lane change maneuver according to the second cooperation trajectory 22 b. Consequently, a second cooperative maneuver adjustment between the now non-preferred second motor vehicle 20 and the preferred third motor vehicle 30 is required for the lane change.One concept behind the maneuver tuning described in the present case is that a potential cooperation partner, i.e., in the present example, the second motor vehicle 20, may be cooperative differently with respect to a person in need of cooperation, i.e., in the present case, the first motor vehicle 10. Thus, there are different levels of cooperation that can be classified as strictly cooperative, conditionally cooperative, and non-cooperative, respectively.The left illustration a) of FIG. 4 shows an absolutely cooperative second motor vehicle 20 which will enable the first motor vehicle 10 under all circumstances to carry out the intended merging maneuver. In contrast, the right illustration b) of FIG. 4 shows a conditionally cooperative second motor vehicle 20 which offers cooperation only under the condition when the third motor vehicle 30 in the property of a cooperation responder supports the second motor vehicle 20 at the desired lane change according to the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 b.The cooperation level can be individually controlled in each case depending on the cost function in connection with the cost limit value of a potential cooperation partner.The second cooperation trajectory 22 bof the second motor vehicle 20 also represents the cooperation maneuver in the case of an obligatory cooperation according to FIG. 4 a, which is preferred by the second motor vehicle 20 for a cooperative maneuver matching with the first motor vehicle 10. By transmitting the second cooperation trajectory 22 bconflining the third planned travel trajectory 31, an cooperation request is implicitly directed to the third motor vehicle 30.FIG. 6 shows that the third motor vehicle 30, provided it is ready to cooperate with the second motor vehicle 20 as a function of costs, could in principle provide three potential cooperation trajectories 32 a, 32 band 32 c. A lane change from the middle to the left lane without a braking maneuver represents the cooperation maneuver with the lowest effort for the third motor vehicle 30. The corresponding trajectory can be selected as the most cost-effective cooperation trajectories 32 bfor a maneuver cooperation.After the above-described update cycle according to FIG. 5 has been run through by the maneuver planning devices 2 of all three motor vehicles 10, 20 and 30 and has been concluded with a mutual exchange of updated planned travel trajectories, a new update cycle can begin.If the second motor vehicle 20 is necessarily cooperative, as is illustrated in FIG. 4 a, it is determined in step 200 by the maneuver planning device 2 of the first motor vehicle 10 that the own planned travel trajectory 11 is not in conflict with any of the other received travel trajectories. In step 250, the own planned travel trajectory 11 is updated by updating. The cooperation between the first and second motor vehicles 10 and 20 can be considered successful and thus finished. The first motor vehicle 10 is allowed to execute its intended merging maneuver. The current cooperation counter from the above-described update cycle is reset and a possibly reserved avoidance trajectory can be discarded. In step 710, the updated own travel trajectory 11 is transmitted.In the case of a second motor vehicle 20 that is necessarily cooperative with respect to the first motor vehicle 10, only a cooperation between the second motor vehicle 20 and the third motor vehicle 30 has to be adjusted. In step 300 of the sequence for an update cycle shown in FIG. 5, it is established by the two maneuver planning devices 2 of the second and third motor vehicle 20 and 30, respectively, that the second motor vehicle 20 is the non-authorized motor vehicle and that the third motor vehicle 30 is the authorized motor vehicle. In steps 400 to 500, the maneuver planning device of the preferred third motor vehicle 30 determines a most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 32 b, which does not conflict with any further planned travel trajectory within the common environment 1.If the ascertained most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 32 bexceeds an individual cost limit value of the preferred third motor vehicle 30, in step 720, the own planned travel trajectory 31 of the third motor vehicle 30 is updated and communicated as an updated planned travel trajectory 31 in the shared environment 1. The second motor vehicle 20 is therefore not offered any cooperation. The second motor vehicle 20 can maintain its cooperation request for a number of subsequent update cycles, for example, controlled via a cooperation counter.In the case of a second motor vehicle 20 that is not necessarily cooperative with respect to the first motor vehicle 10 and a third motor vehicle 30 that is not cooperative with respect to the second motor vehicle 20, the traffic situation is resolved, as illustrated in FIG. 7 a. If the third motor vehicle 30 is also cooperative with respect to the second motor vehicle 20, i.e. if the costs for the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 32 bcontain the cost limit value of the third motor vehicle 30, it is determined in step 600 by the maneuver planning device 2 of the third motor vehicle 30 that the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 32 bis not in conflict with any received planned travel trajectory of a further motor vehicle. Consequently, in step 820, the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 32 bis transmitted as an updated planned travel trajectory by means of vehicle-to-vehicle communication. The traffic situation is resolved after successful maneuver matching, as shown in FIG. 7 b.If the second motor vehicle 20 is cooperative only to a limited extent, as is illustrated in FIG. 4 b, in step 200, the maneuver planning device 2 of the first motor vehicle 10 continues to establish a conflict between the own and the received planned travel trajectory 11 and 21. In step 300, the cooperation counter is incremented and it is determined that the first motor vehicle 10 is not preferred with respect to the second motor vehicle. Provided that an abort criterion, e.g. a limit value for a time until a collision (engl. Time to collision, TTC), which is not yet fulfilled, the own planned travel trajectory 11 can be updated in step 350 and transmitted as an updated planned travel trajectory 11.The third motor vehicle 30 uses its maneuver planning device 2, as has already been described above, to first establish a conflict between the own planned travel trajectory 31 and the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 btransmitted by the second motor vehicle 20 as a planned travel trajectory and can offer a cooperation trajectory 32 bin a cost-dependent manner in step 820 or update its own planned travel trajectory in step 720 and reject a cooperation. In the second update cycle, the second motor vehicle 20 will substantially update its own planned travel trajectory 21 and its most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 b. In steps 300 and 600 of the second update cycle, it is furthermore established that both the own planned travel trajectory 21 and the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bare each in conflict with a planned travel trajectory of one of the other motor vehicles. Accordingly, in step 800, a newly ascertained, most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bis transmitted together with a updated dedicated planned travel trajectory 21 as a pair of updated planned travel trajectories of a pre-authorized motor vehicle 20.As long as the third motor vehicle 30 is not cooperative and, as shown in FIG. 8 a, an updated own planned travel trajectory 31 communicates in the common environment, the second motor vehicle 20, which is cooperative but pre-authorized in relation to the first motor vehicle, maintains its own planned travel trajectory 21 and updates and transmits it cyclically.Cooperation between the three motor vehicles 10, 20 and 30 can also be ended without success in that the maneuver planning device 2 of the first motor vehicle has to select or select the reserved avoidance trajectory 12 as an updated planned travel trajectory. In a subsequent update cycle, the second motor vehicle 20 would no longer ascertain a conflict between its own planned travel trajectory and a received planned travel trajectory. Conflict-free own planned travel trajectory 21 is updated according to step 250 and communicated as an updated planned travel trajectory in the shared environment in step 710. One or more cooperation counters that are used to control the cooperative maneuver tuning between the first and second motor vehicles 10 and 20 and between the second and third motor vehicles 20 and 30 may be reset in step 350. FIG. 9 ashows the exemplary traffic situation after unsuccessful maneuver matching.If the third motor vehicle 30 is cooperative with respect to the second motor vehicle 20 in that the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 32 bis transmitted as an updated planned travel trajectory by the third motor vehicle 30, the maneuver planning device 2 of the second motor vehicle 20 will determine in step 600 of a subsequent update cycle that the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory 22 bcurrently ascertained in the update cycle is conflict-free. Thus, in step 820, conflict-free cooperation trajectory 22 bmay be transmitted as an updated own planned travel trajectory via associated vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3.In a further subsequent update cycle, the first motor vehicle 10 can establish a conflict-free dedicated planned travel trajectory 11. FIG. 9 bshows the exemplary traffic situation after successful maneuver matching between three motor vehicles.FIG. 10 shows a motor vehicle 1 which comprises a maneuver planning device 2 and an associated vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3. The maneuver planning device 2 can retrieve received messages with current planned travel trajectories from a buffer of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 3 or communicate, i.e. send, own current planned travel trajectories via these. Alternatively, received messages can be actively forwarded to the maneuver planning device 2.Although the subject matter has been illustrated and explained in more detail by way of exemplary embodiments, the invention is not restricted by the disclosed examples and other variations can be derived therefrom by the person skilled in the art. It is therefore clear that a large number of possible variations exist. It is also clear that embodiments mentioned by way of example represent only examples which are not to be understood in any way as limiting, for example, the scope of protection, the possible applications or the configuration of the invention. Rather, the preceding description and the description of the figures enable the person skilled in the art to implement the exemplary embodiments in concrete terms, wherein the person skilled in the art, having knowledge of the disclosed inventive idea, can make various changes, for example with regard to the function or the arrangement of individual elements mentioned in an exemplary embodiment, without departing from the scope of protection defined by the claims and their legal equivalents, such as, for example, further explanations in the description.List of Reference Numerals2 Maneuver planning device 3 Vehicle-to-vehicle communication device 10 First motor vehicle 11 Planned travel trajectory 20 Second motor vehicle 21 Planned travel trajectory 30 Third motor vehicle 31 Planned travel trajectory 100 Retrieving of received planned travel trajectories 200 Comparing planned travel trajectories 250 Updating of the own planned travel trajectory 300 Ascertaining a pre-authorized and an un-pre-authorized motor vehicle 350 Updating of the own planned travel trajectory and holding an avoidance trajectory 400 Ascertaining and evaluating potential cooperation trajectories 500 Ascertaining a cost-effective cooperation trajectory within a cost limit value 600 Conflict checking of the cost-effective cooperation trajectory 700 Ascertaining a conflict-free alternative cooperation trajectory within the cost limit value 710 Transmitting the updated own planned travel trajectory 720 Transmitting the updated own planned travel trajectory 730 transmitting the updated own planned travel trajectory or the reserved avoidance trajectory 800 transmitting the most cost effective cooperation trajectory and an updated own planned travel trajectory 810 transmitting the most cost effective cooperation trajectory and an alternative cooperation trajectory 820 transmitting an updated own planned travel trajectory

Claims

Method for tuning driving maneuvers between motor vehicles (10, 20, 30) within a common local environment (1), wherein each of the motor vehicles (10, 20, 30) continuously updates at least one planned driving trajectory (11, 21, 31) for an intended driving maneuver by means of a maneuver planning device (2) of the respective motor vehicle (10, 20, 30) and communicates by means of a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3) in the environment (1), wherein the maneuver planning devices (2) each pass through update cycles which comprise the following steps: a) retrieving (100) planned driving trajectories of intended driving maneuvers of the respective other motor vehicles in the environment (1) which were received via the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3); b) comparing the received planned driving trajectories with a dedicated planned driving trajectory and ascertaining (200) whether there is a conflict between the dedicated planned driving trajectory and the received planned driving trajectories; c) ascertaining (300), if a conflict has been ascertained in the comparison of driving trajectories between the dedicated planned driving trajectory and one of the received planned driving trajectories of another motor vehicle, a pre-authorized motor vehicle (20; 30) which is pre-authorized for carrying out an intended driving maneuver according to its conflicting planned driving trajectory (21; 31) and a non-pre-authorized motor vehicle (10; 20) which is not pre-authorized for carrying out an intended driving maneuver according to its conflicting planned driving trajectory (11; 21); d) determining (400), by a maneuver planning device (2) of a pre-empted motor vehicle (20; 30), a number of potential cooperation trajectories which are conflict-free with the planned travel trajectory of the non-pre-empted motor vehicle (10; 20), wherein the potential cooperation trajectories (22a, 22b, 22c; 32a, 32b, 32c) are evaluated at a cost corresponding to a cost function and in comparison with a cost limit value of the pre-empted motor vehicle (20; 30); e) checking (700), if a conflict check (600) has determined that a conflict between a most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) from the number of potential cooperation trajectories and a received planned driving trajectory (31) of a third motor vehicle (30) exists, if an alternative cooperation trajectory exists among the potential cooperation trajectories, which is conflict-free with the planned driving trajectory (31) of a third motor vehicle (30) and whose costs meet the cost limit value of the pre-empted motor vehicle (20); f) transmitting (810), if an alternative cooperation trajectory (22a) exists, to the alternative cooperation trajectory (22a) together with the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) as a pair of updated planned driving trajectories of the pre-empted motor vehicle (20).Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein, if an alternative cooperation trajectory (22a) does not exist, the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) is transmitted (800) together with a updated dedicated driving trajectory (21) as a pair of updated planned driving trajectories of the pre-authorized motor vehicle (20).Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) is transmitted (820) as an updated planned travel trajectory if a conflict freedom between the most cost-effective cooperation trajectory (22b) and the planned travel trajectory (31) of a third motor vehicle (30) has been established during the conflict check (600).Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the own planned travel trajectory (21, 31) of the pre-empted motor vehicle (20; 30) is updated by updating and transmitted (720) as an updated planned travel trajectory if it has been determined during a cost check (500) that none of the potential cooperation trajectories (22a, 22b, 22c; 32a, 32b, 32c) complies with the cost limit value of the pre-empted motor vehicle (20; 30).Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein a maneuver planning device (2) of an unauthorized motor vehicle (10; 20) updates (350) its own planned travel trajectory (11; 21) by updating it by updating it and transmits it (730) by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3).Method according to the preceding claim 5, wherein an avoidance trajectory (12) is also determined and / or updated (350) by a maneuver planning device of the non-authorised motor vehicle (10), said avoidance trajectory being conflict-free with respect to the received planned travel trajectory (21) of the authorised motor vehicle (20).Method according to preceding Claim 6, wherein a maneuver planning device of the non-authorised motor vehicle (10) replaces (350) the own planned travel trajectory with the avoidance trajectory (12) and is transmitted (730) by means of the vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3) as an updated planned travel trajectory if a triggering event is detected by the maneuver planning device (2).Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein a tuning counter is incremented if a conflict between the own planned travel trajectory and one of the received planned travel trajectories of another motor vehicle has been established during the comparison (300) of travel trajectories.Maneuver planning device for a motor vehicle (10; 20; 30) for planning and tuning driving maneuvers with further motor vehicles in a common environment (1), comprising a data interface for a vehicle-to-vehicle communication device (3) and a computing unit and a program code for carrying out the method according to one of Claims 1 to 8.Computer program which, when it is executed on a computing unit within a maneuver planning device (2), instructs the respective computing unit to execute a method according to one of Claims 1 to 8.A computer program product comprising program code stored on a computer readable medium for performing the method of any one of claims 1 to 8.

Images