Priority presentation device, priority presentation method, and priority presentation program

Abstract

To present determination items of an accident state so that they can be efficiently confirmed.SOLUTION: A priority presentation device 10 comprises a determination item priority calculation unit 20E. The determination item priority calculation unit 20E calculates a priority of each of a plurality of determination items for use in determination of an accident state on the basis of at least one of degrees of credence to a plurality of kinds of determination results about the plurality of determination items, variations in degree of credence showing differences in degree of credence between different kinds of determination results about the plurality of determination items, and variations in percentage of negligence showing differences in percentage of negligence between different kinds of determination results about the plurality of determination items.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] An embodiment of the present invention relates to a priority presentation device, a priority presentation method, and a priority presentation program. [Background technology]

[0002] After an accident involving a car, a pedestrian, or the like occurs, an insurance company or the like evaluates the fault ratio based on the accident situation. For example, a system has been disclosed that displays the results of a judgment such as the color of a traffic light or the traveling speed of a vehicle that is automatically judged for each of a number of judgment items for judging the accident situation, thereby providing the accident situation to an insurance company manager or the like so that the accident situation can be confirmed. Conventionally, a user such as an insurance company employee checks each of the displayed judgment items and appropriately corrects the automatically judged values ​​to set the fault ratio, etc., to a value to be actually applied.

[0003] However, in the conventional technology, multiple check items are always displayed in the same display format regardless of their importance, etc., so that the user does not know which check item should be checked first, and has to check all of the multiple check items with the same attention. In other words, in the conventional technology, check items are not provided in an efficient manner. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0004] [Patent Document 1] Patent No. 6876354 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0005] An object of the present invention is to provide a priority presentation device, a priority presentation method, and a priority presentation program that can provide accident situation determination items in an efficient and confirmable manner. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] The priority presentation device according to the embodiment includes a determination item priority calculation unit that calculates a priority of each of a plurality of determination items based on at least one of the reliability of each of a plurality of types of determination results for each of a plurality of determination items used to determine an accident situation, a reliability change amount that represents a difference in the reliability between different types of the determination results for each of the plurality of determination items, and a fault ratio change amount that represents a difference in fault ratio between different types of the determination results for each of the plurality of determination items. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0007] [Figure 1] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of a priority presentation device. [Figure 2A] An explanatory diagram of the analysis of accident situation data using a machine learning model. [Figure 2B] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram showing the data structure of analysis result information. [Figure 2C] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram showing a data structure of reliability information. [Figure 3A] FIG. 13 is a schematic diagram showing the data structure of fault ratio dictionary information. [Figure 3B] FIG. 13 is a schematic diagram showing the data structure of fault ratio information. [Figure 4A] FIG. [Figure 4B] FIG. [Figure 4C] FIG. [Figure 4D] FIG. [Figure 4E] FIG. [Figure 4F] FIG. [Diagram 5] 1 is a flowchart showing the flow of information processing. [Figure 6] Hardware configuration diagram. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

[0008] Hereinafter, a priority presentation device, a priority presentation method, and a priority presentation program will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0009] FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of an example of a priority presentation device 10 according to the present embodiment.

[0010] The priority level presentation device 10 is an information processing device for presenting the priority level of each of a plurality of determination items used to determine the accident situation.

[0011] An accident situation is information that indicates the situation of an accident caused by one or more parties, such as vehicles and pedestrians. For example, an accident situation is a situation of an accident caused by contact between an object and another object. Examples of objects are vehicles, pedestrians, animals, utility poles, walls, etc. Examples of vehicles are automobiles, bicycles, motorcycles, etc.

[0012] The judgment items are items used to judge the accident situation. In other words, the judgment items are items that can affect the judgment of the fault ratio of each of the parties. The judgment items are items that can judge each situation, such as the vehicle behavior, road conditions, other object behavior, road conditions, and traffic light conditions. Specific examples of the judgment items include the other vehicle involved in the collision, traffic light color, pedestrian crossing, pedestrian signal color, vehicle speed, whether or not there was a stop sign, whether or not there was a sudden acceleration, whether or not there was a center line, and the like, but are not limited to these.

[0013] The priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment provides the priority of each of these multiple judgment items.

[0014] The priority presentation device 10 includes a storage unit 12, a communication unit 14, a UI (user interface) unit 16, and a control unit 20. The storage unit 12, the communication unit 14, the UI unit 16, and the control unit 20 are communicatively connected via a bus 18 or the like.

[0015] The storage unit 12 stores various information. The communication unit 14 is a communication interface for communicating with an information processing device external to the priority presentation device 10. For example, the communication unit 14 communicates with an external information processing device or electronic device via a wired network such as Ethernet (registered trademark) or a wireless network such as Wi-Fi (Wireless Fidelity) or Bluetooth (registered trademark).

[0016] The UI unit 16 has a display function for displaying various information and an input function for receiving operation instructions from a user. The display function is realized, for example, by a display or the like. The input function is realized, for example, by a pointing device such as a mouse or a touch pad, a keyboard, etc. The UI unit 16 may be a touch panel that integrally configures the display function and the input function.

[0017] The control unit 20 executes information processing in the priority presentation device 10. The control unit 20 includes a reliability acquisition unit 20A, a fault ratio acquisition unit 20B, a reliability change amount calculation unit 20C, a fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D, a judgment item priority level calculation unit 20E, and a display control unit 20F.

[0018] The reliability acquisition unit 20A, the fault ratio acquisition unit 20B, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E, and the display control unit 20F are realized, for example, by one or more processors. For example, each of the above units may be realized by having a processor such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) execute a program, that is, by software. Each of the above units may be realized by a processor such as a dedicated IC, that is, by hardware. Each of the above units may be realized by using both software and hardware. When multiple processors are used, each processor may realize one of the units, or may realize two or more of the units.

[0019] The reliability acquiring unit 20A acquires reliability information indicating the reliability of each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items from the accident situation analysis result information.

[0020] The analysis result information is information that represents the analysis result of accident situation data that represents the accident situation. The analysis result information is, for example, information that represents the analysis result by a machine learning model.

[0021] FIG. 2A is an explanatory diagram of an example of analysis of accident situation data 30 by a machine learning model 32.

[0022] The accident situation data 30 is data that represents the accident situation. The accident situation data 30 is, for example, an image of the accident situation, a sensor detection result of the accident situation, etc. The image of the accident situation is, for example, an image taken at the time of the accident, taken by a photographing device mounted on the vehicle of the person involved in the accident or a photographing device installed at the accident site. The sensor detection result of the accident situation is, for example, a detection result detected by a sensor mounted on the vehicle of the person involved in the accident. Specifically, the detection result is, for example, data such as position, speed, acceleration, and voice by GPS (Global Positioning System).

[0023] The machine learning model 32 is a model that analyzes the accident situation data 30 and outputs analysis result information 34, which is an analysis result of the accident situation. For the machine learning model 32, a model using a known machine learning method such as CNN (convolutional neural network) or SVM (support vector machine) may be used.

[0024] 2B is a schematic diagram of an example of the data configuration of the analysis result information 34. For example, assume that the accident situation data 30 is an image of the accident situation. In this case, for example, the analysis result information 34 is information that specifies the likelihood that each area including each of the multiple elements included in the image of the accident situation belongs to each of multiple classes. The classes are determined by, for example, a combination of judgment items and judgment results.

[0025] FIG. 2B shows, as examples, class 1 of the judgment item "traffic light color" and the judgment result "green", class 2 of the judgment item "traffic light color" and the judgment result "yellow", class 3 of the judgment item "traffic light color" and the judgment result "red", class 4 of the judgment item "pedestrian crossing" and the judgment result "present", class 5 of the judgment item "pedestrian crossing" and the judgment result "absent", class N-1 of the judgment item "center line" and the judgment result "present", and class N of the judgment item "center line" and the judgment result "absent". N is an integer. Note that the analysis result information 34 may be, for example, information that specifies the likelihood of belonging to a class determined by a combination of judgment items and judgment results for each area included in the image representing the accident situation, and the number of classes and the method of classifying the areas are not limited to the form shown in FIG. 2B.

[0026] Returning to Figure 1, we will continue with the explanation.

[0027] The reliability acquiring unit 20A acquires reliability information indicating the reliability of each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items from the accident situation analysis result information .

[0028] FIG. 2C is a schematic diagram showing an example of the data configuration of the reliability information 36. As shown in FIG.

[0029] The reliability information 36 is information that indicates the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results for each judgment item for each judgment item. The reliability acquisition unit 20A generates the reliability information 36 by assigning a higher reliability to each of the multiple types of judgment results for each judgment item based on the analysis result information 34, the higher the likelihood of the judgment result.

[0030] Therefore, the reliability information 36 is information that is assigned a higher reliability to a determination result with a higher likelihood represented by the analysis result information 34 by the machine learning model 32.

[0031] In this embodiment, when the detection result of the pedestrian traffic light is used, the judgment result "yellow" of the judgment item "pedestrian traffic light color" means that the pedestrian traffic light color is green and flashing. When the detection result of the pedestrian traffic light is used instead of the judgment item "vehicle traffic light" (see the judgment item "traffic light color" in FIG. 2C), the judgment result "yellow" of the judgment item "vehicle traffic light" is used as the judgment result "yellow" of the judgment item "pedestrian traffic light color."

[0032] Continuing the explanation by returning to Fig. 1, the reliability acquisition section 20A outputs the acquired reliability information 36 to the reliability change amount calculation section 20C and the check item priority level calculation section 20E.

[0033] The fault ratio acquisition unit 20B acquires, from the fault ratio dictionary information, fault ratio information that indicates the fault ratio corresponding to each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items.

[0034] The fault ratio dictionary information is information that defines the fault ratio of the parties involved in an accident for each accident situation represented by a combination of one or more judgment items. The fault ratio dictionary information is determined in advance according to, for example, past cases or court precedents.

[0035] Fault proportion acquisition unit 20B may read fault proportion dictionary information 40 stored in memory unit 12, and acquire fault proportion information from the read fault proportion dictionary information 40. Note that fault proportion acquisition unit 20B may read fault proportion dictionary information 40 from an external information processing device via communication unit 14, and acquire fault proportion information from the read fault proportion dictionary information 40.

[0036] 3A is a schematic diagram showing an example of the data configuration of the fault ratio dictionary information 40. For example, the fault ratio dictionary information 40 is information that defines the fault ratio of the parties involved for each accident situation specified by a combination of one or more judgment items such as pedestrians, cars, traffic lights, etc., and the judgment results for each of these judgment items such as green or red.

[0037] The fault ratio acquisition unit 20B acquires fault ratio information from the fault ratio dictionary information 40.

[0038] 3B is a schematic diagram showing an example of the data configuration of fault ratio information 42. Fault ratio information 42 is information that indicates the fault ratio corresponding to each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items.

[0039] For example, the fault ratio information 42 is data that associates the accident situation represented by a combination of one or more judgment items and judgment results for the judgment items with the fault ratio of the parties involved. FIG. 3B shows, as an example, the fault ratio corresponding to the accident situation represented by the judgment result "Yes" of the judgment item "Pedestrian", the judgment result "Red" of the judgment item "Pedestrian signal color", and the judgment result "Green" of the judgment item "Traffic light color". FIG. 3B also shows, as an example, the fault ratio corresponding to the accident situation represented by the judgment result "Yes" of the judgment item "Pedestrian", the judgment result "Yellow" of the judgment item "Pedestrian signal color", and the judgment result "Green" of the judgment item "Traffic light color". FIG. 3B also shows, as an example, the fault ratio corresponding to the accident situation represented by the judgment result "Yes" of the judgment item "Pedestrian", the judgment result "Red" of the judgment item "Traffic light color", and the judgment result "Green" of the judgment item "Traffic light color".

[0040] The correspondence between the combination of the judgment items and judgment results represented by the accident situation registered in the fault ratio information 42 and the fault ratio is not limited to the form shown in FIG. 3B.

[0041] Fault proportion acquisition unit 20B may generate and acquire fault proportion information 42 by extracting, from fault proportion dictionary information 40, the fault proportion corresponding to each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items.

[0042] Returning to Fig. 1, the explanation will be continued. The fault ratio acquisition unit 20B outputs the acquired fault ratio information 42 to the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D.

[0043] Based on the reliability information 36, the reliability change calculation unit 20C calculates, for each of the multiple judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in reliability between each of the multiple corresponding types of judgment results and other types of judgment results as the reliability change amount.

[0044] A description will be given with reference to FIG. 2C. For example, the judgment item "pedestrian signal color" will be described. The reliability change amount calculation unit 20C reads the reliability "0.5", "0.08", and "0.42" for each of the judgment results "red", "yellow", and "green" corresponding to the judgment item "pedestrian signal color". Then, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates the absolute value of the difference in reliability between the judgment result "red" and the judgment result "yellow" "0.42", the absolute value of the difference in reliability between the judgment result "red" and the judgment result "green" "0.08", and the absolute value of the difference in reliability between the judgment result "yellow" and the judgment result "green" "0.34" as the reliability change amount for the judgment item "pedestrian signal color". Similarly, for other judgment items, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates the absolute value of the difference in reliability between the judgment results of the multiple types corresponding to the judgment item as the reliability change amount.

[0045] In addition, the reliability change calculation unit 20C may calculate, for each of a plurality of judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in reliability between any one pair or any multiple pairs of judgment results among the reliability of each of the corresponding multiple types of judgment results as the reliability change amount.

[0046] In this embodiment, as an example, a form will be described in which the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates the absolute value of the difference in reliability between any pair of judgment results among the respective reliability of multiple types of judgment results corresponding to each of multiple judgment items as the reliability change amount of the judgment item.

[0047] In detail, in this embodiment, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates, for each of a plurality of judgment items, the absolute value of the difference between the highest reliability and the next highest reliability among the reliability of each of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results as the reliability change amount.

[0048] For example, the judgment item "pedestrian signal color" will be described. In this case, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates, as the reliability change amount of the judgment item "pedestrian signal color", the absolute value of the difference between the reliability "0.5" of "red", which is the highest reliability among the multiple types of judgment results "red", "yellow", and "green" corresponding to the judgment item "pedestrian signal color", and the reliability "0.42" of "green", which is the second highest reliability, as the reliability change amount of the judgment item "pedestrian signal color".

[0049] Returning to Fig. 1, the description will be continued. The reliability change amount calculation unit 20C outputs information representing each of the plurality of judgment items and the reliability change amount calculated for each of the plurality of judgment items to the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D and the judgment item priority level calculation unit 20E.

[0050] Based on the fault ratio information 42, the fault ratio change calculation unit 20D calculates, for each of a plurality of judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in fault ratio between each of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results and other types of judgment results as the fault ratio change.

[0051] A description will be given with reference to FIG. 3B. For example, the judgment item "pedestrian signal color" will be described. The fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D reads the fault ratio of any one party (e.g., a pedestrian) for each of the multiple types of judgment results "red," "yellow," and "green" corresponding to the judgment item "pedestrian signal color." Then, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D calculates the absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the judgment result "green" and the judgment result "yellow" (30%), the absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the judgment result "green" and the judgment result "red" (50%), and the absolute value of the difference in the reliability between the judgment result "yellow" and the judgment result "red" (20%) as the fault ratio change amount for the judgment item "pedestrian signal color." Similarly, for other judgment items, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D calculates the absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the multiple types of judgment results corresponding to the judgment item as the fault ratio change amount.

[0052] In addition, the fault ratio change calculation unit 20D may calculate, for each of a plurality of judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio of any one pair or any multiple pairs of judgment results among the respective fault ratios of the corresponding multiple types of judgment results as the fault ratio change of the judgment item.

[0053] In this case, the fault ratio change calculation unit 20D calculates, for each of the multiple judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the judgment results used by the reliability change calculation unit 20C to calculate the reliability change, among the fault ratios of each of the corresponding multiple types of judgment results.

[0054] As described above, in this embodiment, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D calculates, for each of the multiple judgment items, the absolute value of the difference between the highest reliability and the second highest reliability among the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results corresponding to the multiple judgment items as the reliability change amount. Therefore, in this embodiment, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D calculates, for each of the multiple judgment items, the absolute value of the difference between the fault ratio corresponding to the most reliable judgment result and the fault ratio corresponding to the second most reliable judgment result.

[0055] For example, the judgment item "pedestrian signal color" will be described. In this case, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D calculates, as the fault ratio change amount of the judgment item "pedestrian signal color", the absolute value of the difference between the pedestrian fault ratio "50%" corresponding to "red", which has the highest reliability among the multiple types of judgment results "red", "yellow", and "green" corresponding to the judgment item "pedestrian signal color", and the pedestrian fault ratio "0%" corresponding to "green", which has the next highest reliability.

[0056] Returning to Fig. 1, the explanation continues. Fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D outputs information representing each of the plurality of judgment items and the fault ratio change amount calculated for each of the plurality of judgment items to the judgment item priority level calculation unit 20E.

[0057] The judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority of each of the multiple judgment items based on at least one of the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items used to judge the accident situation, the reliability change amount representing the difference in reliability between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items, and the fault ratio change amount representing the difference in fault ratio between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items.

[0058] The check item priority calculation unit 20E receives reliability information 36 from the reliability acquisition unit 20A. The check item priority calculation unit 20E also receives information representing each of the multiple check items and the reliability change amount calculated for each of the multiple check items from the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C. The check item priority calculation unit 20E also receives information representing each of the multiple check items and the fault ratio change amount calculated for each of the multiple check items from the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D.

[0059] Then, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority of each of the multiple judgment items using at least one of the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results included in the reliability information 36, the reliability change amount representing the difference in reliability between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items, and the fault ratio change amount representing the difference in fault ratio between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items included in the fault ratio information 42.

[0060] Specifically, the check item priority calculation unit 20E calculates a priority for each of a plurality of check items such that the lower the reliability, the smaller the amount of change in reliability, and the greater the amount of change in fault ratio, the higher the priority.

[0061] For example, for each of a plurality of judgment items, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E specifies the highest reliability among the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results as the reliability of the judgment item. Then, for each of a plurality of judgment items, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates a higher priority as the specified reliability is lower.

[0062] Furthermore, for example, the check item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority for each check item using the following formula (1).

[0063] Priority = (1 / α) × β ····································································································· (1)

[0064] In formula (1), α represents the amount of change in reliability, and β represents the amount of change in fault ratio.

[0065] Furthermore, the check item priority calculation unit 20E may calculate the priority for each check item using the following formula (2) or (3): In formulas (2) and (3), α and β have the same meanings as in formula (1).

[0066] Priority = (1-α)×β ··Equation (2) Priority=(1 / α)+β ···Equation (3)

[0067] In the above formulas (1) to (3), a larger value indicates a higher priority.

[0068] The above α may represent a reliability. The above α may be an addition result, a multiplication result, or an average value of the reliability and the reliability change amount. In this case, the reliability used for α may be the highest reliability among the multiple types of judgment results corresponding to each of the multiple judgment items.

[0069] As described above, in this embodiment, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates, as an example, the absolute value of the difference in reliability between a pair of judgment results, which is a pair of the most reliable judgment result and the second most reliable judgment result, among the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results corresponding to each of the multiple judgment items, as the reliability change amount. Also, the fault ratio change amount calculation unit 20D calculates, as an example, the absolute value of the difference in fault ratio between a pair of judgment results, which is a pair of the most reliable judgment result and the second most reliable judgment result, among the fault ratios of each of the multiple types of judgment results corresponding to each of the multiple judgment items, as the fault ratio change amount. Therefore, in this embodiment, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E uses one reliability change amount and one fault ratio change amount calculated for one judgment item to calculate the priority of the judgment item.

[0070] As described above, the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C may calculate, for each of the multiple judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in reliability between multiple pairs of judgment results having different combinations of types of judgment results among the respective reliability of multiple types of corresponding judgment results as the reliability change amount. Similarly, the fault proportion change amount calculation unit 20D may calculate, for each of the multiple judgment items, the absolute value of the difference in fault proportion between multiple pairs of judgment results having different combinations of types of judgment results among the respective fault proportions of multiple types of corresponding judgment results.

[0071] In this case, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E will receive multiple reliability change amounts and multiple fault proportion change amounts for one judgment item, each of which has a different combination of types of judgment results, from the reliability change amount calculation unit 20C and the fault proportion change amount calculation unit 20D.

[0072] In this case, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates a provisional priority for each of a plurality of pairs of different combinations of judgment result types for one judgment item from the corresponding reliability change amount and fault ratio change amount using any of the above formulas (1) to (3).Then, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E may calculate, as the priority for the judgment item, the sum, average, or multiplication value of the provisional priority for each of the plurality of pairs of different combinations of judgment result types calculated for one judgment item.

[0073] Through these processes, the check item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority of each of the multiple check items used to determine the accident situation.

[0074] The display control unit 20F displays the check items in a display form according to the priority calculated by the check item priority calculation unit 20E. In detail, the display control unit 20F displays the check items in a display form that encourages greater attention as the priority becomes higher.

[0075] 4A is a schematic diagram of an example of a display screen 50A. The display screen 50A is an example of the display screen 50 displayed on the UI unit 16 by the display control unit 20F.

[0076] The display control unit 20F displays, for example, a display screen 50A on the UI unit 16. The display screen 50A includes an accident basic information display field 52A, an accident situation diagram display field 52B, a judgment item list display field 52C, an accident information display field 52D, and a judgment basis display field 52E.

[0077] The accident basic information display field 52A is a display field for basic information regarding the accident. For example, information regarding the parties involved in the accident, information that can identify the accident, and the like are displayed in the accident basic information display field 52A.

[0078] The accident situation diagram display field 52B is a display field for diagrams showing the accident situation. For example, an image of the accident at the time of the accident, a diagram that typically shows the accident environment at the time of the accident, etc. are displayed in the accident situation diagram display field 52B.

[0079] The check item list display field 52C is a display field for a list of a plurality of check items used to determine the accident situation. The check item list display field 52C displays, for example, a list of check items and the most reliable check result corresponding to each check item.

[0080] The accident information display field 52D is a display field for accident information. In the accident information display field 52D, various information related to the accident, such as legal precedent information related to the accident displayed on the display screen 50A, is displayed.

[0081] The judgment basis display field 52E is a display field for detailed data and evidence data of each of a plurality of judgment items used in judging the accident situation. The judgment basis display field 52E includes, for example, a priority display field 52E1 and a display field 52E2 of evidence data of each judgment item. The priority display field 52E1 displays, for example, a list of a plurality of judgment items for which priorities have been calculated. The display field 52E2 of evidence data of each judgment item displays, for each judgment item, evidence data, detailed data, and the like used in judging the judgment item.

[0082] For example, assume a situation in which judgment items such as "own vehicle signal," "own vehicle movement," and "center line" are displayed. Also assume a case in which the judgment item "own vehicle signal" has the highest priority, followed by "own vehicle movement" and "center line" in descending order of priority.

[0083] In this case, for example, the display control unit 20F displays the "own vehicle signal", which is the judgment item with the highest priority, in a display form different from that of the other judgment items. Specifically, for example, as shown in FIG. 4A, the display control unit 20F selectively highlights the judgment item with the highest priority, "own vehicle signal", among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display field 52E1 (see area 52Ea). Also, as shown in FIG. 4A, the display control unit 20F displays the multiple judgment items included in the display screen 50A in descending order of priority. Note that the display control unit 20F may highlight judgment items with priorities equal to or higher than a threshold instead of in descending order of priority.

[0084] Furthermore, the display control unit 20F may highlight a plurality of check items in descending order of priority.

[0085] 4B is a schematic diagram of an example of a display screen 50B. The display screen 50B is an example of the display screen 50 displayed on the UI unit 16 by the display control unit 20F.

[0086] The display control unit 20F displays, for example, a display screen 50B on the UI unit 16. The display screen 50B includes, like the display screen 50A, for example, an accident basic information display field 52A, an accident situation diagram display field 52B, a judgment item list display field 52C, an accident information display field 52D, and a judgment grounds display field 52E.

[0087] For example, assume a situation in which judgment items such as "own vehicle signal," "own vehicle movement," and "center line" are displayed. Also assume a case in which the judgment item "own vehicle signal" has the highest priority, followed by "own vehicle movement" and "center line" in descending order of priority.

[0088] In this case, for example, the display control unit 20F highlights "own vehicle signal", which is the highest priority judgment item among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display field 52E1 (see area 52Ea). The display control unit 20F also highlights "own vehicle movement", which is the next highest priority judgment item, in a color that can encourage attention next to area 52Ea (see area 52Eb). Note that the display control unit 20F may provide multiple priority threshold ranges in order of decreasing priority, and highlight the priority judgment items in each threshold range in a color corresponding to each threshold range.

[0089] Furthermore, the display control unit 20F may display all of the determination items included in the display screen 50 in a display form according to the priority.

[0090] 4C is a schematic diagram of an example of a display screen 50C. The display screen 50C is an example of the display screen 50 displayed on the UI unit 16 by the display control unit 20F.

[0091] The display control unit 20F displays, for example, a display screen 50C on the UI unit 16. The display screen 50C includes, like the display screen 50A, for example, an accident basic information display field 52A, an accident situation diagram display field 52B, a judgment item list display field 52C, an accident information display field 52D, and a judgment grounds display field 52E.

[0092] For example, assume a situation in which judgment items such as "own vehicle signal," "own vehicle movement," and "center line" are displayed. Also assume a case in which the judgment item "own vehicle signal" has the highest priority, followed by "own vehicle movement" and "center line" in descending order of priority.

[0093] In this case, for example, the display control unit 20F displays the "own vehicle signal", which is the judgment item with the highest priority, in a display form different from that of the other judgment items. Specifically, for example, as shown in Fig. 4C, the display control unit 20F selectively highlights the judgment item with the highest priority, "own vehicle signal", among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display field 52E1, the display field 52E2 of the evidence data of each of the judgment items, and the judgment item list display field 52C (see areas 52Ea, 52Ec, and 52Ca).

[0094] Furthermore, the display control unit 20F may highlight a plurality of check items among all check items included on the display screen 50 in descending order of priority.

[0095] 4D is a schematic diagram of an example of a display screen 50D. The display screen 50D is an example of the display screen 50 displayed on the UI unit 16 by the display control unit 20F.

[0096] The display control unit 20F displays, for example, a display screen 50D on the UI unit 16. The display screen 50D includes, like the display screen 50A, for example, an accident basic information display field 52A, an accident situation diagram display field 52B, a judgment item list display field 52C, an accident information display field 52D, and a judgment grounds display field 52E.

[0097] For example, assume a situation in which judgment items such as "own vehicle signal," "own vehicle movement," and "center line" are displayed. Also assume a case in which the judgment item "own vehicle signal" has the highest priority, followed by "own vehicle movement" and "center line" in descending order of priority.

[0098] In this case, for example, the display control unit 20F highlights the "own vehicle signal" which is the judgment item with the highest priority among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display column 52E1, the display column 52E2 of the evidence data of each judgment item, and the judgment item list display column 52C (see areas 52Ea, 52Ec, and 52Ca). The display control unit 20F also highlights the "own vehicle movement" which is the judgment item with the next highest priority among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display column 52E1, the display column 52E2 of the evidence data of each judgment item, and the judgment item list display column 52C with a color or the like that can encourage attention next (see areas 52Eb, 52Ed, and 52Cb).

[0099] Furthermore, the display control unit 20F may highlight a plurality of determination items included in the display screen 50 according to priority, rather than arranging them in order of priority.

[0100] 4E is a schematic diagram of an example of a display screen 50D. The display screen 50E is an example of the display screen 50 displayed on the UI unit 16 by the display control unit 20F.

[0101] The display control unit 20F displays, for example, a display screen 50E on the UI unit 16. The display screen 50E includes, like the display screen 50A, for example, an accident basic information display field 52A, an accident situation diagram display field 52B, a judgment item list display field 52C, an accident information display field 52D, and a judgment grounds display field 52E.

[0102] For example, assume a situation in which judgment items such as "own vehicle signal," "own vehicle movement," and "center line" are displayed. Also assume a case in which the judgment item "own vehicle signal" has the highest priority, followed by "own vehicle movement" and "center line" in descending order of priority.

[0103] In this case, for example, the display control unit 20F highlights the "own vehicle signal" which is the judgment item with the highest priority among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display column 52E1, the display column 52E2 of the evidence data of each judgment item, and the judgment item list display column 52C (see areas 52Ea, 52Ec, and 52Ca). The display control unit 20F also highlights the "own vehicle movement" which is the judgment item with the next highest priority among the multiple judgment items displayed in the priority display column 52E1, the display column 52E2 of the evidence data of each judgment item, and the judgment item list display column 52C with a color or the like that can encourage attention next (see areas 52Eb, 52Ed, and 52Cb). At this time, the display control unit 20F may display multiple judgment items included in at least one of the display columns 52E1 for priority, 52E2 for evidence data for each judgment item, and 52C for judgment item list, in an order other than priority order, as shown in FIG. 4E.

[0104] Furthermore, the display control unit 20F may exclude the judgment results of judgment items whose priorities are equal to or lower than a threshold value from the display targets.

[0105] 4F is a schematic diagram of an example of a display screen 50F. The display screen 50F is an example of the display screen 50 displayed on the UI unit 16 by the display control unit 20F.

[0106] The display control unit 20F displays, for example, a display screen 50F on the UI unit 16. The display screen 50F includes, like the display screen 50A, for example, an accident basic information display field 52A, an accident situation diagram display field 52B, a judgment item list display field 52C, an accident information display field 52D, and a judgment grounds display field 52E.

[0107] For example, assume a situation in which judgment items such as "own vehicle signal," "own vehicle movement," and "center line" are displayed. Also assume a case in which the judgment item "own vehicle signal" has the highest priority, followed by "own vehicle movement" and "center line" in decreasing order of priority. Also assume a case in which the priority of the judgment item "center line" is equal to or lower than a threshold value.

[0108] In this case, for example, the display control unit 20F may display the display screen 50F in which the judgment result of the judgment item "center line" whose priority is equal to or lower than the threshold is not displayed (see area 52Cc). In this case, for example, the user may input any judgment result in the area 52Cc by operating the UI unit 16. The display control unit 20F that receives the input of the judgment result may store the received judgment result in association with the corresponding judgment item.

[0109] Next, an example of the flow of information processing executed by the priority presentation device 10 of the embodiment will be described.

[0110] FIG. 5 is a flowchart showing an example of the flow of information processing executed by the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment.

[0111] The reliability obtaining unit 20A obtains reliability information 36 indicating the reliability of each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items from the accident situation analysis result information 34 (step S100).

[0112] The fault proportion acquisition unit 20B acquires the fault proportion information 42 from the fault proportion dictionary information 40 (Step S102).

[0113] The reliability change amount calculation unit 20C calculates the reliability change amount for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the reliability information 36 acquired in step S100 (step S104).

[0114] Fault proportion change amount calculation unit 20D calculates the amount of change in fault proportion for each of a plurality of judgment items based on fault proportion information 42 acquired in step S102 (step S106).

[0115] The judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority of each of the multiple judgment items based on at least one of the reliability represented by the reliability information 36 acquired in step S100, the reliability change amount calculated in step S104, and the fault ratio change amount calculated in step S106 (step S108).

[0116] The display control unit 20F displays the check items in a display form according to the priority calculated for each of the check items in step S108 (step S110), and then ends this routine.

[0117] As described above, the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment includes a judgment item priority calculation unit 20E. The judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority of each of the multiple judgment items based on at least one of the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items used to judge the accident situation, the reliability change amount representing the difference in reliability between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items, and the fault ratio change amount representing the difference in fault ratio between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items.

[0118] In the conventional technology, multiple check items were displayed in the same display format regardless of their importance. Therefore, in the conventional technology, the user did not know which check item should be checked first, and had to check all of the multiple check items with the same attention. Therefore, in the conventional technology, the checking operation by the user may be inefficient.

[0119] In addition, the reliability of the judgment results for the judgment items may vary depending on the performance of the machine learning model that derived the judgment results and the accuracy of the accident situation data used for the derivation. However, in the conventional technology, since only a list of multiple judgment items is displayed, it is difficult for the user to determine which judgment item's judgment result needs to be particularly confirmed or corrected. In addition, in the conventional technology, there are cases where the user fails to confirm a particularly important judgment item. In other words, in the conventional technology, the judgment items of the accident situation are not provided in a manner that allows efficient confirmation.

[0120] On the other hand, in the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment, the judgment item priority calculation unit 20E calculates the priority of each of the multiple judgment items based on at least one of the reliability of each of the multiple types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items used to judge the accident situation, the reliability change amount representing the difference in reliability between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items, and the fault ratio change amount representing the difference in fault ratio between different types of judgment results for each of the multiple judgment items.

[0121] For example, a judgment item including a judgment result with low reliability is a judgment item that particularly requires confirmation by the user because it is highly likely to have a particular effect on the determination of the fault ratio. In addition, the smaller the reliability change amount, which is the difference in reliability between multiple types of judgment results, the lower the certainty of the judgment result, so the judgment item is a judgment item that particularly requires confirmation by the user. In addition, the larger the difference in the fault ratio between multiple types of judgment results for a judgment item, the larger the change in the fault ratio due to the difference in judgment results, so the judgment item is a judgment item that particularly requires confirmation by the user.

[0122] The priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment calculates the priority of each of a plurality of judgment items based on at least one of the reliability, the reliability change amount, and the fault ratio change amount. Therefore, the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment can calculate a priority indicating that confirmation by the user is particularly required for each of a plurality of judgment items. Therefore, the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment can provide the judgment items that the user should be particularly urged to pay attention to by outputting each of the plurality of judgment items according to the calculated priority.

[0123] Therefore, the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment can provide the accident situation judgment items in an efficient and confirmable manner.

[0124] Next, an example of the hardware configuration of the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment will be described.

[0125] FIG. 6 is a diagram showing an example of a hardware configuration of the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment.

[0126] The priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment is equipped with a control device such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 90D, storage devices such as a ROM (Read Only Memory) 90E, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 90F, and a HDD (Hard Disk Drive) 90G, an I / F unit 90B that interfaces with various devices, an output unit 90A that outputs various information, an input unit 90C that accepts operations by the user, and a bus 90H that connects each unit, and has a hardware configuration that utilizes a normal computer.

[0127] In the priority presentation device 10 of this embodiment, the CPU 90D reads out a program from the ROM 90E onto the RAM 90F and executes it, thereby realizing each of the above-mentioned units on the computer.

[0128] The programs for executing the above-mentioned processes executed by the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment may be stored in the HDD 90G. Also, the programs for executing the above-mentioned processes executed by the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment may be provided by being pre-installed in the ROM 90E.

[0129] The program for executing the above-mentioned processes executed by the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment may be stored in a computer-readable storage medium such as a CD-ROM, CD-R, memory card, DVD (Digital Versatile Disc), or flexible disk (FD) in an installable or executable format file and provided as a computer program product. The program for executing the above-mentioned processes executed by the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment may be stored on a computer connected to a network such as the Internet and provided by downloading the program via the network. The program for executing the above-mentioned processes executed by the priority presentation device 10 of the present embodiment may be provided or distributed via a network such as the Internet.

[0130] Although the embodiment of the present invention has been described above, the embodiment is presented as an example and is not intended to limit the scope of the invention. This new embodiment can be implemented in various other forms, and various omissions, substitutions, and modifications can be made without departing from the gist of the invention. This embodiment and its modifications are included in the scope and gist of the invention, and are included in the scope of the invention and its equivalents described in the claims. [Explanation of symbols]

[0131] 10 Priority presentation device 20A Reliability acquisition unit 20B Fault ratio acquisition section 20C Reliability change calculation unit 20D Fault ratio change amount calculation section 20E Judgment item priority calculation unit 20F Display control unit

Claims

1. a judgment item priority calculation unit that calculates a priority of each of a plurality of judgment items based on at least one of the reliability of each of a plurality of types of judgment results for each of a plurality of judgment items used to judge an accident situation, a reliability change amount that represents a difference in the reliability between different types of the judgment results for each of the plurality of judgment items, and a fault ratio change amount that represents a difference in the fault ratio between different types of the judgment results for each of the plurality of judgment items; A priority presentation device comprising:

2. a reliability acquisition unit that acquires reliability information representing the reliability of each of the plurality of types of the determination results for each of the plurality of determination items from the analysis result information of the accident situation; a fault ratio acquisition unit that acquires fault ratio information representing the fault ratio corresponding to each of a plurality of types of the judgment results for each of the plurality of judgment items from fault ratio dictionary information; Equipped with The judgment item priority calculation unit Calculating the priority of each of the plurality of judgment items using at least one of the reliability of each of the plurality of types of judgment results included in the reliability information, the reliability change amount calculated from the reliability information, and the fault ratio change amount calculated from the fault ratio information. The priority presentation device according to claim 1 .

3. The analysis result information is an analysis result of accident situation data by a machine learning model, The priority presentation device according to claim 2 .

4. a reliability change amount calculation unit that calculates, for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the reliability information, an absolute value of a difference in reliability between each of the plurality of types of judgment results corresponding to the plurality of judgment items and the judgment results of other types as the reliability change amount; a fault ratio change amount calculation unit that calculates, for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the fault ratio information, an absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between each of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results and the other types of judgment results as the fault ratio change amount; Equipped with The priority presentation device according to claim 2 or 3.

5. The reliability change amount calculation unit calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items, an absolute value of a difference between the highest reliability and the second highest reliability among the reliability of each of the plurality of corresponding judgment results as the reliability change amount; The fault ratio change amount calculation unit For each of the plurality of judgment items, among the fault ratios of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results, an absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the judgment results used in calculating the reliability change amount is calculated as the fault ratio change amount. The priority presentation device according to claim 4.

6. The judgment item priority calculation unit Calculating the priority for each of the plurality of judgment items, the priority being higher as the reliability is lower, the priority being higher as the reliability change amount is smaller, and the priority being higher as the fault ratio change amount is larger. The priority presentation device according to any one of claims 1 to 5.

7. a display control unit that displays the judgment items in a display form according to the priority; The priority presentation device according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

8. The display control unit is The judgment result of the judgment item whose priority is equal to or lower than a threshold is excluded from display. The priority presentation device according to claim 7.

9. A priority presentation method executed by an information processing device, comprising: a determination item priority calculation step of calculating a priority of each of the plurality of determination items based on at least one of the reliability of each of the plurality of determination items used to determine the accident situation, a reliability change amount representing a difference in the reliability between the determination results of different types for each of the plurality of determination items, and a fault ratio change amount representing a difference in the fault ratio between the determination results of different types for each of the plurality of determination items; A priority presentation method including:

10. a reliability acquisition step of acquiring reliability information representing the reliability of each of the plurality of types of the determination results for each of the plurality of determination items from the analysis result information of the accident situation; a fault ratio step of acquiring fault ratio information representing the fault ratio corresponding to each of a plurality of types of the judgment results for each of the plurality of judgment items from fault ratio dictionary information; Including, The step of calculating the priority of each judgment item includes: Calculating the priority of each of the plurality of judgment items using at least one of the reliability of each of the plurality of types of judgment results included in the reliability information, the reliability change amount calculated from the reliability information, and the fault ratio change amount calculated from the fault ratio information. The method for presenting priority according to claim 9.

11. The analysis result information is an analysis result of accident situation data by a machine learning model, The method for presenting priority according to claim 10.

12. a reliability change amount calculation step of calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the reliability information, an absolute value of the difference in reliability between each of the plurality of types of judgment results corresponding to the plurality of judgment items and the judgment results of other types as the reliability change amount; a fault ratio change amount calculation step of calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the fault ratio information, an absolute value of the difference between the fault ratio of each of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results and the other types of judgment results as the fault ratio change amount; Including, The method for presenting priority according to claim 10 or 11.

13. The reliability change amount calculation step includes: calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items, an absolute value of a difference between the highest reliability and the second highest reliability among the reliability of each of the plurality of corresponding judgment results as the reliability change amount; The fault ratio change amount calculation step includes: For each of the plurality of judgment items, among the fault ratios of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results, an absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the judgment results used in calculating the reliability change amount is calculated as the fault ratio change amount. The method for presenting priority according to claim 12.

14. The step of calculating the priority of each judgment item includes: Calculating the priority for each of the plurality of judgment items, the priority being higher as the reliability is lower, the priority being higher as the reliability change amount is smaller, and the priority being higher as the fault ratio change amount is larger. The method for presenting priority according to any one of claims 9 to 13.

15. a display control step of displaying the judgment items in a display form according to the priority, The method for presenting priority according to any one of claims 9 to 14.

16. The display control step includes: The judgment result of the judgment item whose priority is equal to or lower than a threshold is excluded from display. The method of claim 15 .

17. a determination item priority calculation step of calculating a priority of each of the plurality of determination items based on at least one of the reliability of each of the plurality of determination items used to determine the accident situation, a reliability change amount representing a difference in the reliability between the determination results of different types for each of the plurality of determination items, and a fault ratio change amount representing a difference in the fault ratio between the determination results of different types for each of the plurality of determination items; A priority presentation program for causing a computer to execute the above.

18. a reliability acquisition step of acquiring reliability information representing the reliability of each of the plurality of types of the determination results for each of the plurality of determination items from the analysis result information of the accident situation; a fault ratio step of acquiring fault ratio information representing the fault ratio corresponding to each of a plurality of types of the judgment results for each of the plurality of judgment items from fault ratio dictionary information; Including, The step of calculating the priority of each judgment item includes: Calculating the priority of each of the plurality of judgment items using at least one of the reliability of each of the plurality of types of judgment results included in the reliability information, the reliability change amount calculated from the reliability information, and the fault ratio change amount calculated from the fault ratio information.

18. The priority presentation program according to claim 17.

19. The analysis result information is an analysis result of accident situation data by a machine learning model, 20. The priority presentation program according to claim 18.

20. a reliability change amount calculation step of calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the reliability information, an absolute value of the difference in reliability between each of the plurality of types of judgment results corresponding to the plurality of judgment items and the judgment results of other types as the reliability change amount; a fault ratio change amount calculation step of calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items based on the fault ratio information, an absolute value of the difference between the fault ratio of each of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results and the other types of judgment results as the fault ratio change amount; Including, 20. The priority presentation program according to claim 18 or 19.

21. The reliability change amount calculation step includes: calculating, for each of the plurality of judgment items, an absolute value of a difference between the highest reliability and the second highest reliability among the reliability of each of the plurality of types of corresponding judgment results as the reliability change amount; The fault ratio change amount calculation step includes: For each of the plurality of judgment items, among the fault ratios of the corresponding plurality of types of judgment results, an absolute value of the difference in the fault ratio between the judgment results used in calculating the reliability change amount is calculated as the fault ratio change amount.

21. The priority presentation program according to claim 20.

22. The step of calculating the priority of each judgment item includes: Calculating the priority for each of the plurality of judgment items, the priority being higher as the reliability is lower, the priority being higher as the reliability change amount is smaller, and the priority being higher as the fault ratio change amount is larger. The priority presentation program according to any one of claims 17 to 21.

23. a display control step of displaying the judgment items in a display form according to the priority, The priority presentation program according to any one of claims 17 to 22.

24. The display control step includes: The judgment result of the judgment item whose priority is equal to or lower than a threshold is excluded from display.

24. The priority presentation program according to claim 23.

Images