Information processing device and information processing method

Abstract

To determine correctness of a cooperative operation.SOLUTION: An information processing device comprises: a reception section for receiving cooperative operation data including a request source identifier identifying a vehicle or a person of a request source of one cooperative operation and a request destination identifier identifying a vehicle or a person of a request destination of the one cooperative operation; and a determination section for determining correctness of the cooperative operation based on at least one identifier of the request source identifier and the request destination identifier included in at least one piece of the cooperative operation data.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 2

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to an information processing device and an information processing method. [Background technology]

[0002] Patent Document 1 describes a driving control method that realizes safe lane changes by controlling driving after confirming safety through vehicle-to-vehicle communication. In the driving control method described in Patent Document 1, a vehicle exchanges information including identification numbers and location information with surrounding vehicles and stores the information in a table, and when changing lanes, identifies following vehicles from sensor information and the table and requests the identified following vehicles to change lanes.

[0003] Vehicle-to-vehicle communication includes V2V (vehicle-to-vehicle) communication, such as the dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) system using the 5.8 GHz band, the ITS Connect system using the 760 MHz band, and the PC5 communication system of the cellular vehicle-to-everything (C-V2X) method. Furthermore, a system for vehicle-to-vehicle communication using a cellular mobile communication system, such as the fourth-generation mobile communication system (4G) or the fifth-generation mobile communication system (5G), is called V2N2V (vehicle-to-network-to-vehicle). Vehicles exchange location and driving information by periodically reporting their location and driving information to those around them through such vehicle-to-vehicle communication. Non-Patent Document 1 describes a technology for collecting communication logs when vehicles communicate directly with each other. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0004] [Patent Document 1] JP 2019-207700 A [Non-patent literature]

[0005] [Non-Patent Document 1] 3GPP,TS 32.277,V17.4.0,2022-12 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0006] In a cooperative operation between vehicles, such as the driving control method described in Patent Document 1, a requesting vehicle requests a requested vehicle to accept the requesting vehicle's driving, such as changing lanes, and the requested vehicle responds to the request, allowing the requesting vehicle to safely perform the driving. Cooperative operation between vehicles is expected to be used when a requesting vehicle requests a nearby vehicle or an oncoming vehicle to give way to the requested vehicle during a lane change, merging, or right turn. Cooperative operation can be performed not only between vehicles, but also between various other vehicles, such as when a vehicle and a pedestrian, a vehicle and a bicycle, or a pedestrian and a bicycle, yield to each other at an intersection.

[0007] To continuously operate the collaborative operation support service that supports such collaborative operations, it is possible to provide incentives to users who perform collaborative operations using the collaborative operation support service. However, there is a concern that users may engage in fraudulent collaborative operations in order to receive the incentives.

[0008] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above circumstances, and its object is to make it possible to determine the correctness of a cooperative operation. [Means for solving the problem]

[0009] One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device that includes a receiving unit that receives cooperative operation data including a requesting identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that requests a cooperative operation and a requested identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that is requested to perform the cooperative operation, and a determining unit that determines the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on at least one of the requesting identifier and the requested identifier included in at least one of the cooperative operation data. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of collaborative behavior based on the number of collaborative behaviors that occurred within a specified period, for collaborative behavior data that have the same combination of requester identifier and requested recipient identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of collaborative behavior based on the number of collaborative behaviors that occurred in the same time period within a specified period, for collaborative behavior data that have the same combination of requester identifier and requested recipient identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the collaborative operation data further includes location information indicating the location where the collaborative operation is performed, and the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the collaborative operation based on the number of collaborative operations that occurred within a specified distance range within a specified period of time for the collaborative operation data that have the same combination of requester identifier and requested recipient identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of collaborative behavior based on the number of collaborative behaviors that occurred within a specified period, for collaborative behavior data with the same requester identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the collaborative operation data further includes location information indicating the location where the collaborative operation is performed, and the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the collaborative operation based on the number of collaborative operations that occurred within a specified distance range within a specified period of time for the collaborative operation data having the same request source identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the cooperative operation data includes type information indicating the type of cooperative operation and location information indicating the location where the cooperative operation is performed, and the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on the distance between the location where the cooperative operation of the requesting vehicle or person is performed and the location where the cooperative operation of the requested vehicle or person is performed, and a judgment condition for the distance that is preset according to the type of cooperative operation. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, further comprising an acquisition unit that acquires movement history data including the position at the start of movement and the position at the end of movement of a vehicle or person corresponding to the collaborative operation data, and the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the collaborative operation based on at least one of the positions at the start of movement and the position at the end of movement of a requesting vehicle or person identified by a requester identifier included in the collaborative operation data and a requested vehicle or person identified by a requested recipient identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on the distance at the start of movement or the distance at the end of movement between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, further comprising an acquisition unit that acquires movement history data including positions before and after the time of the cooperative operation corresponding to the cooperative operation data, and the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on the positional relationship before and after the time of the cooperative operation between a requesting vehicle or person identified by a requester identifier included in the cooperative operation data and a requested vehicle or person identified by a requested identifier. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the cooperative operation data includes type information indicating the type of cooperative operation, and the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on a judgment condition for the positional relationship that is preset according to the type of cooperative operation. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the judgment unit judges the validity of the cooperative operation based on map information including at least one of lane information on a road, intersection information, and parking lot information, and the positional relationship. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the types of cooperative actions include at least one of lane changes between automobiles, right turns between automobiles, parking between automobiles, pedestrian crossing between an automobile and a pedestrian, and bicycles moving straight between an automobile and a bicycle. One aspect of the present invention is an information processing device as described above, wherein the collaborative operation data includes information on an operation mode indicating that the input of the result of the collaborative operation was performed by manual operation, and the judgment unit judges the legitimacy of the collaborative operation when the operation mode indicates that the input was performed by manual operation.

[0010] One aspect of the present invention is an information processing method executed by an information processing device, which includes a receiving step of receiving cooperative operation data including a requester identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that has requested a cooperative operation and a requested identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that has been requested to perform the cooperative operation, and a determination step of determining the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on at least one of the requester identifier and the requested identifier included in at least one of the cooperative operation data. [Effects of the Invention]

[0011] According to the present invention, it is possible to obtain an effect that the validity of a cooperative operation can be determined. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0012] [Figure 1] 1 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of a collaborative operation support service system according to an embodiment. [Figure 2] FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a collaboration management server (information processing device) according to an embodiment. [Figure 3] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of a movement history server according to an embodiment. [Figure 4] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of an indirect communication server according to an embodiment. [Figure 5] FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of a terminal according to an embodiment. [Figure 6] FIG. 1 is a sequence diagram illustrating an example of the overall procedure of a collaborative operation management method according to an embodiment. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a sequence diagram illustrating an example of a procedure for a cooperative operation according to an embodiment. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of collaborative operation data according to an embodiment. [Figure 9] 1 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a procedure for a collaboration management method according to an embodiment. [Figure 10] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating search conditions for movement history data according to an embodiment. [Figure 11] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of movement history data of a search result according to an embodiment. [Figure 12] FIG. 1 is a diagram for explaining an example 1 of a use case of cooperative operation (lane change between automobiles) according to an embodiment. [Figure 13] FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining a second example of a use case (right turn between two automobiles) of a cooperative operation according to an embodiment. [Figure 14] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a third example of a use case (parking of cars) of a cooperative operation according to an embodiment. [Figure 15] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a fourth example of a use case (pedestrian crossing between a car and a pedestrian) of cooperative behavior according to an embodiment. [Figure 16] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating a fifth example of a use case of cooperative behavior (a bicycle traveling straight between a car and a bicycle) according to an embodiment. [Figure 17] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of the configuration of cooperative action determination result data according to an embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0013] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. 1 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a collaborative operation support service system according to an embodiment. The collaborative operation support service system 1 includes a collaborative operation management server 10 and a movement history server 30. The collaborative operation management server 10 and the movement history server 30 are connected to a communication network NW such as the Internet. The collaborative operation management server 10 and the movement history server 30 communicate with external devices via the communication network NW.

[0014] FIG. 1 shows a vehicle V (Va, Vb) as an example of an object for performing a cooperative action. The vehicle V may be a car or a bicycle. Furthermore, the object for performing a cooperative action is not limited to the vehicle V. The object for performing a cooperative action may also be a person. Therefore, the cooperative action according to this embodiment is possible with combinations such as two cars, a car and a pedestrian, a car and a bicycle, or a pedestrian and a bicycle.

[0015] The terminal Vt (Vt-a, Vt-b) is a terminal mounted on the vehicle V (Va, Vb). The terminal Vt may be a terminal such as a navigation system installed in the vehicle V, or may be a mobile terminal such as a smartphone owned by a passenger of the vehicle V.

[0016] Vehicle Va is the vehicle that requests the cooperative operation (requesting vehicle). Vehicle Vb is the vehicle that is requested to perform the cooperative operation (requested vehicle). Terminal Vt-a is a terminal (requesting terminal) mounted on requesting vehicle Va. Terminal Vt-b is a terminal (requested terminal) mounted on requested vehicle Vb. Hereinafter, when there is no particular distinction between the request source vehicle Va and the request destination vehicle Vb, they will be referred to as vehicle V. Furthermore, when there is no particular distinction between the request source terminal Vt-a and the request destination terminal Vt-b, they will be referred to as terminal Vt. When the subject of the cooperative action is a person, a mobile terminal such as a smartphone owned by the person corresponds to the requesting terminal or the requested terminal.

[0017] The requesting terminal Vt-a and the request receiving terminal Vt-b may communicate directly via inter-vehicle communication 100, or may communicate indirectly using an indirect communication server 50 connected to the communication network NW.

[0018] The collaborative operation management server 10 is a server that executes processes related to the management of collaborative operations, etc. The movement history server 30 is a server that executes processes related to the management of the movement history of the vehicle V, etc.

[0019] 2 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a collaboration management server 10 (information processing device) according to this embodiment. In FIG. 2, the collaboration management server 10 includes a communication unit 11, a main control unit 12, a receiving unit 13, a determination unit 14, an acquisition unit 15, and a collaboration database 16.

[0020] Each function of the collaborative operation management server 10 is realized by the collaborative operation management server 10 including computer hardware such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) and memory, and the CPU executing a computer program stored in the memory. The collaborative operation management server 10 may be configured using a general-purpose computer device or a dedicated hardware device. For example, the collaborative operation management server 10 may be configured using a server computer connected to a communication network such as the Internet. Each function of the collaborative operation management server 10 may be realized by cloud computing. The collaborative operation management server 10 may be realized by a single computer, or may be realized by distributing the functions of the collaborative operation management server 10 across multiple computers. The collaborative operation management server 10 may also be configured to have a website set up using, for example, a WWW system.

[0021] The communication unit 11 communicates with external devices via the communication network NW. The main control unit 12 performs main control of the collaboration management server 10.

[0022] The receiving unit 13 receives the cooperative operation data through communication by the communication unit 11. The cooperative operation data is data including a requester identifier that identifies a requesting vehicle Va of one cooperative operation and a requested vehicle identifier that identifies a requested vehicle Vb of the one cooperative operation. The requester identifier may be the identifier of the requesting vehicle Va or the identifier of the requesting terminal Vt-a. The requested vehicle identifier may be the identifier of the requested vehicle Vb or the identifier of the requested terminal Vt-b.

[0023] The determination unit 14 executes a process of determining the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on at least one of a request source identifier and a request destination identifier included in at least one cooperative operation data.

[0024] The acquisition unit 15 acquires movement history data from the movement history server 30 through communication by the communication unit 11. The cooperative action database 16 stores various data relating to the management of cooperative actions.

[0025] 3 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of the movement history server 30 according to this embodiment. In FIG. 3, the movement history server 30 includes a communication unit 31, a main control unit 32, and a movement history database 33.

[0026] Each function of the movement history server 30 is realized by the movement history server 30 including computer hardware such as a CPU and a memory, and the CPU executing a computer program stored in the memory. The movement history server 30 may be configured using a general-purpose computer device, or may be configured as a dedicated hardware device. For example, the movement history server 30 may be configured using a server computer connected to a communication network such as the Internet. Each function of the movement history server 30 may be realized by cloud computing. The movement history server 30 may be realized by a single computer, or may be realized by distributing the functions of the movement history server 30 across multiple computers.

[0027] The communication unit 31 communicates with external devices via the communication network NW. The main control unit 32 performs main control of the movement history server 30.

[0028] The movement history database 33 stores movement history data received from the terminal Vt through communication by the communication unit 31. The movement history data is data indicating the movement history of the terminal Vt. Therefore, the movement history data is also data indicating the movement history of the vehicle V on which the terminal Vt is mounted.

[0029] 4 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of the indirect communication server 50 according to this embodiment. In FIG. 4, the indirect communication server 50 includes a communication unit 51, a main control unit 52, and a database 53.

[0030] Each function of the indirect communication server 50 is realized by the indirect communication server 50 having computer hardware such as a CPU and memory, and the CPU executing a computer program stored in the memory. The indirect communication server 50 may be configured using a general-purpose computer device, or may be configured as a dedicated hardware device. For example, the indirect communication server 50 may be configured using a server computer connected to a communication network such as the Internet. Each function of the indirect communication server 50 may be realized by cloud computing. The indirect communication server 50 may be realized by a single computer, or may be realized by distributing the functions of the indirect communication server 50 across multiple computers.

[0031] The communication unit 51 communicates with external devices via the communication network NW. The main control unit 52 performs main control of the indirect communication server 50. The main control unit 52 executes processing to realize indirect communication between the terminals Vt. The database 53 stores a communication log of the indirect communication between the terminals Vt.

[0032] 5 is a block diagram showing an example of the configuration of a terminal Vt according to this embodiment. In FIG. 5, the terminal Vt includes a communication unit 71, a GPS (Global Positioning System) 72, a position control unit 73, and a cooperative operation control unit 74.

[0033] Each function of the terminal Vt is realized by the terminal Vt being provided with computer hardware such as a CPU and memory, and the CPU executing a computer program stored in the memory.

[0034] The terminal Vt may be configured using a general-purpose computer device or a dedicated hardware device. For example, a car navigation system may have the functions of the terminal Vt. The terminal Vt may also be configured using a mobile terminal device such as a smartphone or a tablet computer (tablet PC).

[0035] The communication unit 71 has a function of communicating with external devices via the communication network NW and a function of communicating with the terminals Vt of other vehicles V. The communication unit 71 may communicate directly with the terminals Vt of other vehicles V through vehicle-to-vehicle communication 100, or may communicate indirectly with the terminals Vt of other vehicles V using the indirect communication server 50.

[0036] The GPS 72 outputs positioning data including absolute position information and positioning error information, which are the positioning results of the current absolute position (latitude, longitude) of the terminal Vt. This positioning data is also the positioning data of the vehicle V on which the terminal Vt is mounted. The positioning error information is information indicating the positioning error (distance) calculated from the GPS reception strength and the number of satellites. For example, the RMSE (Root Mean Square Error) as the positioning error information indicates that there is a 95% probability that the location is within a circle with a radius indicated by the RMSE value. Note that positioning methods other than GPS may also be applied. As positioning methods other than GPS, for example, the GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) or the VPS (Visual Positioning System) may be used to acquire the absolute position information and positioning error information.

[0037] The position control unit 73 periodically acquires positioning data from the GPS 72 and transmits movement history data composed of the acquired positioning data to the movement history server 30 via communication by the communication unit 71 .

[0038] The cooperative operation control unit 74 controls the cooperative operation of the vehicle V. The cooperative operation control unit 74 manages the procedure and state transition of the cooperative operation, and records a log of the cooperative operation (cooperative operation data).

[0039] The overall procedure of the collaborative operation management method according to this embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 6. Fig. 6 is a sequence diagram showing an example of the overall procedure of the collaborative operation management method according to this embodiment.

[0040] (Steps S1-1, S1-2) The terminal Vt periodically transmits a location information message to the movement history server 30. The location information message is a message including movement history data. The movement history server 30 stores the movement history data received from the terminal Vt in the movement history database 33.

[0041] (Step S2) The requesting vehicle Va and the requested vehicle Vb perform a cooperative operation. The terminal Vt holds cooperative operation data related to the cooperative operation. The cooperative operation data is data including a requesting vehicle identifier that identifies the requesting vehicle Va of a cooperative operation and a requested vehicle identifier that identifies the requested vehicle Vb of the cooperative operation.

[0042] (Steps S3-1 and S3-2) The terminal Vt transmits a collaborative operation data transmission message including collaborative operation data to the collaborative operation management server 10. The timing at which the terminal Vt transmits the collaborative operation data transmission message to the collaborative operation management server 10 may be any timing at which connection to the communication network NW is possible, for example. The collaborative operation management server 10 stores the collaborative operation data received from the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b in the collaborative operation database 16, associating the data with the combination of the requesting terminal identifier and the requested terminal identifier.

[0043] (Step S4) The collaborative operation management server 10 determines the validity of the collaborative operation based on the collaborative operation data associated with the combination of the request source identifier and the request destination identifier.

[0044] (Steps S5-1 and S5-2) The collaboration management server 10 acquires from the movement history server 30 the movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a (terminal 1) and the movement history data of the requested terminal Vt-b (terminal 2).

[0045] (Step S6) The collaborative operation management server 10 determines the validity of the collaborative operation based on the collaborative operation data and movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b.

[0046] Fig. 7 is a sequence diagram showing an example of a procedure for cooperative operation according to this embodiment. The procedure for cooperative operation according to this embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 7. Message transmission and reception in the sequence of Fig. 7 may be performed by either direct communication or indirect communication, and may switch between direct communication and indirect communication midway.

[0047] Steps S11 to S14 are a known cooperation procedure described in, for example, "ITS Forum RC-017."

[0048] (Step S11) The requesting terminal Vt-a broadcasts a request message to the request receiving terminal Vt-b. After this, the requesting terminal Vt-a transitions to the "requesting" state.

[0049] (Step S12) The request destination terminal Vt-b sends a request response message to the request source terminal Vt-a. After this, the request destination terminal Vt-b transitions to the "formal request waiting" state.

[0050] (Step S13) The requesting terminal Vt-a transmits an update request message to the requesting terminal Vt-b, after which the requesting terminal Vt-a transitions to the "update requesting" state.

[0051] (Step S14) The request destination terminal Vt-b sends an update response message to the request source terminal Vt-a. After this, the request destination terminal Vt-b transitions to the "update complete" state. When the request source terminal Vt-a receives the update response message from the request destination terminal Vt-b, it transitions to the "update complete" state.

[0052] In the above steps S11-S14, the terminal Vt holds its state upon sending and receiving each message. At the completion of step S14, the requesting terminal Vt-a holds the "update request completed" state, and the requested terminal Vt-b holds the "update response completed" state.

[0053] After step S14, the requesting vehicle Va and the requested vehicle Vb perform a cooperative operation and complete the cooperative operation. This completion of the cooperative operation can be detected in the case of a mechanically automated cooperative operation, but it may be difficult to detect in the case of a cooperative operation driven by a human driver.

[0054] (Steps S15-S16) The requesting terminal Vt-a sends a thank-you message to the requested terminal Vt-b. In the case of mechanically automated cooperative operations, the completion of the cooperative operation can be detected, so the requesting terminal Vt-a automatically sends a thank-you message to the requested terminal Vt-b when it detects the completion of the cooperative operation. On the other hand, in the case of cooperative operations driven by a human, the thank-you message is sent to the requested terminal Vt-b by the human message sending operation.

[0055] When the request destination terminal Vt-b receives the thank you message from the request source terminal Vt-a, it sends a thank you receipt response message to the request source terminal Vt-a. As a result, the request source terminal Vt-a transitions to the "thank you message completed" state, and the request destination terminal Vt-b transitions to the "thank you response completed" state.

[0056] Finally, when the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b complete the cooperative operation, they record information about the cooperative operation (requesting terminal identifier, requested terminal identifier, use case (type of cooperative operation), execution date and time, execution location, final state, etc.) as cooperative operation data. Examples of cooperative operation use cases include lane changes, merging, right turns, parking, pedestrian crossing, bicycles going straight, and priority for automobiles.

[0057] Fig. 8 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of collaborative operation data according to this embodiment. The collaborative operation data in Fig. 8 is collaborative operation data recorded by terminal 1, and includes a case in which terminal 1 becomes the requesting terminal Vt-a and a case in which terminal 1 becomes the requested terminal Vt-b.

[0058] In Figure 8, in cases 1-5, both the requester and the requestee are automobiles. In case 6, the requester is an automobile and the requestee is a pedestrian. In case 7, the requester is an automobile and the requestee is a bicycle. In case 8, the requester is a pedestrian and the requestee is an automobile. In case 9, the requester is a bicycle and the requestee is an automobile.

[0059] According to the cooperative action procedure in Fig. 7 and the cooperative action data in Fig. 8, when the final state is "update completed" or "thank you completed", it can be determined that "the cooperative action may have been successful" in step S4 in Fig. 6. Also, in the case of mechanically automated cooperative action, when the final state is "cooperative action completed", it can be determined that "the cooperative action may have been successful" in step S4 in Fig. 6.

[0060] Fig. 9 is a flowchart showing an example of the procedure of the collaborative operation management method executed by the collaborative operation management server 10 according to this embodiment. The collaborative operation management method according to this embodiment will be described with reference to Fig. 9. Fig. 9 shows the procedure for one collaborative operation.

[0061] (Step S21) The collaboration management server 10 is in a standby state. The collaboration management server 10 proceeds to step S22 in response to a predetermined trigger. For example, when collaboration data related to one collaborative operation is stored in the collaboration database 16, the process proceeds to step S22.

[0062] (Step S22) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative action database 16, collaborative action data of the requesting terminal Vt-a relating to one collaborative action (target collaborative action).

[0063] (Step S23) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative operation database 16, collaborative operation data of the requested terminal Vt-b regarding the target collaborative operation.

[0064] (Step S24) The determination unit 14 determines the validity of the target cooperative operation based on the acquired cooperative operation data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b. If the result of this determination is valid, proceed to step S25; if not, proceed to step S29.

[0065] (Step S25) The acquisition unit 15 acquires, from the movement history server 30, movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a regarding the target cooperative action.

[0066] (Step S26) The acquisition unit 15 acquires, from the movement history server 30, movement history data of the requested terminal Vt-b regarding the target cooperative action.

[0067] (Step S27) The determination unit 14 determines the validity of the target cooperative action based on the movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b acquired by the acquisition unit 15. If the result of this determination is valid, the process proceeds to step S28; otherwise, the process proceeds to step S29.

[0068] (Step S28) The determination unit 14 determines that the target cooperative behavior is established.

[0069] (Step S29) The determination unit 14 determines that the target cooperative behavior is not established.

[0070] (Step S30) The cooperative behavior database 16 stores the determination result of the target cooperative behavior made by the determination unit 14, ie, "successful or failure."

[0071] The determination result of the target cooperative behavior, "successful or failure," stored in the cooperative behavior database 16 is used, for example, to determine whether to grant an incentive to a user. For example, a target cooperative behavior that is "successful" is eligible for incentive granting, but a target cooperative behavior that is "failed" is not eligible for incentive granting.

[0072] In the cooperative operation management method of FIG. 9, the validity of both step S24 and step S27 is determined before the establishment of the target cooperative operation is determined, but the present invention is not limited to this.

[0073] For example, the success or failure of the target cooperative behavior may be determined solely by the validity determination in step S24. In this case, regardless of whether step S27 is performed or the result of the validity determination in step S27, if the result of the validity determination in step S24 is valid, the success or failure result of the target cooperative behavior is "successful" and stored in the cooperative behavior database 16. On the other hand, if the result of the validity determination in step S24 is invalid, the success or failure result of the target cooperative behavior is "failed" and stored in the cooperative behavior database 16.

[0074] For example, the success or failure of the target cooperative behavior may be determined solely by the validity determination in step S27. In this case, regardless of whether step S24 is performed or the result of the validity determination in step S24, if the result of the validity determination in step S27 is valid, the success or failure result of the target cooperative behavior is "successful" and stored in the cooperative behavior database 16. On the other hand, if the result of the validity determination in step S27 is invalid, the success or failure result of the target cooperative behavior is "failed" and stored in the cooperative behavior database 16.

[0075] Next, the cooperative action correctness determination method according to this embodiment will be described with an example.

[0076] (Example 1 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative operation database 16, collaborative operation data within a predetermined period in the past that has the same combination of the request source identifier and the request destination identifier for the target collaborative operation. Note that "the combination of the requester identifier and the requested destination identifier is the same" may include a combination where the requester identifier is the same and the requested destination identifier is the same, as well as a case where the requester identifier and the requested destination identifier are reversed. In other words, the combination of the requester identifier "IDa" and the requested destination identifier "IDb" and the combination of the requester identifier "IDb" and the requested destination identifier "IDa" may be treated as being the same combination of the requester identifier and the requested destination identifier.

[0077] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of a target cooperative operation based on the number of cooperative operations that occurred within a predetermined period of time for cooperative operation data that have the same combination of requester identifier and requestee identifier. For example, if the number of cooperative operations that occurred within the predetermined period of time is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, the determination unit 14 may determine that the target cooperative operation is invalid, or if not, determine that the target cooperative operation is valid. The predetermined period may be, for example, one hour, one day, or one week.

[0078] In addition, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency, the judgment unit 14 may extract only cases in which the final state is either "update completed," "cooperative action completed," or "thank you completed," and may use only the extracted cases to judge the validity of the target cooperative action.

[0079] The predetermined period may be determined based on the execution date and time included in the collaborative operation data, or based on the reception date and time of the collaborative operation data from the terminal Vt recorded in the collaborative operation database 16.

[0080] According to the first example of the cooperative action correctness determination method, it is possible to determine the dishonesty of repeating cooperative actions between the same user combinations in order to obtain an incentive, for example.

[0081] (Example 2 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative operation database 16, collaborative operation data within a predetermined period in the past that has the same combination of the request source identifier and the request destination identifier for the target collaborative operation.

[0082] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of a target cooperative operation based on the number of cooperative operations that occurred in the same time slot within a predetermined period, for cooperative operation data that have the same combination of requester identifier and requestee identifier. For example, if the number of cooperative operations that occurred in the same time slot within the predetermined period is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold, the determination unit 14 may determine that the target cooperative operation is invalid, or if not, determine that the target cooperative operation is valid. The predetermined period may be, for example, one hour, one day, or one week. The predetermined threshold may be the same or different for each time slot.

[0083] In addition, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency, the judgment unit 14 may extract only cases in which the final state is either "update completed," "cooperative action completed," or "thank you completed," and may use only the extracted cases to judge the validity of the target cooperative action.

[0084] Furthermore, the predetermined period and time zone may be determined based on the execution date and time included in the collaborative action data, or based on the reception date and time of the collaborative action data from the terminal Vt recorded in the collaborative action database 16.

[0085] According to the second example of the cooperative action validity determination method, it is possible to determine the fraudulent behavior of repeating cooperative actions by the same user combination in the same time period in order to obtain an incentive, for example.

[0086] (Example 3 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative operation database 16, collaborative operation data within a predetermined period in the past that has the same combination of the request source identifier and the request destination identifier for the target collaborative operation.

[0087] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of a target cooperative action based on the number of cooperative actions that occurred within a predetermined distance range within a predetermined period of time for cooperative action data that have the same combination of requester identifier and requestee identifier. For example, if the number of cooperative actions that occurred within a predetermined distance range within a predetermined period of time is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, the determination unit 14 may determine that the target cooperative action is invalid, or if not, determine that the target cooperative action is valid. The predetermined period may be, for example, one hour, one day, or one week. The predetermined distance range may be, for example, the inside of a circle with a predetermined radius.

[0088] In addition, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency, the judgment unit 14 may extract only cases in which the final state is either "update completed," "cooperative action completed," or "thank you completed," and may use only the extracted cases to judge the validity of the target cooperative action.

[0089] The predetermined period may be determined based on the execution date and time included in the collaborative operation data, or based on the reception date and time of the collaborative operation data from the terminal Vt recorded in the collaborative operation database 16.

[0090] According to the third example of the cooperative action validity determination method, it is possible to determine the fraudulent behavior of repeating cooperative actions within a predetermined distance range with the same user combination, for example, in order to obtain an incentive.

[0091] (Example 4 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The determination unit 14 acquires, for the target cooperative operation, cooperative operation data within a predetermined period of time in the past that has the same combination of requester identifier and requestee identifier from the cooperative operation database 16. At this time, the determination unit 14 acquires, for the target cooperative operation, both the cooperative operation data acquired from the requester terminal Vt-a (requester cooperative operation data) and the cooperative operation data acquired from the requestee terminal Vt-b (requestee cooperative operation data).

[0092] The determination unit 14 determines the validity of the target cooperative operation based on the requester cooperative operation data and the requested cooperative operation data, based on predetermined validity determination conditions. Examples of the validity determination conditions are given below.

[0093] (Example 4-1 of validity criteria) If the final states of the requester cooperative action data and the requested recipient cooperative action data do not correspond, the target cooperative action is determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action is determined to be valid. For example, if the final state of one of the requester cooperative action data and the requested recipient cooperative action data is either "update completed," "cooperative action completed," or "thank you gift completed," and the final state of the other is neither "update completed," "cooperative action completed," nor "thank you gift completed," the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid.

[0094] (Example 4-2 of validity criteria) If there is a discrepancy between the execution dates and times of the requester's cooperative action data and the requested recipient's cooperative action data, the target cooperative action is determined to be invalid, and if there is no discrepancy, the target cooperative action is determined to be valid. For example, if the time difference between the execution dates and times of the requester's cooperative action data and the requested recipient's cooperative action data is equal to or greater than a threshold, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if there is no discrepancy, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid.

[0095] (Example 4-3 of validity criteria) If there is a discrepancy between the execution positions of the requester's cooperative action data and the requested cooperative action data, the target cooperative action is determined to be invalid; otherwise, the target cooperative action is determined to be valid. For example, if the distance between the execution positions of the requester's cooperative action data and the requested cooperative action data is equal to or greater than a threshold, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid; otherwise, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid. The threshold value for the distance between the execution positions is set in advance in the cooperative action management server 10 for each use case (type of cooperative action) of the cooperative action according to the positional relationship between the targets of the cooperative action.

[0096] According to the fourth example of the cooperative operation correctness determination method, the correctness of the cooperative operation data can be determined.

[0097] In addition, in Examples 1 to 4 of the above-mentioned cooperative action validity determination method, even if the requester and the requested party are reversed, for example, both the case of "requester identifier: vehicle 1, requested party identifier: vehicle 2" and the case of "requester identifier: vehicle 2, requested party identifier: vehicle 1" are treated as cooperative action data relating to the same target cooperative action.

[0098] (Example 5 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative operation database 16, collaborative operation data within a predetermined period in the past that has the same request source identifier for the target collaborative operation.

[0099] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of a target cooperative operation based on the number of cooperative operations that occurred within a predetermined period of time for cooperative operation data with the same requester identifier. For example, if the number of cooperative operations that occurred within the predetermined period of time is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, the determination unit 14 may determine that the target cooperative operation is invalid, and if not, determine that the target cooperative operation is valid. The predetermined period may be, for example, one hour, one day, or one week.

[0100] In addition, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency, the judgment unit 14 may extract only cases in which the final state is either "update completed," "cooperative action completed," or "thank you completed," and may use only the extracted cases to judge the validity of the target cooperative action.

[0101] The predetermined period may be determined based on the execution date and time included in the collaborative operation data, or based on the reception date and time of the collaborative operation data from the terminal Vt recorded in the collaborative operation database 16.

[0102] According to the fifth example of the cooperative action correctness determination method, it is possible to determine the fraudulent behavior of the same requesting user repeating cooperative actions in order to obtain an incentive, for example.

[0103] (Example 6 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The determination unit 14 acquires, from the collaborative operation database 16, collaborative operation data within a predetermined period in the past that has the same request source identifier for the target collaborative operation.

[0104] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of a target cooperative action based on the number of cooperative actions that occurred within a predetermined distance range within a predetermined period of time for cooperative action data with the same requester identifier. For example, if the number of cooperative actions that occurred within a predetermined distance range within a predetermined period of time is equal to or exceeds a predetermined threshold, the determination unit 14 may determine that the target cooperative action is invalid, or if not, determine that the target cooperative action is valid. The predetermined period may be, for example, one hour, one day, or one week. The predetermined distance range may be, for example, the inside of a circle with a predetermined radius.

[0105] In addition, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency, the judgment unit 14 may extract only cases in which the final state is either "update completed," "cooperative action completed," or "thank you completed," and may use only the extracted cases to judge the validity of the target cooperative action.

[0106] The predetermined period may be determined based on the execution date and time included in the collaborative operation data, or based on the reception date and time of the collaborative operation data from the terminal Vt recorded in the collaborative operation database 16.

[0107] According to the sixth example of the cooperative action validity determination method, it is possible to determine the fraudulent behavior of the same requesting user repeating cooperative actions within a predetermined distance range in order to obtain an incentive, for example.

[0108] (Example 7 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) The acquisition unit 15 acquires movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b related to the target cooperative operation from the movement history server 30. The acquisition unit 15 transmits a movement history data request to the movement history server 30, including search conditions and terminal identifiers (terminal IDs) of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b related to the target cooperative operation.

[0109] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating search conditions for movement history data according to this embodiment. The search conditions for movement history data are configured with feature points related to past cooperative actions that are necessary for evaluating the legitimacy of the cooperative action. A past cooperative action is a pair of a use case and the time of execution of a cooperative action that was performed within a specified period for the combination of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b of the cooperative action. The specified period is, for example, "the day of the cooperative action" or "the past seven days since the cooperative action." The acquisition unit 15 acquires the execution date and time of the relevant case from the cooperative action database 16 based on the specified period.

[0110] The characteristic points regarding the cooperative action are characteristic position conditions regarding the cooperative action. In addition to the time of the cooperative action (time of the cooperative action), there are, for example, "the start of the cooperative action (time of the start of the cooperative action)," "before the cooperative action (before the cooperative action is performed)," "after the cooperative action (after the cooperative action is performed)," and "the end of the cooperative action (time of the end of the cooperative action)." By combining each of these with additional conditions, the movement history server 30 can identify the time of the search condition.

[0111] Additional conditions for the start and end of cooperative operation are, for example, "terminal startup" or "one day." "Terminal startup" refers to the start (start of movement) and end (end of movement) of one continuous movement. "One day" refers to the start of the first movement and the end of the last movement in a day in which one or more continuous movements exist.

[0112] The additional conditions before and after the collaborative action are "X seconds before and after" (for example, "15 seconds before and after" or "60 seconds before and after"). "X seconds before and after" refers to the time before and after the collaborative action, taking into account the time it takes to execute the collaborative action use case.

[0113] Of the items shown in FIG. 10, the remaining items excluding the use case, "implementation date and time" and each "additional condition", become search conditions for movement history data.

[0114] In response to the movement history data request, the movement history server 30 searches the movement history database 33 for movement history data that matches the search criteria and terminal ID included in the movement history data request. The movement history server 30 responds with the movement history data of the search results to the collaborative operation management server 10. Fig. 11 shows an example of the configuration of the movement history data of the search results.

[0115] The acquisition unit 15 acquires the movement history data returned from the movement history server 30. The determination unit 14 determines the validity of the target cooperative action based on the movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b acquired by the acquisition unit 15.

[0116] The determination unit 14 determines the validity of a target cooperative action based on at least one of the start and end positions of a movement included in the movement history data of a requesting vehicle or person identified by a requester identifier included in the cooperative action data and a requested vehicle or person identified by a requested destination identifier included in the cooperative action data. An example of this is shown below.

[0117] (Example 7-1) If the distance between the position of the requesting vehicle or person at the start of movement and the position of the requested vehicle or person at the start of movement is within a predetermined threshold, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid.

[0118] (Example 7-2) If the distance between the position of the requesting vehicle or person at the end of its movement and the position of the requested vehicle or person at the end of its movement is within a predetermined threshold, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid.

[0119] (Example 7-3) If the position of the requesting vehicle or person at the start and end of their movement and the position of the requested vehicle or person at the start and end of their movement are within a predetermined distance range, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid. The predetermined distance range may be, for example, the inside of a circle with a predetermined radius.

[0120] (Example 7-4) If the distance between the position of the requesting vehicle or person at the start of movement and the position at the end of movement is within a predetermined threshold, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid.

[0121] (Example 7-5) If the distance between the position of the requested vehicle or person at the start of movement and the position at the end of movement is within a predetermined threshold, the target cooperative action may be determined to be invalid, and if not, the target cooperative action may be determined to be valid.

[0122] In each of Examples 7-1 to 7-5 above, the target cooperative behavior may be determined to be invalid only if the number of cooperative behaviors that occur within a predetermined period and satisfy the criteria of Examples 7-1 to 7-5 is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold, and the target cooperative behavior may be determined to be valid otherwise. The predetermined period may be, for example, one hour, one day, or one week.

[0123] The predetermined period may be determined based on the execution date and time included in the collaborative operation data, or based on the reception date and time of the collaborative operation data from the terminal Vt recorded in the collaborative operation database 16.

[0124] According to the seventh example of the cooperative action validity determination method, it is possible to determine the fraudulent behavior of the same requesting user repeatedly performing cooperative actions in the same area in order to obtain an incentive, for example.

[0125] (Example 8 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) As in the seventh example of the cooperative operation correctness determination method described above, the acquisition unit 15 acquires, from the movement history server 30, movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b relating to the target cooperative operation.

[0126] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of the target cooperative action based on the movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b acquired by the acquisition unit 15. The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of the target cooperative action based on the distance between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person and a distance determination condition. The distance determination condition is set in advance in the cooperative action management server 10 for each use case of the cooperative action (type of cooperative action) according to the positional relationship between the targets of the cooperative action. If the distance between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person does not satisfy the distance determination condition, the target cooperative action is determined to be invalid; otherwise, the determination unit 14 determines that the target cooperative action is valid.

[0127] According to the eighth example of the cooperative operation correctness determination method, the correctness of a target cooperative operation can be determined for each use case of the cooperative operation (type of the cooperative operation) based on the characteristics of the distance between targets of the cooperative operation.

[0128] (Example 9 of a method for determining the validity of cooperative behavior) As in the seventh example of the cooperative operation correctness determination method described above, the acquisition unit 15 acquires, from the movement history server 30, movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b relating to the target cooperative operation.

[0129] The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of the target cooperative behavior based on the movement history data of the requesting terminal Vt-a and the requested terminal Vt-b acquired by the acquisition unit 15. The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of the target cooperative behavior based on the positional relationship between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person before and after the cooperative behavior is performed. For example, for each use case of the cooperative behavior (type of cooperative behavior), a positional relationship determination condition determined according to the positional relationship between the targets of the cooperative behavior is set in advance in the cooperative behavior management server 10. The determination unit 14 determines the legitimacy of the target cooperative behavior based on the positional relationship between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person before and after the cooperative behavior is performed and the positional relationship determination condition. If the positional relationship between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person before and after the cooperative behavior is performed does not satisfy the positional relationship determination condition, the determination unit 14 determines that the target cooperative behavior is invalid; otherwise, the determination unit 14 determines that the target cooperative behavior is valid.

[0130] According to Example 9 of the method for determining the validity of a cooperative operation, for each use case (type of cooperative operation) of the cooperative operation, the validity of the target cooperative operation can be determined based on the characteristics of the positional relationship between the targets of the cooperative operation before and after the time the cooperative operation is performed.

[0131] The determination unit 14 may determine the legitimacy of the cooperative behavior based on map information including at least one of lane information on roads, intersection information, and parking lot information, and on the positional relationship between the targets of the cooperative behavior before and after the cooperative behavior is performed. This allows the positional relationship between the targets of the cooperative behavior before and after the cooperative behavior is performed to be accurately grasped, which contributes to improving the accuracy of determining the legitimacy of the cooperative behavior.

[0132] Next, use cases (types of cooperative operations) according to this embodiment will be described using examples.

[0133] [Example 1 of cooperative behavior use case: lane change between cars] 12 is a diagram for explaining example 1 of cooperative operation use case (lane change between automobiles). The definition of the positional relationship when automobiles change lanes is shown below, divided into those with and without map information. In FIG. 12, terminal 1 is a requesting terminal Vt-a that requests a lane change for a requesting vehicle Va, and terminal 2 is a requested terminal Vt-b for a requested vehicle Vb that accepts the request.

[0134] (Example of lane change definition between cars: without map information) (1-1) Before and during cooperative operation (1-1a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 correspond to that of an automobile. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are within that range. (1-1b) The traveling direction of terminal 1 is the same as that of terminal 2. For example, the traveling direction of terminal 1 is 0°, and the traveling direction of terminal 2 is within the range of 0° to 15°. (1-1c) Terminal 1 is located to the side or diagonally in front of terminal 2 in the direction of travel. For example, the direction of travel is set to 0°, and terminal 2 is located within a range of 90° to 150° as seen from terminal 1. The definition of the period from before cooperative behavior regarding lane changes between vehicles to when cooperative behavior is performed when no map information is available is that all of the above conditions 1-1a, 1-1b, and 1-1c are satisfied.

[0135] (1-2) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (1-2a) Same as 1-1a above. (1-2b) Same as 1-1b above. (1-2c) Terminal 1 is located ahead of terminal 2 in the direction of travel. For example, if the traveling direction is 0°, terminal 2 is located within a range of 150° to 180° as seen from terminal 1. The definition of the period from when cooperative behavior regarding lane changes between vehicles is performed to after cooperative behavior is performed when all of the above conditions 1-2a, 1-2b, and 1-2c are satisfied in the absence of map information.

[0136] In the absence of map information, the conditions for determining the positional relationship when vehicles change lanes are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (1-1) definition from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is performed and (1-2) definition from when cooperative action is performed to after cooperative action is performed.

[0137] (Example of lane change definition between cars: with map information) (1-3) Before and during cooperative operation (1-3a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 correspond to that of an automobile. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are within that range. (1-3b) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located on different lanes on the same road. (1-3c) Terminal 1 is located to the side or diagonally in front of terminal 2 in the direction of travel. For example, the direction of travel is set to 0°, and terminal 2 is located within a range of 90° to 150° as seen from terminal 1. The definition of the period from before cooperative behavior regarding lane changes between vehicles to when cooperative behavior is performed when map information is available is that all of the above conditions 1-3a, 1-3b, and 1-3c are satisfied.

[0138] (1-4) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (1-4a) Same as 1-3a above. (1-4b) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located in the same lane on the same road. (1-4c) Terminal 1 is located ahead of terminal 2 in the direction of travel. For example, if the traveling direction is 0°, terminal 2 is located within a range of 150° to 180° as seen from terminal 1. The definition of the period from when cooperative behavior regarding lane changes between vehicles is performed to after cooperative behavior is performed when map information is available is that all of the above conditions 1-4a, 1-4b, and 1-4c are satisfied.

[0139] When map information is available, the conditions for determining the positional relationship when vehicles change lanes are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (1-3) definition from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is performed and (1-4) definition from when cooperative action is performed to after cooperative action is performed.

[0140] When the use case of the cooperative operation is a lane change between automobiles, the judgment unit 14 judges that the target cooperative operation is invalid if the positional relationship judgment condition determined according to the above definition is not satisfied, and judges that the target cooperative operation is valid if not.

[0141] [Cooperative behavior use case example 2: right turn between cars] 13 is a diagram for explaining example 2 of the cooperative operation use case (right turn between two vehicles). The definition of the positional relationship when two vehicles turn right is shown below, divided into those with and without map information. In FIG. 13, terminal 1 is a request source terminal Vt-a that requests a right turn of a request source vehicle Va, and terminal 2 is a request destination terminal Vt-b of a request destination vehicle Vb that accepts the request.

[0142] (Example of right turn definition between cars: without map information) (2-1) Before and during cooperative operation (2-1a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 correspond to that of an automobile. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are within that range. (2-1b) The traveling directions of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are opposite. For example, the traveling direction of terminal 1 is 0°, and the traveling direction of terminal 2 is within the range of 165° to 180°. (2-1c) The positional relationship between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is close to each other. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within a circle of a predetermined radius, and the distance between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is shorter when cooperative operation is performed than before cooperative operation. The definition of the period from before to when cooperative action is taken between vehicles when turning right in the absence of map information is that all of the conditions 2-1a, 2-1b, and 2-1c above are satisfied.

[0143] (2-2) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (2-2a) Same as 2-1a above. (2-2b) The traveling directions of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are different. For example, the traveling direction of terminal 1 is 0°, and the traveling direction of terminal 2 is within the range of 60° to 120°. (2-2c) The distance traveled by terminal 2 is shorter than the distance traveled by terminal 1. For example, the distance traveled by terminal 1 is more than twice the distance traveled by terminal 2. The definition of the period from when cooperative action is performed between vehicles when turning right in the absence of map information to after the cooperative action is performed is that all of the above conditions 2-2a, 2-2b, and 2-2c are satisfied.

[0144] In the absence of map information, the conditions for determining the positional relationship when vehicles turn right are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (2-1) definition from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is performed and (2-2) definition from when cooperative action is performed to after cooperative action is performed.

[0145] (Example of right turn definition between cars: with map information) (2-3) Before and during cooperative operation (2-3a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 correspond to that of an automobile. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are within that range. (2-3b) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located in opposite lanes. (2-3c) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are approaching the same intersection. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are closer to the same intersection when cooperative operation is performed than before cooperative operation. The definition of the period from before cooperative action is taken between vehicles when turning right, when map information is available, to when cooperative action is taken, is that all of the above conditions 2-3a, 2-3b, and 2-3c are satisfied.

[0146] (2-4) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (2-4a) Same as 2-3a above. (2-4b) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within the same intersection, or terminal 1 and terminal 2 are moving away from the same intersection. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within a specified radius from the same intersection, or the distance from the same intersection is increasing. (2-4c) The distance traveled by terminal 2 is shorter than the distance traveled by terminal 1. For example, the distance traveled by terminal 1 is more than twice the distance traveled by terminal 2. The definition of the period from when cooperative action is performed between vehicles when turning right to when cooperative action is performed is that all of the above conditions 2-4a, 2-4b, and 2-4c are satisfied when map information is available.

[0147] When map information is available, the conditions for determining the positional relationship between vehicles when turning right are determined in advance according to the definitions (2-3) from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is performed and (2-4) from when cooperative action is performed to after cooperative action is performed.

[0148] When the use case of the cooperative action is a right turn between two vehicles, the judgment unit 14 judges that the target cooperative action is invalid if the positional relationship judgment condition determined in accordance with the above definition is not satisfied, and judges that the target cooperative action is valid if not.

[0149] [Cooperative Use Case Example 3: Parking between cars] 14 is a diagram for explaining example 3 of the cooperative operation use case (parking of cars). The definition of the positional relationship when cars are parked is shown below, divided into cases with and without map information. In FIG. 14, terminal 1 is a requesting terminal Vt-a that requests parking of a requesting vehicle Va, and terminal 2 is a requested terminal Vt-b of a requested vehicle Vb that accepts the request.

[0150] (Example of car parking definition: without map information) (3-1) Before and during cooperative operation (3-1a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 correspond to that of an automobile. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are within that range. (3-1b) The positional relationship between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is close to each other. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within a circle of a predetermined radius, and the distance between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is shorter when cooperative operation is performed than before cooperative operation. The definition of the period from before cooperative parking between vehicles to when cooperative parking between vehicles is performed in the absence of map information is that all of the conditions in 3-1a and 3-1b above are satisfied.

[0151] (3-2) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (3-2a) Same as 3-1a above. (3-2b) Terminal 1 moves to the location where terminal 2 was located, and terminal 2 is far away. For example, the position of terminal 1 after the cooperative operation is performed is the same as the position of terminal 2 before the cooperative operation is performed, and the distance between terminal 1 and terminal 2 after the cooperative operation is greater than or equal to a predetermined value. The definition of the period from when cooperative parking between vehicles is performed to after cooperative parking is performed when all of the above conditions 3-2a and 3-2b are satisfied, in the absence of map information.

[0152] In the absence of map information, the conditions for determining the positional relationship between vehicles when parking are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (3-1) definition from before cooperative operation to when cooperative operation is performed and (3-2) definition from when cooperative operation is performed to after cooperative operation is performed.

[0153] (Example of car parking definition: with map information) (3-3) Before and during cooperative operation (3-3a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 correspond to that of an automobile. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 and terminal 2 are within that range. (3-3b) Terminal 1 approaches the parking space of terminal 2 in the parking lot, and terminal 2 is currently parked. The definition of the period from before cooperative parking between vehicles to when cooperative parking between vehicles is performed when map information is available is that all of the conditions in 3-3a and 3-3b above are satisfied.

[0154] (3-4) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (3-4a) Same as 3-3a above. (3-4b) Terminal 1 is in the parking space of terminal 2, and terminal 2 is away from the parking space. The definition of the period from when cooperative parking between vehicles is performed to after the cooperative parking is performed when map information is available is that all of the conditions 3-4a and 3-4b above are satisfied.

[0155] When map information is available, the conditions for determining the positional relationship between vehicles when parking are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (3-3) definitions from before cooperative operation to when cooperative operation is performed and (3-4) definitions from when cooperative operation is performed to after cooperative operation is performed.

[0156] When the use case of the cooperative operation is parking two cars, the judgment unit 14 judges that the target cooperative operation is invalid if the positional relationship judgment condition determined according to the above definition is not met, and judges that the target cooperative operation is valid if not.

[0157] [Cooperative behavior use case example 4: Pedestrian crossing between vehicles and pedestrians] Figure 15 is a diagram for explaining cooperative behavior use case example 4 (pedestrian crossing between a car and a pedestrian). The definition of the positional relationship at a pedestrian crossing between a car and a pedestrian is shown below, divided into those with and without map information. In FIG. 15, terminal 2 is a request source terminal Vt-a that requests a request source (pedestrian) to cross, and terminal 1 is a request destination terminal Vt-b of a request destination vehicle Vb that accepts the request.

[0158] (Example of pedestrian crossing definition between cars and pedestrians: without map information) (4-1) Before and during cooperative operation (4-1a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 correspond to a car. The speed and acceleration of terminal 2 correspond to a pedestrian. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to a car is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 are within the range equivalent to a car. Also, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to a pedestrian is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 2 are within the range equivalent to a pedestrian. (4-1b) The positional relationship between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is close to each other. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within a circle of a predetermined radius, and the distance between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is shorter when cooperative operation is performed than before cooperative operation. The definition of the period from before cooperative behavior regarding pedestrian crossing between a vehicle and a pedestrian to when cooperative behavior is performed when no map information is available is that all of the conditions in 4-1a and 4-1b above are satisfied.

[0159] (4-2) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (4-2a) Same as 4-1a above. (4-2b) The movement paths of terminal 1 and terminal 2 intersect. For example, a line connecting the position of terminal 1 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 1 after the cooperative action intersects with a line connecting the position of terminal 2 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 2 after the cooperative action. The definition of the pedestrian crossing situation between a vehicle and a pedestrian when coordinated behavior is performed and after coordinated behavior is that all of the above conditions 4-2a and 4-2b are satisfied when no map information is available.

[0160] In the absence of map information, the conditions for determining the positional relationship at the pedestrian crossing between a vehicle and a pedestrian are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (4-1) definition from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is performed and (4-2) definition from when cooperative action is performed to after cooperative action is performed.

[0161] (Example of definition of pedestrian crossing between cars and pedestrians: with map information) (4-3) Before and during cooperative operation (4-3a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 correspond to a car. The speed and acceleration of terminal 2 correspond to a pedestrian. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to a car is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 are within the range equivalent to a car. Also, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to a pedestrian is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 2 are within the range equivalent to a pedestrian. (4-3b) Terminal 1 is moving on the roadway, and terminal 2 is moving on the sidewalk. The definition of the period from before cooperative behavior regarding pedestrian crossing between a vehicle and a pedestrian to when cooperative behavior is performed when map information is available is that all of the conditions in 4-3a and 4-3b above are satisfied.

[0162] (4-4) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (4-4a) Same as 4-3a above. (4-4b) The movement paths of terminal 1 and terminal 2 intersect. For example, a line connecting the position of terminal 1 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 1 after the cooperative action intersects with a line connecting the position of terminal 2 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 2 after the cooperative action. (4-4c) Terminal 1 is moving on the same roadway as before the cooperative action was performed, and terminal 2 is moving on the sidewalk on the opposite side of the roadway from before the cooperative action was performed. The definition of the pedestrian crossing situation between a vehicle and a pedestrian when coordinated action is taken and after coordinated action is that all of the above conditions 4-4a, 4-4b, and 4-4c are met when map information is available.

[0163] When map information is available, the conditions for determining the positional relationship at the pedestrian crossing between a vehicle and a pedestrian are determined in advance according to the definitions from before the cooperative action to when the cooperative action is performed and (4-4) from when the cooperative action is performed to after the cooperative action is performed.

[0164] When the use case of the cooperative action is a pedestrian crossing between a car and a pedestrian, the judgment unit 14 judges that the target cooperative action is invalid if the positional relationship judgment condition determined according to the above definition is not satisfied, and judges that the target cooperative action is valid if not.

[0165] [Cooperative behavior use case example 5: Bicycle moving straight between a car and a bicycle] 16 is a diagram for explaining cooperative operation use case example 5 (bicycle traveling straight between a car and a bicycle). The definition of the positional relationship between a car and a bicycle traveling straight between a car and a bicycle is shown below, divided into those with and without map information. In FIG. 16, terminal 2 is a request source terminal Vt-a that requests the request source (bicycle) to go straight, and terminal 1 is a request destination terminal Vt-b of a request destination vehicle Vb that accepts the request.

[0166] (Example of definition of straight-ahead bicycle travel between a car and a bicycle: without map information) (5-1) Before and during cooperative operation (5-1a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 correspond to that of an automobile. The speed and acceleration of terminal 2 correspond to that of a bicycle. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 are within the range equivalent to that of an automobile. Also, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of a bicycle is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 2 are within the range equivalent to that of a pedestrian. (5-1b) The positional relationship between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is close to each other. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within a circle of a predetermined radius, and the distance between terminal 1 and terminal 2 is shorter when cooperative operation is performed than before cooperative operation. Meeting all of the above conditions 5-1a and 5-1b defines the period from before cooperative action is taken between a car and a bicycle regarding a bicycle traveling straight ahead to when cooperative action is taken when map information is not available.

[0167] (5-2) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (5-2a) Same as 5-1a above. (5-2b) The movement paths of terminal 1 and terminal 2 intersect. For example, a line connecting the position of terminal 1 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 1 after the cooperative action intersects with a line connecting the position of terminal 2 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 2 after the cooperative action. The definition of the state between a car and a bicycle regarding a bicycle traveling straight ahead when no map information is available is that all of the conditions in 5-2a and 5-2b above are satisfied.

[0168] In the absence of map information, the conditions for determining the positional relationship between a car and a bicycle when the bicycle is moving straight ahead are determined in advance according to the above-mentioned (5-1) definition from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is being performed and (5-2) definition from when cooperative action is being performed to after cooperative action is being performed.

[0169] (Example of definition of straight-ahead bicycle travel between a car and a bicycle: with map information) (5-3) Before and during cooperative operation (5-3a) The speed and acceleration of terminal 1 correspond to that of an automobile. The speed and acceleration of terminal 2 correspond to that of a bicycle. For example, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of an automobile is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 1 are within the range equivalent to that of an automobile. Also, a range of speed and acceleration equivalent to that of a bicycle is set in advance, and the speed and acceleration of terminal 2 are within the range equivalent to that of a pedestrian. (5-3b) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are approaching the same intersection. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are closer to the same intersection when cooperative operation is performed than before cooperative operation. The definition of the period from before cooperative action is taken between a car and a bicycle regarding a bicycle traveling straight ahead to when cooperative action is taken when map information is available is that all of the conditions in 5-3a and 5-3b above are satisfied.

[0170] (5-4) From the time of cooperative action to the time of cooperative action (5-4a) Same as 5-3a above. (5-4b) The movement paths of terminal 1 and terminal 2 intersect. For example, a line connecting the position of terminal 1 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 1 after the cooperative action intersects with a line connecting the position of terminal 2 when the cooperative action is performed and the position of terminal 2 after the cooperative action. (5-4c) Terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within the same intersection, or terminal 1 and terminal 2 are moving away from the same intersection. For example, terminal 1 and terminal 2 are located within a specified radius from the same intersection, or the distance from the same intersection is increasing. The definition of the period from when cooperative action is performed between a car and a bicycle regarding bicycle traveling straight ahead to after the cooperative action is performed when map information is available is that all of the conditions 5-4a, 5-4b, and 5-4c above are satisfied.

[0171] When map information is available, the conditions for determining the positional relationship between a car and a bicycle when the bicycle is moving straight ahead are determined in advance according to the definitions (5-3) from before cooperative action to when cooperative action is being performed and (5-4) from when cooperative action is being performed to after cooperative action is being performed.

[0172] When the use case of the cooperative action is a bicycle moving straight between a car and a bicycle, the judgment unit 14 judges that the target cooperative action is invalid if the positional relationship judgment condition determined according to the above definition is not satisfied, and judges that the target cooperative action is valid if not.

[0173] FIG. 17 shows an example of the configuration of cooperative action determination result data according to this embodiment. The determination unit 14 creates the cooperative action determination result data exemplified in FIG. 17. The cooperative action determination result data is stored in the cooperative action database 16. The cooperative action determination result data is used, for example, to determine whether to grant an incentive to a user. For example, in FIG. 17, cases 1, 3, 4, and 6-9 for which the determination result is "successful" are eligible for incentives, but cases 2 and 5 for which the determination result is "failed" are not eligible for incentives.

[0174] The collaborative operation data may include information on an operation mode indicating that the result of the collaborative operation was input by a manual operation. In this case, the terminal Vt has a user interface for a user to perform a manual operation, and when the user performs a manual operation, the terminal Vt notifies the collaborative operation management server 10 that a manual operation has been performed by sending a collaborative operation data transmission message. Furthermore, when the operation mode indicates that the result was input by a manual operation, the judgment unit 14 may judge the validity of the collaborative operation.

[0175] According to this embodiment, it is possible to obtain the effect of being able to determine the validity of a cooperative operation.

[0176] This will enable improvements in overall service quality in ITS (Intelligent Transport Systems), for example, and contribute to Goal 9 of the United Nations-led Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which is to "Develop resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialization and foster innovation."

[0177] Although an embodiment of the present invention has been described in detail above with reference to the drawings, the specific configuration is not limited to this embodiment, and design changes and the like are also included within the scope that does not deviate from the gist of the present invention.

[0178] In addition, a computer program for realizing the functions of each of the above-described devices may be recorded on a computer-readable recording medium, and the program recorded on the recording medium may be read and executed by a computer system. Note that the "computer system" here may also include hardware such as an OS and peripheral devices. In addition, "computer-readable recording medium" refers to writable non-volatile memory such as a flexible disk, optical magnetic disk, ROM, or flash memory, portable media such as a DVD (Digital Versatile Disc), or a storage device such as a hard disk built into a computer system.

[0179] Furthermore, the term "computer-readable recording medium" also includes those that retain a program for a certain period of time, such as volatile memory (e.g., DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory)) within a computer system that serves as a server or client when a program is transmitted via a network such as the Internet or a communication line such as a telephone line. The program may be transmitted from a computer system storing the program in a storage device or the like to another computer system via a transmission medium or by transmission waves in the transmission medium. Here, the "transmission medium" that transmits the program refers to a medium that has the function of transmitting information, such as a network (communication network) such as the Internet or a communication line (communication line) such as a telephone line. The program may also be a program for implementing some of the functions described above, or may be a so-called differential file (differential program) that can implement the functions described above in combination with a program already stored in the computer system. [Explanation of symbols]

[0180] 1...cooperative operation support service system, 10...cooperative operation management server, 30...movement history server, 50...indirect communication server, Va, Vb...vehicle, Vt-a, Vt-b...terminal, 11, 31, 51, 71...communication unit, 12, 32, 52...main control unit, 13...receiving unit, 14...determination unit, 15...acquisition unit, 16...cooperative operation database, 33...movement history database, 53...database, 72...GPS, 73...position control unit, 74...cooperative operation control unit

Claims

1. a receiving unit that receives cooperative operation data including a request source identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that has requested a cooperative operation and a request destination identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that is a recipient of the request to perform the cooperative operation; a determination unit that determines the validity of a cooperative operation based on at least one of a request source identifier and a request destination identifier included in at least one of the cooperative operation data; An information processing device comprising:

2. the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on the number of cooperative operations that have occurred within a predetermined period, for the cooperative operation data that have the same combination of a request source identifier and a request destination identifier. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

3. the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on the number of cooperative operations that occurred in the same time period within a predetermined period, for the cooperative operation data that have the same combination of a request source identifier and a request destination identifier. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

4. the cooperative operation data further includes location information indicating a location where the cooperative operation is performed; the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative action based on the number of cooperative actions that occurred within a predetermined distance range within a predetermined period of time, for the cooperative action data that have the same combination of a request source identifier and a request destination identifier. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

5. the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on the number of cooperative operations that have occurred within a predetermined period, for the cooperative operation data having the same request source identifier. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

6. the cooperative operation data further includes location information indicating a location where the cooperative operation is performed; the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative action based on the number of cooperative actions that occurred within a predetermined distance range within a predetermined period of time, for the cooperative action data having the same request source identifier. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

7. the cooperative operation data includes type information indicating a type of cooperative operation and location information indicating a location where the cooperative operation is performed; the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative action based on a distance between a position where the requesting vehicle or person performs the cooperative action and a position where the requested vehicle or person performs the cooperative action, and a distance determination condition that is preset according to the type of the cooperative action. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

8. an acquisition unit that acquires movement history data including a position at the start of movement and a position at the end of movement of the vehicle or person corresponding to the cooperative movement data; the determination unit determines the validity of the cooperative operation based on at least one of a position at the start of movement and a position at the end of movement of a requesting vehicle or person identified by a requesting identifier included in the cooperative operation data and a requested vehicle or person identified by a requested identifier included in the cooperative operation data. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

9. the determination unit determines the validity of the cooperative action based on a distance between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person at the start of movement or a distance between the requesting vehicle or person and the requested vehicle or person at the end of movement. The information processing device according to claim 8 .

10. an acquisition unit that acquires movement history data including positions before and after the time of performing the cooperative movement corresponding to the cooperative movement data; the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on a positional relationship between a requesting vehicle or person identified by a request source identifier included in the cooperative operation data and a requested vehicle or person identified by a requested destination identifier before and after the time of the cooperative operation. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

11. the collaborative operation data includes type information indicating a type of collaborative operation; the determination unit determines the validity of the cooperative operation based on a determination condition for the positional relationship that is preset according to the type of the cooperative operation. The information processing device according to claim 10.

12. the determination unit determines the validity of the cooperative operation based on map information including at least one of lane information on a road, intersection information, and parking lot information, and the positional relationship; The information processing device according to claim 10.

13. The types of cooperative actions include at least one of lane change between automobiles, right turn between automobiles, parking between automobiles, pedestrian crossing between automobiles and pedestrians, and bicycle going straight between automobiles and bicycles. The information processing device according to claim 7 or 11.

14. the cooperative operation data includes information on an operation mode indicating that the input of the result of the cooperative operation has been performed by a manual operation; the determination unit determines the legitimacy of the cooperative action when the operation mode indicates that the cooperative action has been performed by manual operation. The information processing device according to claim 1 .

15. An information processing method executed by an information processing device, a receiving step of receiving cooperative operation data including a request source identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that has requested a cooperative operation and a request destination identifier that identifies a vehicle or person that has been requested to perform the cooperative operation; a determining step of determining the legitimacy of the cooperative operation based on at least one of a request source identifier and a request destination identifier included in at least one of the cooperative operation data; An information processing method including:

Images