Route determination method, route determination device, and program

Abstract

Provided are a route determination method, a route determination device, and a program that make it possible to determine a route which enables an electric vehicle to be charged safely. A route determination device according to the present disclosure comprises a travel request reception unit, a reliability acquisition unit, a first route determination unit, and a route information acquisition unit. The travel request reception unit receives a travel request that includes one or more destinations and that requests travel of the electric vehicle by way of the destinations. The reliability acquisition unit acquires the reliability of each of a plurality of charging stations from the reliability storage unit. When the travel request has been received by the travel request reception unit, the first route determination unit determines, on the basis of the reliability that has been acquired by the reliability acquisition unit, a route of the electric vehicle which goes through the one or more charging stations and the destinations included in the travel request. A route information output unit outputs route information indicating the route of the electric vehicle that has been determined by the first route determination unit.

Description

Route determination method, route determination device, and program

[0001] The present disclosure relates to a route determination method, a route determination device, and a program.

[0002] In recent years, there has been a shift to electric vehicles due to the high environmental impact of fossil fuel-powered vehicles. Electric vehicles have a shorter driving range than fossil fuel-powered vehicles, so they need to be charged while driving. For example, when determining a route (driving route, e.g., a package delivery route) for commercial electric vehicles that takes into account the charging time or the location of charging points, a technique is known for determining the route by taking into account the amount of power consumed by the electric vehicle.

[0003] International Publication No. 2022 / 018937

[0004] However, in conventional technology, the safety of charging stations is not taken into consideration when determining the route of an electric vehicle, so there is a risk that problems such as power supply interruptions or delays in power supply due to hacking or malfunction of the charging station at the charging station where the electric vehicle is scheduled to be powered may occur, making it impossible to charge safely.

[0005] An object of the present disclosure is to provide a route determination method, a route determination device, and a program that are capable of determining a route that allows safe charging of an electric vehicle.

[0006] In order to achieve the above object, the route determination method of the present disclosure is a route determination device including: a travel request receiving unit that receives a travel request that includes one or more destinations and requests that an electric vehicle travel via the destinations; a reliability acquisition unit that acquires the reliability of each of a plurality of charging stations that are facilities for charging the electric vehicle from a reliability memory unit that stores the reliability of each of the plurality of charging stations; a first route determination unit that, when the travel request is received by the travel request receiving unit, determines a route for the electric vehicle that passes via the destination included in the travel request and one or more of the charging stations based on the reliability acquired by the reliability acquisition unit; and a route information output unit that outputs route information indicating the route of the electric vehicle determined by the first route determination unit.

[0007] According to the present disclosure, it is possible to determine a route that allows safe charging of an electric vehicle. Note that the effects described herein are not necessarily limited to those described herein, and may be any of the effects described in this specification.

[0008] FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of a schematic configuration of a delivery system according to an embodiment. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration of a route determination device according to an embodiment. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of functions of the route determination device according to an embodiment. FIG. 4 is a diagram illustrating an example of a reliability determination table according to an embodiment. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of a relationship between the reliability and weight of each of a plurality of evaluation items constituting an evaluation based on an SBOM according to an embodiment. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of a correspondence relationship between a score indicating an evaluation regarding risk according to an embodiment and reliability. FIG. 7 is a diagram illustrating an example of a determination table for calculating a risk score according to an embodiment. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating an example of an SBOM according to an embodiment. FIG. 9 is a diagram illustrating an example of a correspondence relationship between a score indicating an evaluation regarding vulnerability according to an embodiment and reliability. FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a correspondence relationship between a score indicating an evaluation regarding a license according to an embodiment and reliability. FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an example of a determination table for calculating a license score according to an embodiment. FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating an example of correspondence information indicating a correspondence relationship between each evaluation criterion for an evaluation regarding charging time and an evaluation regarding standby time according to an embodiment and reliability. FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of correspondence information indicating the correspondence between reliability and each evaluation criterion for evaluations based on reviews by registered members and evaluations based on reviews by non-registered members according to the embodiment. FIG. 14 is a diagram showing an example of correspondence information indicating the correspondence between ranks and reliability according to the embodiment. FIG. 15 is a diagram showing an example of charging station reliability information according to the embodiment. FIG. 16 is a diagram showing an example of a route determination method according to the embodiment. FIG. 17 is a flowchart showing an example of operation of the route determination device according to the embodiment. FIG. 18 is a diagram showing an example of a route determination method according to a modified example. FIG. 19 is a diagram showing an example of functions possessed by the route determination device according to the modified example. FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of a route determination method according to the modified example. FIG. 21 is a flowchart showing an example of operation of the route determination device according to the modified example.

[0009] Hereinafter, a route determination method, a route determination device, and a program according to an embodiment of the present disclosure will be described in detail with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0010] FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an example of the schematic configuration of a delivery system 1 that delivers packages using electric vehicles (hereinafter referred to as "EVs") according to this embodiment. As shown in FIG. 1, the delivery system 1 includes multiple charging stations 10A-10D, a charging station management server 20, a route determination device 30, and an EV vehicle management server 35. Although FIG. 1 illustrates four charging stations 10A-10D, the number of charging stations 10 included in the delivery system 1 is not limited to this, and can be changed as desired depending on design conditions, etc. In the following description, when there is no need to distinguish between the charging stations 10A-10D, they will be simply referred to as "charging stations 10."

[0011] 1 , the charging station 10, the charging station management server 20, the route determination device 30, and the EV vehicle management server 35 can be connected to each other via a network 40 such as the Internet. In addition, a terminal 50 (which may be a mobile terminal such as a smartphone or a stationary terminal such as a desktop PC) owned by a user can also be connected to the network 40.

[0012] The specific contents of each of the charging station 10, the charging station management server 20, the route determination device 30, and the EV vehicle management server 35 included in the delivery system 1 will be described below.

[0013] First, a description will be given of the charging station 10. The charging station 10 is a facility for charging (supplying power to) EV vehicles. As shown in FIG. 1 , the charging station 10 includes multiple EV chargers 100A to 100C, a power meter 110, and a charging station control device 120. In the following description, when the multiple EV chargers 100A to 100C are not distinguished from one another, they will be simply referred to as "EV chargers 100." The EV chargers 100, the power meter 110, and the charging station control device 120 are connected to a network, such as a local area network (LAN), via a network switch 130, and can exchange data among them.

[0014] EV charger 100 is a device that charges the battery of an EV vehicle using power transformed by a substation. The substation transforms high-voltage power generated at a power plant or the like into power for charging EV vehicles. Note that in this embodiment, the substation is installed inside charging station 10, but this is not limiting. For example, the substation may be installed outside charging station 10. In other words, the installation location of the substation is arbitrary, and it may be installed inside or outside charging station 10.

[0015] The power meter 110 (PM) is a device that measures the power supplied from the substation to the EV charger 100. In other words, the power meter 110 is a device that measures the amount of power used by the EV charger 100 to charge the EV vehicle.

[0016] The charging station control device 120 is a device (e.g., a site controller (SC)) that performs overall control of the charging station 10. For example, the charging station control device 120 can acquire software configuration information of each of the EV charger 100, the power meter 110, and the charging station control device 120, and transmit the acquired software configuration information to the charging station management server 20. The software configuration information is information that indicates the configuration of the software, and in this embodiment, is a software bill of materials (SBOM) that includes components that make up the software, dependencies between the components, versions, license information, etc. Specific contents of the SBOM will be described later.

[0017] For example, charging station control device 120 can send the updated SBOM of each of EV charger 100, power meter 110, and charging station control device 120 to charging station management server 20 every time the SBOM of each of EV charger 100, power meter 110, and charging station control device 120 is updated, or can send the SBOM of each of EV charger 100, power meter 110, and charging station control device 120 to charging station management server 20 every time a certain period of time has passed.

[0018] Next, the charging station management server 20 will be described. The charging station management server 20 is a device that manages the multiple charging stations 10 included in the delivery system 1, and manages information such as the SBOM received from each charging station 10 (charging station control device 120). In response to a request from the route determination device 30 (described later), the charging station management server 20 can transmit the SBOM of each of the EV chargers 100, power meters 110, and charging station control devices 120 included in each charging station 10 to the route determination device 30. A specific method for using the SBOM by the route determination device 30 will be described later.

[0019] Next, the route determination device 30 will be described. When the route determination device 30 receives a delivery request requesting delivery of a package, it determines a route for the EV vehicle in accordance with the received delivery request. The delivery request includes one or more destinations and is an example of a "travel request" that requests the EV vehicle to travel via the destinations. The delivery request of this embodiment includes one or more combinations of information indicating the package and information such as an address indicating the delivery destination of the package (corresponding to the destination), and is information that requests delivery of the package to the delivery destination. The delivery request can also be considered as information that requests the EV vehicle to travel via the delivery destination included in the delivery request. Below, a specific configuration of the route determination device 30 will be described.

[0020] FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of the hardware configuration of the route determination device 30. In this embodiment, the route determination device 30 is configured as a computer device. As shown in FIG. 2, the route determination device 30 includes a processor 301, a ROM (Read Only Memory) 302, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 303, and a communication I / F (Interface) 304. Note that the hardware elements of the route determination device 30 are not limited to the configuration illustrated in FIG. 2, and the route determination device 30 may include other hardware elements (e.g., a display device, an input device, etc.).

[0021] The processor 301 is, for example, a CPU (Central Processing Unit). By executing a program, the processor 301 comprehensively controls the operation of the route determination device 30 and realizes various functions of the route determination device 30. The various functions of the route determination device 30 will be described later.

[0022] The ROM 302 is a non-volatile memory that stores various types of information including programs executed by the processor 301. The RAM 303 is a volatile memory that has a work area for the processor 301. The communication I / F unit 304 is an interface for connecting to the network 40.

[0023] Fig. 3 is a diagram showing an example of functions possessed by the route determination device 30. Note that, in the example of Fig. 3, only functions necessary for explaining the main parts of this embodiment are illustrated, but the functions possessed by the route determination device 30 are not limited to these.

[0024] 3, route determination device 30 includes delivery request receiving unit 310, SBOM acquiring unit 311, usage record acquiring unit 312, review acquiring unit 313, reliability determining unit 314, reliability storage unit 315, map information storage unit 316, route determination unit 317, and route information output unit 318. In this embodiment, processor 301 executes a program stored in ROM 302 to realize the functions of delivery request receiving unit 310, SBOM acquiring unit 311, usage record acquiring unit 312, review acquiring unit 313, reliability determining unit 314, route determination unit 317, and route information output unit 318. However, this is not limiting, and some or all of these functions may be realized by dedicated hardware circuits (semiconductor integrated circuits, etc.). Furthermore, the reliability storage unit 315 and the map information storage unit 316 are realized by, for example, the ROM 302, but are not limited to this and may be realized by, for example, a storage device external to the route determination device 30.

[0025] The delivery request receiving unit 310 is an example of a "traveling request receiving unit" and receives a delivery request requesting delivery of a package. As described above, the delivery request includes one or more combinations of information indicating the package and information indicating the package's delivery destination (corresponding to the destination), and is information requesting that the EV vehicle travel via the package's delivery destination. In this embodiment, the terminal 50 carried by the user transmits the delivery request input in response to the user's operation to the route determination device 30 via the network 40. The delivery request receiving unit 310 can then receive the delivery request transmitted from the terminal 50 via the network 40.

[0026] SBOM acquisition unit 311 is an example of a "reliability acquisition unit" and acquires the SBOM of each of EV chargers 100, power meters 110, and charging station control devices 120 included in each charging station 10 in delivery system 1. In the present embodiment, SBOM acquisition unit 311 accesses charging station management server 20 to acquire the SBOM. The SBOM may be acquired at any timing. For example, SBOM acquisition unit 311 may periodically access charging station management server 20 to acquire the SBOM, or may acquire the SBOM upon receiving a notification of an SBOM update from charging station management server 20. Furthermore, for example, charging station management server 20 may transmit the updated SBOM to route determination device 30 (SBOM acquisition unit 311) every time the SBOM managed by itself is updated, or charging station management server 20 may transmit the SBOMs of each device to route determination device 30 simultaneously at regular intervals. Further, for example, the SBOM acquisition unit 311 may be configured to acquire the SBOM of each device included in each charging station 10 directly from the charging station control device 120 of the charging station 10 without going through the charging station management server 20.

[0027] The usage record acquisition unit 312 acquires usage records of each charging station 10 in the delivery system 1. In this embodiment, examples of usage records are assumed to be the time required to charge an EV vehicle at the charging station 10 (charging time) and the time the EV vehicle waits at the charging station 10 until charging begins (standby time). In this embodiment, the EV vehicle measures the charging time and standby time, and transmits information linking the measured results with the charging station 10 to the EV vehicle management server 35. The EV vehicle management server 35 then manages the actual charging time and standby time of each charging station 10. For example, the EV vehicle management server 35 may manage the average values ​​of the actual charging time and standby time for each charging station 10, and can periodically update and manage this information.

[0028] In the present embodiment, the usage record acquisition unit 312 accesses the EV vehicle management server 35 to acquire the usage record. The timing of acquiring the usage record is arbitrary. For example, the usage record acquisition unit 312 may periodically access the EV vehicle management server 35 to acquire the usage record, or may acquire the usage record when it receives a notification of an update to the usage record from the EV vehicle management server 35. Note that this is not limited to this, and for example, the EV vehicle management server 35 may update the usage record at regular intervals and transmit the updated usage record to the route determination device 30. Furthermore, for example, the charging station management server 20 may manage the usage record instead of the EV vehicle management server 35. In this configuration, the usage record acquisition unit 312 can acquire the usage record from the charging station management server 20.

[0029] The review acquisition unit 313 acquires user reviews (impressions, comments) about the charging station 10. In this embodiment, the terminal 50 carried by the user transmits the reviews input in response to user operations to the route determination device 30 via the network 40. The review acquisition unit 313 can acquire the reviews transmitted from the terminal 50 via the network 40.

[0030] The SBOM acquired by the SBOM acquisition unit 311, the usage record acquired by the usage record acquisition unit 312, and the reviews acquired by the review acquisition unit 313 are input to a reliability determination unit 314 and used to determine the reliability of each charging station 10. A specific method for determining the reliability will be described later.

[0031] The reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability of each charging station 10 included in the delivery system 1. The reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability based on an evaluation of the charging station 10. The evaluation includes an evaluation based on the SBOM of each of the multiple devices included in the charging station 10 (EV charger 100, power meter 110, charging station control device 120), an evaluation related to the usage record, and an evaluation based on user reviews. For each of these evaluations, the reliability determination unit 314 calculates a reliability (individual reliability) according to the evaluation, and determines the reliability of the charging station 10 (overall reliability) based on the calculated reliability. Specific details are described below.

[0032] In this embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability of the charging station 10 using a reliability determination table for determining reliability, as shown in Fig. 4. The reliability determination table shown in Fig. 4 has three evaluation items: "Device," "Usage Record," and "Review" included in the charging station 10, and each item is associated with a reliability and a weight according to the evaluation of the item. A method for determining the reliability according to the evaluation of each item will be described below.

[0033] First, a method for determining the reliability based on the evaluation of a "device" will be described. In this embodiment, the evaluation of the "device" is an evaluation based on the SBOM of each of the multiple devices included in the charging station 10 (EV charger 100, power meter 110, and charging station control device 120). The reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability of each of the multiple devices included in the charging station 10 based on the evaluation based on the SBOM of the device. In this embodiment, the SBOM-based evaluation includes three items: a risk evaluation, a vulnerability evaluation, and a license evaluation. However, the evaluation is not limited to these, and may include one or a combination of two of these items. In short, the SBOM-based evaluation may include at least one of a risk evaluation, a vulnerability evaluation, and a license evaluation. The reliability determination unit 314 obtains at least one of the risk evaluation, the vulnerability evaluation, and the license evaluation based on the SBOM, and determines the reliability based on the obtained evaluation.

[0034] A method for determining the reliability according to the evaluation based on the SBOM will be described. As described above, in this embodiment, the evaluation based on the SBOM is composed of three items: an evaluation related to risk, an evaluation related to vulnerability, and an evaluation related to licenses. In this embodiment, a weight is set for each of the above items, as shown in FIG. 5, for example. The reliability determination unit 314 calculates the reliability according to the evaluation of each item and performs a weighted addition of the calculated reliability. The reliability determination unit 314 determines the result obtained by the weighted addition as the reliability according to the evaluation based on the SBOM. A method for determining the reliability of each of the three items will be described below.

[0035] First, a method for determining reliability according to a risk assessment will be described. FIG. 6 is a diagram illustrating an example of the correspondence between a score (assessment value) indicating a risk assessment and reliability. A risk, for example, refers to the possibility of exploiting a vulnerability. A vulnerability, for example, refers to the possibility of compromising the security of information. In the example of FIG. 6, the higher the score, the higher the possibility of exploiting a vulnerability and the lower the reliability. In the example of FIG. 6, a reliability of "3" is associated with a score of "0," a reliability of "2" is associated with a score in the range of "0.1 to 3.9," a reliability of "1" is associated with a score in the range of "4.0 to 7.9," and a reliability of "0" is associated with a score in the range of "8.0 to 10.0." Note that, although the reliability is set to four levels in the example of FIG. 6, this is not limiting, and the number of reliability levels can be arbitrarily changed depending on design conditions, etc.

[0036] In the example of FIG. 6, the risk level is divided into four levels according to the score: "None," "Low," "High," and "Critical," with the higher the score, the higher the risk level. In this example, the risk level "None" indicates that there is no problem. "Low" indicates that the vulnerability may be exploited only with physical access, but that there is almost no impact on the system or business. "High" indicates that the vulnerability is difficult to exploit. "Critical" indicates that the vulnerability is easy to exploit.

[0037] A method for calculating a risk score will now be described. In this embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 calculates a risk score based on the determination table shown in FIG. 7 , but the method for calculating the score is not limited to this. The determination table in FIG. 7 includes five determination items: "Attacker's Motive for Attack (Theft, Impersonation)," "Possibility of Zero-Day Attack," "Risk Level of Vulnerability," "Vulnerable Components and Libraries," and "Ease of Access to Attack Target." Each item is assigned a determination criterion, a determination value, and a weight according to the determination result. The reliability determination unit 314 uses the SBOM of the device whose reliability is to be determined to calculate a determination value for each item in the determination table shown in FIG. 7 and performs a weighted sum of the determined determination values. The result of the weighted sum is the risk score. A specific description will be given below.

[0038] Before describing the determination method using the determination table shown in Fig. 7, the specific contents of the SBOM will be described using Fig. 8. The SBOM is information (software bill of materials) that indicates the configuration of software used in a device, and in the example of Fig. 8, the items that make up the SBOM include, but are not limited to, package name / package version, dependent packages, package revision history, build information, license information, and security information.

[0039] The package name / package version field contains a specific package name / package version of the software used in the device, and a corresponding functional description. For example, the package name / package version "OS001 / 20.03" is associated with a functional description that it is an operating system, which is the basic system that runs the software. Similarly, the package name / package version "NC001 / 1.1.1f" is associated with a functional description that it is network communication software that performs data communication via a network. Similarly, the package name / package version "OPC0001 / 3.24" is associated with a functional description that it is operation panel control software that controls a panel operated by a user. Similarly, the package name / package version "WS0001 / 2.4" is associated with a functional description that it is web server software that performs data communication with devices such as the charging station control device 120. Similarly, the package name / package version "DB001 / 8.0" is associated with a functional description that it is database software that stores personal information such as IDs and information used for payment.

[0040] In the "Dependent Packages" section, package names are associated with the libraries they use. For example, libraries A and B are associated with "NC001," which indicates the package name of network communications software. This means that libraries A and B are used to communicate data over the network. Similarly, libraries C, D, and E are associated with "OS001," which indicates the package name of an operating system. Similarly, libraries F, G, H, and K are associated with "WS0001," which indicates the package name of web server software. Similarly, libraries L and M are associated with "DB0001," which indicates the package name of database software.

[0041] The "Package Modification History" section describes the modification history for each package. The "Build Information" section describes the build date and update date. The update date includes the date of the most recent update and the date of the previous update.

[0042] The "license information" section describes the support period and expiration date. The "security information" section describes vulnerability information in association with a CVE number that identifies the vulnerability information, the registration date of the CVE number, a CVSS value that indicates the severity of the vulnerability, the degree of impact on confidentiality, the degree of impact on integrity, and the degree of impact on availability. In the example of Figure 8, the vulnerability information describes that library G of the web server software records a string crafted by a remote attacker in a log, which allows arbitrary Java code to be executed on the system.

[0043] The reliability determination unit 314 uses the SBOM described above to make a determination for each determination item in the determination table shown in Figure 7 and calculates a determination value according to the determination result.The determination values ​​calculated for each determination item are then weighted and added together, and the result of the weighted addition is determined as the risk score.The determination method using SBOM will be described below for each determination item in the determination table shown in Figure 7.

[0044] First, we will explain how to determine "the attacker's motive for attacking" from the five determination items included in the determination table shown in FIG. 7 . The determination criterion for this determination item is the presence or absence of personal information, such as an ID or payment information, within the device. The trust determination unit 314 determines the presence or absence of an ID or payment information within the device by referencing the SBOM. In the SBOM shown in FIG. 8 , the function description corresponding to the package name of the database software ("DB0001" in the example of FIG. 8 ) also describes whether personal information is stored. Therefore, the trust determination unit 314 can determine the presence or absence of personal information by referencing this portion. Then, a determination value corresponding to the determination result is calculated according to the determination table shown in FIG. 7 . In the example of FIG. 7 , if personal information is present, the determination value is "1," and if personal information is not present, the determination value is "0."

[0045] Next, a method for determining the "possibility of a zero-day attack" will be described. The determination criterion for this determination item is whether a remote update (update via remote operation) is possible. The reliability determination unit 314 determines whether a remote update is possible by referencing the SBOM. In this example, the conditions for a remote update being possible are that network communication is possible and that the device supports remote updates. The reliability determination unit 314 can determine whether network communication is possible by referencing the SBOM and determining whether network communication software is used. In addition, in the SBOM shown in FIG. 8, the function description corresponding to the package name indicating the operating system also describes whether the device supports remote updates. Therefore, the reliability determination unit 314 can determine whether the device supports remote updates by referencing this portion. Then, a determination value corresponding to the determination result is calculated according to the determination table shown in FIG. 7. In the example of FIG. 7, if a remote update is not possible, the determination value is "1," and if a remote update is possible, the determination value is "0." If a remote update is not possible, the update is more likely to take longer than if a remote update is possible, thereby increasing the risk.

[0046] Next, we will explain how to determine the "risk level of vulnerability." The criteria for these assessment items are "possibility of information leakage," "possibility of information tampering," and "possibility of business suspension," and a judgment value and weight are set according to the assessment result for each.

[0047] The reliability determination unit 314 determines the "possibility of information leakage" by referring to the SBOM. As described with reference to FIG. 8 , the security information section of the SBOM also describes the degree of impact on confidentiality. Therefore, the reliability determination unit 314 can determine the possibility of information leakage by referring to this section. For example, if the impact on confidentiality is large, it can be determined that the possibility of information leakage is also high. The reliability determination unit 314 then calculates a judgment value according to the judgment result in accordance with the judgment table shown in FIG. 7 . In the example of FIG. 7 , if the possibility of information leakage is high, the judgment value is "2." If the possibility of information leakage is low, the judgment value is "1." If there is no possibility of information leakage, the judgment value is "0." For example, a case where there is a high possibility of information leakage is assumed to be a case where confidential information or important files are accessible. Furthermore, a case where there is a low possibility of information leakage is assumed to be a case where the impact is limited even if information leakage occurs.

[0048] The reliability determination unit 314 also references the SBOM to determine the "possibility of information tampering." As described with reference to FIG. 8 , the security information section of the SBOM also describes the degree of impact on integrity. Therefore, the reliability determination unit 314 can determine the possibility of information tampering by referencing this section. For example, if the impact on integrity is large, it can be determined that the possibility of information tampering is also high. The reliability determination unit 314 then calculates a judgment value according to the judgment result in accordance with the judgment table shown in FIG. 7 . In the example of FIG. 7 , if the possibility of information tampering is high, the judgment value is "2." If the possibility of information tampering is low, the judgment value is "1." If there is no possibility of information tampering, the judgment value is "0." For example, a case where there is a high possibility of information tampering is assumed to be a case where confidential information or important files can be tampered with. Furthermore, a case where there is a low possibility of information tampering is assumed to be a case where information tampering is possible but confidential information or important files cannot be tampered with.

[0049] The reliability determination unit 314 also references the SBOM to determine the "possibility of business outage." As described with reference to FIG. 8 , the security information section of the SBOM also describes the degree of impact on availability. Therefore, the reliability determination unit 314 can determine the possibility of business outage by referencing this section. For example, if the impact on availability is large, it can be determined that the possibility of business outage is also high. The reliability determination unit 314 then calculates a judgment value according to the judgment result in accordance with the judgment table shown in FIG. 7 . In the example of FIG. 7 , if the possibility of business outage is high, the judgment value is "2." If the possibility of business outage is low, the judgment value is "1." If there is no possibility of business outage, the judgment value is "0." For example, a case where there is a high possibility of business outage is assumed to be a case where resources are completely depleted or completely stopped. Furthermore, a case where there is a low possibility of business outage is assumed to be a case where resources are temporarily depleted or business operations are delayed or temporarily suspended.

[0050] Next, a method for determining whether a vulnerable component or library is used, one of the five determination items included in the determination table shown in FIG. 7, will be described. The determination criterion for this determination item is whether a vulnerable component or library is used. The trust determination unit 314 determines whether a vulnerable component or library is used by referring to the SBOM. As described with reference to FIG. 8, the security information in the SBOM also includes information about vulnerabilities. In the example shown in FIG. 8, library G is identified as a vulnerable library. Referring to the dependent package item in the SBOM shown in FIG. 8, library G is associated with "WS0001," which indicates the package name of the web server software. In other words, it is clear that the web server software uses library G to perform data communication with devices such as the charging station control device 120. In this case, the trust determination unit 314 can determine that vulnerable library G is used. The trust determination unit 314 then calculates a determination value according to the determination result in accordance with the determination table shown in FIG. 7. In the example of Figure 7, if a vulnerable component or library is used, the judgment value will be "2", if it is used but can be disabled, the judgment value will be "1", and if it is not used, the judgment value will be "0".

[0051] Next, we will explain how to determine the "access difficulty of the attack target." The criteria for this determination item are whether the attack source category is the Internet, a local network or Bluetooth®, or physical access. The access difficulty decreases (the determination value increases) in the order of Internet, local network or Bluetooth, and physical access. The reliability determination unit 314 references the SBOM to determine whether the data communication method is the Internet, local network or Bluetooth, or physical access. The SBOM shown in FIG. 8 describes a package name (NC001) indicating network communication software that performs data communication via the network, and the corresponding function description also describes whether data communication is performed via the Internet, a local network, or Bluetooth. The reliability determination unit 314 can determine the data communication method by referencing this portion. The reliability determination unit 314 then calculates a determination value corresponding to the determination result according to the determination table shown in FIG. 7. In the example of FIG. 7, if the means of data communication is the Internet, the judgment value is "2", if it is a local network or Bluetooth, the judgment value is "1", and if it is physical access, the judgment value is "0".

[0052] The reliability determination unit 314 performs a weighted addition of the determination values ​​obtained from the above determination results using the weights set in the determination table of Fig. 7, and determines the result of the weighted addition as the risk score. Then, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability corresponding to the risk score by referring to the correspondence relationship shown in Fig. 6.

[0053] Next, a method for determining reliability according to the vulnerability assessment, one of the three items shown in FIG. 5 , will be described. FIG. 9 is a diagram showing an example of the correspondence between the scores (assessment values) indicating the vulnerability assessment and the reliability. As described above, vulnerability refers to, for example, the possibility of compromising the security of information. In the example of FIG. 9 , the higher the score, the greater the vulnerability and the lower the reliability. In the example of FIG. 9 , a reliability of "4" is associated with a score of "0," a reliability of "3" is associated with a score in the range of "0.1 to 3.9," a reliability of "2" is associated with a score in the range of "4.0 to 6.9," a reliability of "1" is associated with a score in the range of "7.0 to 8.9," and a reliability of "0" is associated with a score in the range of "9.0 to 10.0." Note that, in the example of FIG. 9 , the reliability is set to five levels, but this is not limiting, and the number of reliability levels can be arbitrarily changed depending on design conditions, etc.

[0054] 9, the vulnerability level is divided into five levels according to the score: "None," "Low," "Medium," "High," and "Critical," and the higher the score, the higher the vulnerability level. Note that the number of levels according to the score is not limited to this and can be set arbitrarily.

[0055] A method for determining a vulnerability score will now be described. In this embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the vulnerability score by referring to the SBOM shown in FIG. 8. More specifically, in the security information section of the SBOM shown in FIG. 8, information about a vulnerability is described in association with a CVSS value indicating the severity of the vulnerability. The reliability determination unit 314 determines this CVSS value as the vulnerability score. Then, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability corresponding to the vulnerability score by referring to the correspondence relationship shown in FIG. 9.

[0056] Next, a method for determining the reliability level according to the license-related evaluation, one of the three items shown in FIG. 5 , will be described. FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of the correspondence between the score (evaluation value) indicating the license-related evaluation and the reliability level. The license-related evaluation can also be considered to represent the degree of license-related problems (license issues). In the example of FIG. 10 , the higher the score, the greater the degree of license issues and the lower the reliability level. In the example of FIG. 10 , a score of "0" is associated with a reliability level of "2," a score in the range of "0.1 to 5.9" is associated with a reliability level of "1," and a score in the range of "6.0 to 10.0" is associated with a reliability level of "2." Note that in the example of FIG. 10 , the reliability level is set to three levels, but this is not limited to this, and the number of reliability levels can be changed as desired depending on design conditions, etc.

[0057] In the example of FIG. 10, the license issue level is divided into three levels according to the score: "None," "Low," and "High," with a higher score indicating a higher license issue level. In this example, the license issue level "None" indicates that there are no problems. "Low" indicates that the service can continue, but that measures such as license renewal are required. "High" indicates that there is a possibility that the service will be stopped, and that the quality of the service will be reduced due to malfunctions or the like, which is equivalent to a license violation. Note that the number of levels according to the score is not limited to this and can be changed as desired according to design conditions, etc.

[0058] A method for calculating a license score (score of license issues) will now be described. In this embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 calculates the license score based on the determination table shown in FIG. 11 , but the method for calculating the score is not limited to this. The determination table in FIG. 11 includes two determination items: "software support period" and "software update." For each item, a determination criterion, a determination value corresponding to the determination result, and a weight are set. The reliability determination unit 314 uses the SBOM described with reference to FIG. 8 to perform a determination for each determination item in the determination table shown in FIG. 11 and calculates a determination value corresponding to the determination result. The determination values ​​calculated for each determination item are then weighted and added, and the result of the weighted addition is determined as the license score. Below, a determination method using the SBOM will be described for each determination item in the determination table shown in FIG. 11 .

[0059] First, a method for determining the "software support period" of the two determination items included in the determination table shown in FIG. 11 will be described. The determination criterion for this determination item is whether or not the software is within the support period. As described above, the support period is described in the license information section of the SBOM shown in FIG. 8. The reliability determination unit 314 can determine whether or not the software is within the support period by referencing this section. The reliability determination unit 314 then determines a determination value according to the determination result in accordance with the determination table shown in FIG. 11. In the example of FIG. 11, if the software support period has expired, the determination value is "2." If the period has expired but the software can still be used, the determination value is "1." If the software is still within the support period, the determination value is "0."

[0060] Next, a method for determining "software update" will be described. The determination criterion for this determination item is whether software updates have been performed appropriately. In the example of FIG. 11 , five determination criteria are provided: no update, yearly update, semi-annual update, monthly update, and update when security information is updated. As described above, in the SBOM build information field shown in FIG. 8 , the update date describes the date of the most recent update and the date of the previous update. The reliability determination unit 314 can determine the frequency of software updates by referencing this field. The reliability determination unit 314 then calculates a determination value according to the determination result according to the determination table shown in FIG. 11 . In the example of FIG. 11 , the determination value is "4" if no update has been performed, "3" if annual update has been performed, "2" if semi-annual update has been performed, "1" if monthly update has been performed, and "0" if update has been performed when security information has been updated.

[0061] The reliability determination unit 314 performs weighted addition on the determination values ​​obtained from the above determination results using the weights set in the determination table of Fig. 11, and determines the result of the weighted addition as the license score. Then, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability corresponding to the license score by referring to the correspondence relationship shown in Fig. 10.

[0062] In this manner, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability of each of the three items (risk evaluation, vulnerability evaluation, and license evaluation) shown in FIG. 5 and performs a weighted addition using the weights set for each item. The reliability determination unit 314 determines the result of the weighted addition as the reliability corresponding to the evaluation based on the SBOM. In this manner, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability of each device included in the charging station 10 according to the evaluation based on the SBOM of the device.

[0063] Next, a method for determining the reliability according to the evaluation of the "usage record" among the three items shown in FIG. 4 will be described. The evaluation of the "usage record" includes an evaluation regarding the charging time and an evaluation regarding the waiting time. The reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability according to the evaluation regarding the charging time and the evaluation regarding the waiting time. In this embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability such that the smaller the difference between the actual charging time and the expected charging time at the charging station 10, the higher the evaluation regarding the charging time of the charging station 10 and the higher the reliability, and the smaller the difference between the actual waiting time and the expected waiting time at the charging station 10, the higher the evaluation regarding the waiting time of the charging station 10 and the higher the reliability.

[0064] 12 is a diagram showing an example of correspondence information showing the correspondence relationship between the evaluation criteria for the evaluation of the charging time and the evaluation of the standby time and the reliability. The correspondence information shown in FIG. 12 is set so that the smaller the difference between the actual charging time and the previously estimated charging time (set value), the higher the evaluation of the charging time and the higher the reliability, and the smaller the difference between the actual standby time and the previously estimated standby time (set value), the higher the evaluation of the standby time and the higher the reliability.

[0065] More specifically, the correspondence between the evaluation criteria for the evaluation of charging time and the reliability will be described first. In the example of correspondence information shown in FIG. 12 , if the difference between the actual charging time and the expected charging time (the value obtained by subtracting the expected charging time from the actual charging time) is a positive value that exceeds a first predetermined value, it corresponds to the evaluation criterion of "longer than the expected time" and is given a low evaluation. The reliability associated with a low evaluation is set to "0." Furthermore, if the absolute value of the difference between the actual charging time and the expected charging time is equal to or less than the first predetermined value, it corresponds to the evaluation criterion of "performed as expected" and is given an average evaluation. The reliability associated with an average evaluation is set to "1." Furthermore, if the difference between the actual charging time and the expected charging time is a negative value that exceeds the first predetermined value, it corresponds to the evaluation criterion of "shorter than the expected time" and is given a high evaluation. The reliability associated with a high evaluation is set to "2."

[0066] Next, the correspondence relationship between the evaluation criteria for evaluation of waiting time and the reliability will be described. In the example of correspondence information shown in FIG. 12 , if the difference between the actual waiting time and the expected waiting time (the value obtained by subtracting the expected waiting time from the actual waiting time) is a positive value that exceeds a second predetermined value, it corresponds to the evaluation criterion of "longer than the expected time" and is given a low evaluation. The reliability associated with a low evaluation is set to "0." Furthermore, if the absolute value of the difference between the actual waiting time and the expected waiting time is equal to or less than the second predetermined value, it corresponds to the evaluation criterion of "performed as expected" and is given an average evaluation. The reliability associated with an average evaluation is set to "1." Furthermore, if the difference between the actual charging time and the expected charging time is a negative value that exceeds the second predetermined value, it corresponds to the evaluation criterion of "shorter than the expected time" and is given a high evaluation. The reliability associated with a high evaluation is set to "2."

[0067] In this way, the reliability determination unit 314 uses the correspondence information shown in Fig. 12 to obtain an evaluation according to the difference between the charging time (actual charging time) included in the usage record acquired by the usage record acquisition unit 312 and the previously assumed charging time (set value), and determines a reliability according to the obtained evaluation. Similarly, the reliability determination unit 314 uses the correspondence information shown in Fig. 12 to obtain an evaluation according to the difference between the waiting time (actual waiting time) included in the usage record acquired by the usage record acquisition unit 312 and the previously assumed waiting time (set value), and determines a reliability according to the obtained evaluation.

[0068] Next, a method for determining the reliability according to the evaluation based on the "review" of the three items shown in FIG. 4 will be described. Evaluation based on reviews includes evaluation based on reviews by registered members and evaluation based on reviews by non-registered members. The reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability according to the evaluation based on reviews by registered members and the reliability according to the evaluation based on reviews by non-registered members. In this embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability such that the higher the evaluation based on reviews, the greater the reliability.

[0069] FIG. 13 is a diagram illustrating an example of correspondence information showing the correspondence between the evaluation criteria and reliability for evaluations based on reviews by registered members and evaluations based on reviews by non-registered members. In the correspondence information shown in FIG. 13 , the evaluation criteria for review-based evaluations are set to three levels: "bad," "average," and "good." For example, if the negative expressions contained in the review are equal to or greater than a first threshold, the review falls under the "bad" evaluation criterion, resulting in a low evaluation. The reliability associated with a low evaluation is set to "0." Furthermore, for example, if the negative expressions contained in the review are equal to or greater than a second threshold (< the first threshold) but less than the first threshold, the review falls under the "average" evaluation criterion, resulting in a normal evaluation. The reliability associated with a normal evaluation is set to "1." Furthermore, for example, if the negative expressions contained in the review are less than the second threshold, the review falls under the "good" evaluation criterion, resulting in a high evaluation. The reliability associated with a high evaluation is set to "2."

[0070] In this manner, the reliability determining unit 314 uses the correspondence information shown in FIG. 13 to obtain an evaluation based on the review acquired by the review acquiring unit 313, and determines a reliability according to the obtained evaluation.

[0071] In this manner, the reliability determination unit 314 calculates the reliability (individual reliability) of each of the devices, usage records, and reviews included in the charging station 10, performs weighted addition using the weights determined for each item in the reliability determination table shown in Fig. 4, and determines the result of the weighted addition as the overall reliability. Note that the weights determined for each item in the reliability determination table shown in Fig. 4 are merely examples and can be changed as desired depending on design conditions, etc.

[0072] An example of calculating the overall reliability will be described below. For example, in the reliability determination table shown in Fig. 4, the maximum reliability according to the evaluation based on the SBOM of "Device" is set to 9.6, the maximum reliability according to the evaluation related to charging time included in the evaluation of "Usage Record" is set to 2.0, the maximum reliability according to the evaluation related to standby time is set to 2.0, the maximum reliability according to the evaluation based on reviews by registered members included in the evaluation of "Reviews" is set to 2.0, and the maximum reliability according to the evaluation based on reviews by non-registered members is set to 2.0. If we consider a case where the reliability of each item in the reliability determination table shown in FIG. 4 is set to the maximum value and a weighted addition is performed, the result of the weighted addition is (EV charger 100A: 9.6×1.0 + EV charger 100B: 9.6×1.0 + EV charger 100C: 9.6×1.0 + wattmeter 110: 9.6×0.8 + charging station control device 120: 9.6×1.5) + (charging time: 2×0.5 + standby time: 2×0.5) + (registered member reviews: 2×0.3 + unregistered member reviews: 2×0.4) = 63.52.

[0073] Let us assume that the overall reliability in the above case is "100." For example, in the reliability determination table shown in FIG. 4, the reliability of EV charger 100A is a = 7.6, the reliability of EV charger 100B is b = 7.6, the reliability of EV charger 100C is c = 9.6, the reliability of power meter 110 is d = 8.8, the reliability of charging station control device 120 is e = 6.8, the reliability based on the evaluation regarding charging time is f = 1.0, the reliability based on the evaluation regarding waiting time is g = 1.0, the reliability based on reviews by registered members is h = 1.0, and the reliability based on reviews by unregistered members is i = 2.0. In this case, the overall reliability can be calculated as (100 / 63.52) x (EV charger 100A: 7.6 x 1.0 + EV charger 100B: 7.6 x 1.0 + EV charger 100C: 9.6 x 1.0 + power meter 110: 8.8 x 0.8 + charging station control device 120: 6.8 x 1.5) + (charging time: 1 x 0.5 + standby time: 1 x 0.5) + (registered member reviews: 1 x 0.3 + non-registered member reviews: 2 x 0.4) = 82.084.

[0074] The reliability determination unit 314 can also determine a rank corresponding to the reliability of the charging station 10 determined as described above, using correspondence information indicating the correspondence between ranks and reliability, as shown in Fig. 14, for example. In the example of Fig. 14, the ranks are divided into three levels: "A," "B," and "C." A reliability of 100 or more is classified as "A," a reliability of 50 or more but less than 100 is classified as "B," and a reliability of less than 50 is classified as "C." As described above, a reliability of 82.084 corresponds to the "B" rank.

[0075] In this way, the reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability and rank of each charging station 10 included in the delivery system 1. Then, the reliability determination unit 314 creates information indicating the rank of each charging station 10 (hereinafter referred to as "charging station reliability information"), for example, as shown in FIG. 15 . Then, the reliability determination unit 314 stores the created charging station reliability information in the reliability storage unit 315. Furthermore, for example, the reliability determination unit 314 can update the charging station reliability information every time the reliability of the devices, usage records, and reviews included in the charging station 10 is updated, and store the updated charging station reliability information in the reliability storage unit 315.

[0076] 3, the map information storage unit 316 stores map information. How to use the map information will be described later.

[0077] When a delivery request is received by the delivery request receiving unit 310, the route determination unit 317 determines a route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the received delivery request and one or more charging stations 10, based on the reliability obtained from the reliability storage unit 315. The route here refers to the travel route of the EV vehicle from departure from the warehouse to return to the warehouse, passing through the delivery destination and one or more charging stations 10. The specific contents of the route determination unit 317 will be described below.

[0078] As shown in FIG. 3 , the route determination unit 317 includes a reliability acquisition unit 320 , a first route determination unit 330 , and a second route determination unit 340 .

[0079] The reliability acquisition unit 320 acquires the reliability of each charging station 10 from the reliability storage unit 315. In the present embodiment, the reliability acquisition unit 320 acquires charging station reliability information from the reliability storage unit 315 when a delivery request is received by the delivery request reception unit 310. Note that the timing for acquiring the charging station reliability information is arbitrary; for example, the reliability acquisition unit 320 may acquire the charging station reliability information when the charging station reliability information stored in the reliability storage unit 315 is updated.

[0080] When a delivery request is received by the delivery request receiving unit 310, the first route determination unit 330 determines a route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10, based on the reliability acquired by the reliability acquisition unit 320. In this embodiment, the first route determination unit 330 determines the route for the EV vehicle by preferentially selecting a charging station 10 with a high reliability from among multiple candidate charging stations 10. Furthermore, the first route determination unit 330 determines the route for the EV vehicle so as to approach the shortest route among one or more routes that pass through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10, based on the reliability acquired by the reliability acquisition unit 320. Specific details of this will be described later.

[0081] The second route determination unit 340 determines the shortest route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request received by the delivery request receiving unit 310 and one or more charging stations 10. In this embodiment, the second route determination unit 340 uses map information stored in the map information storage unit 316 to identify one or more routes for the EV vehicle from departing from the warehouse, passing through the delivery destination included in the delivery request received by the delivery request receiving unit 310 and one or more charging stations 10, and returning to the warehouse. The second route determination unit 340 then determines the route with the shortest travel distance from among the one or more identified routes. In this example, the second route determination unit 340 determines the shortest route by selecting a charging station 10 that allows the EV vehicle to reach the delivery destination in the shortest time from within a range of distance that the EV vehicle can travel on a full charge, assuming that the EV vehicle is fully charged at the start of delivery and that the EV vehicle will be fully charged at a charging station 10 that is passed along the way.

[0082] Hereinafter, a route determination method by the first route determination unit 330 using the reliability acquired by the reliability acquisition unit 320 and the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 will be described. If a charging station 10 (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "first charging station 10") whose reliability is below a threshold exists on the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 and a charging station 10 (hereinafter sometimes referred to as the "second charging station 10") whose reliability is equal to or greater than the threshold exists around the first charging station 10, the first route determination unit 330 determines a route for the EV vehicle to pass through the second charging station 10 instead of the first charging station 10. Furthermore, if, for example, a second charging station 10 does not exist around the first charging station 10, the first route determination unit 330 can simply select the first charging station 10 on the shortest route.

[0083] In the present embodiment, as an example, a charging station 10 with a reliability rank of less than "B," i.e., a charging station 10 with a reliability rank of "C," is referred to as the "first charging station 10." For example, assume that the delivery request received by the delivery request receiving unit 310 includes delivery destination X and delivery destination Y shown in FIG. 16 , and the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 is warehouse → charging station 10B → delivery destination X → delivery destination Y → charging station 10D → warehouse. In this case, if the charging station reliability information acquired by the reliability acquisition unit 320 is the content shown in FIG. 15 , the reliability ranks of each of charging station 10B and charging station 10D are "C," and therefore correspond to the above-mentioned first charging station 10. For each of charging station 10B and charging station 10D, the first route determination unit 330 checks whether a charging station 10 (second charging station 10) with a reliability rank of "B" or higher exists in the vicinity of each of charging station 10B and charging station 10D.

[0084] 16 , since a charging station 10A with a reliability rank of "A" exists around charging station 10B, first route determination unit 330 selects charging station 10A instead of charging station 10B. In this way, first route determination unit 330 preferentially selects a charging station 10 with a high reliability from among multiple candidate charging stations 10. Note that in this example, charging station 10A is the only second charging station 10 existing around charging station 10B, but if, for example, multiple second charging stations 10 exist around charging station 10B, the second charging station 10 that is closest to the shortest route is selected from among them.

[0085] 16 , since charging station 10C with a reliability rank of “B” is present around charging station 10D, first route determination unit 330 selects charging station 10C instead of charging station 10D. In this manner, first route determination unit 330 determines the route of the EV vehicle in response to the delivery request received by delivery request receiving unit 310 as follows: Warehouse → Charging station 10A → Delivery destination X → Delivery destination Y → Charging station 10C → Warehouse.

[0086] 3 , the explanation will be continued. The route information output unit 318 outputs route information indicating the route of the electric vehicle determined by the route determination unit 317 (first route determination unit 330). In this embodiment, the route information output unit 318 outputs the route information to the electric vehicle management server 35.

[0087] Next, the EV vehicle management server 35 shown in FIG. 2 will be described. The EV vehicle management server 35 is a device that manages multiple EV vehicles used for delivery. As described above, in this embodiment, the EV vehicles measure their charging times and standby times, and transmit information linking the measured results with the charging stations 10 to the EV vehicle management server 35. The EV vehicle management server 35 then manages the actual charging times and standby times of each charging station 10 (manages usage records). The EV vehicle management server 35 also receives route information output from the route determination device 30. In this embodiment, a delivery company that delivers packages using EV vehicles manages the EV vehicle management server 35, and the delivery company drives the EV vehicles according to the route information received by the EV vehicle management server 35. The above is a detailed description of each device included in the delivery system 1.

[0088] 17 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the route determination device 30 of this embodiment. In the following description of the processing by each function of the route determination device 30, explanations of parts that overlap with the above description will be omitted as appropriate. Furthermore, the order of the steps in the flowchart of FIG. 17 is not limited to the example of FIG. 17 and can be changed as appropriate.

[0089] 17 , first, the delivery request receiving unit 310 receives a delivery request (step S1). Next, the reliability obtaining unit 320 obtains charging station reliability information from the reliability storage unit 315 (step S2). Next, the second route determining unit 340 uses the delivery request obtained in step S1 and the map information stored in the map information storage unit 316 to determine the shortest route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10 (step S3).

[0090] Next, the first route determination unit 330 determines whether or not a charging station 10 whose reliability is less than a threshold (in this embodiment, the reliability rank is less than "B") exists on the shortest route, using the charging station reliability information acquired in step S2 and the shortest route determined in step S3 (step S4). If the determination result in step S4 is negative (step S4: No), the first route determination unit 330 determines the shortest route determined in step S3 as the route for the EV vehicle (step S5).

[0091] If the determination result of step S4 is positive (step S4: Yes), the first route determination unit 330 executes the following steps S6 to S8 for each charging station 10 on the shortest route whose reliability is less than the threshold.

[0092] In step S6, the first route determination unit 330 determines whether a charging station 10 with a reliability equal to or higher than the threshold (in this embodiment, the reliability rank is "B" or higher) exists around the charging station 10 with a reliability lower than the threshold (step S6). If the result of step S6 is positive (step S6: Yes), the first route determination unit 330 selects a charging station 10 with a reliability equal to or higher than the threshold instead of the charging station 10 with a reliability lower than the threshold (step S7). As described above, if there are multiple charging stations 10 with a reliability equal to or higher than the threshold, the first route determination unit 330 can select a charging station 10 that is closest to the shortest route. If the result of step S6 is negative (step S6: No), the first route determination unit 330 simply selects a charging station 10 with a reliability lower than the threshold on the shortest route (step S8).

[0093] When the processing of steps S6 to S8 described above is completed for all charging stations 10 whose reliability is less than the threshold (step S9: Yes), the route of the EV vehicle is determined in accordance with the above selection result by the first route determination unit 330 (step S10), and the processing ends.

[0094] As described above, the route determination device 30 of the present embodiment determines a route for an EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10, based on the reliability of each of the multiple charging stations 10 included in the delivery system 1. By determining the route for the EV vehicle taking the reliability of the charging stations 10 into consideration, it is possible to determine a route that allows the EV vehicle to be safely charged. More specifically, the route determination device 30 of the present embodiment determines the route for the EV vehicle by preferentially selecting charging stations 10 with high reliability from among multiple candidate charging stations 10, thereby determining the route for the EV vehicle, thereby making it possible to determine a route that allows the EV vehicle to be safely charged.

[0095] Furthermore, as described above, the route determination device 30 of this embodiment determines a route for the EV vehicle so as to approximate the shortest route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10, based on the reliability of each of the multiple charging stations 10 included in the delivery system 1. More specifically, if a first charging station 10 indicating a charging station 10 with a reliability below a threshold is present on the shortest route and a second charging station 10 indicating a charging station 10 with a reliability equal to or higher than the threshold is present around the first charging station 10, the route determination device 30 of this embodiment determines a route for the EV vehicle so as to pass through the second charging station 10 instead of the first charging station 10. This makes it possible to determine a safe and nearly shortest route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10.

[0096] As described above, the reliability of charging station 10 is determined according to an SBOM-based evaluation of each of a plurality of devices included in charging station 10, and the SBOM-based evaluation includes at least one of an evaluation regarding risk, an evaluation regarding vulnerability, and an evaluation regarding license. By determining a route by preferentially selecting charging stations 10 with high reliability according to the SBOM-based evaluation, it is possible to determine a safe route that preferentially passes through charging stations 10 that ensure safety in terms of risk, vulnerability, and license.

[0097] As described above, the reliability of charging station 10 is determined based on the evaluation of the charging time and the evaluation of the standby time of charging station 10. Furthermore, the reliability of charging station 10 is determined based on the evaluation based on user reviews. By determining a route by preferentially selecting charging stations 10 that have a high reliability based on the evaluation based on the SBOM described above, as well as a high reliability based on the evaluation of the usage record (charging time, standby time) and a high reliability based on the evaluation based on reviews, it is possible to determine a route that allows EV vehicles to be charged safely and comfortably.

[0098] Although the embodiments of the present disclosure have been described above, the above-described embodiments are presented as examples and are not intended to limit the scope of the invention. These novel embodiments can be embodied in various other forms, and various omissions, substitutions, and modifications can be made without departing from the spirit of the invention. These novel embodiments and modifications thereof are included within the scope and spirit of the invention, and are also included in the scope of the invention and its equivalents as defined in the claims.

[0099] Furthermore, the effects of the embodiments described in this specification are merely examples and are not limiting, and other effects may also be obtained.

[0100] Modifications will be described below.

[0101] (1) Modification 1 In the above-described embodiment, the second route determination unit 340 determines the shortest route on the assumption that the EV vehicle is fully charged at the start of delivery, but this is not limiting. For example, the shortest route can also be determined based on the actual charge level (which is not necessarily full) of the EV vehicle used for delivery. For example, in a configuration in which the route determination device 30 specifies the EV vehicle to be used for delivery, the second route determination unit 340 can determine the shortest route by selecting the charging station 10 that is closest to the delivery destination from among the charging stations 10 that exist within a driving range based on the charge level of the EV vehicle used for delivery.

[0102] The method of specifying the EV vehicles to be used for delivery is arbitrary. For example, the route determination device 30 may specify EV vehicles in order so that their frequency of use is equal, or may specify EV vehicles so that their driving distance is equal, or the delivery request received from outside may include information specifying the EV vehicles to be used.

[0103] (2) Modification 2 In the above-described embodiment, it is assumed that the EV vehicle is fully charged at the charging station 10 on the route determined by the first route determination unit 330. However, depending on the distance to the next charging station 10 or warehouse, for example, there may be cases where it is not necessary to fully charge the EV vehicle at the previous charging station 10.

[0104] Therefore, the first route determination unit 330 can also determine the amount of charge to be applied to the EV vehicle at the charging station 10 based on the position of the charging station 10 on the determined route of the EV vehicle. In this case, the route determination device 30 can output, to the EV vehicle management server 35, information indicating the amount of charge to be applied to the EV vehicle at the charging station 10 on the route indicated by the route information, in addition to the above-mentioned route information.

[0105] Furthermore, depending on the location of a highly reliable charging station 10 (second charging station 10) selected instead of a less reliable charging station 10 (first charging station 10), it may be possible to reach the warehouse without passing through the charging station 10 next to the selected highly reliable charging station 10. In such a case, the first route determination unit 330 may determine a route by skipping the next charging station 10. In other words, the first route determination unit 330 may determine a route based on the location of the highly reliable charging station 10 that has been preferentially selected.

[0106] For example, assume that the shortest route for the EV vehicle determined by the second route determination unit 340 is warehouse → charging station 10B (reliability rank "C") → delivery destination V → delivery destination W → charging station 10C (reliability rank "B") → warehouse, as shown by the dotted line in Fig. 18. In the example of Fig. 18, charging station 10A (reliability rank "A"), which has a reliability rank of "B" or higher, is located around charging station 10B, which has a reliability rank of less than "B." Therefore, the first route determination unit 330 selects charging station 10A instead of charging station 10B, and can determine the route for the EV vehicle to be warehouse → delivery destination V → charging station 10A → delivery destination W → charging station 10C → warehouse, as shown by the solid line in Fig. 18.

[0107] In the example of FIG. 18 , depending on the locations of charging stations 10A and 10C, it may not be necessary to fully charge the EV vehicle at each of charging stations 10A and 10C. The first route determination unit 330 can determine the amount of charge to be applied to the EV vehicle at each of charging stations 10A and 10C so that the EV vehicle can travel via warehouse → delivery destination V → charging station 10A → delivery destination W → charging station 10C → warehouse. For example, the amount of charge applied to the EV vehicle at each charging station 10 can be set to an amount that allows the EV vehicle to travel to the next charging station 10 or warehouse. Furthermore, if the EV vehicle can reach the warehouse without passing through charging station 10C if it is fully charged at charging station 10A, for example, the first route determination unit 330 can determine a route that skips charging station 10C. In this case, the route of the EV vehicle is warehouse → delivery destination V → charging station 10A → delivery destination W → warehouse.

[0108] (3) Modification 3 In the above-described embodiment, the reliability storage unit 315 and the map information storage unit 316 are provided within the route determination device 30, but this is not limiting, and the reliability storage unit 315 and the map information storage unit 316 may be stored in any location, and may be provided, for example, in a device outside the route determination device 30 (an external device such as a server or a storage device).

[0109] (4) Modification 4 For example, the reliability may be determined based on an evaluation of the congestion level of the charging station 10. In this case, a “congestion level” is provided as an evaluation item in the reliability determination table, and a predetermined weight is associated with the reliability.

[0110] For example, the charging station management server 20 may monitor the congestion level of each of the multiple charging stations 10 included in the delivery system 1, and record and manage the average congestion level for each charging station 10 for each of multiple time periods. Furthermore, for example, the charging station management server 20 may also periodically update the congestion level of each charging station 10.

[0111] For example, the delivery request may include time information specifying the delivery time, and the reliability determination unit 314 may obtain the congestion level of each charging station 10 corresponding to the time information included in the delivery request from the charging station management server 20. The reliability determination unit 314 determines the reliability such that the higher the congestion level of the charging station 10, the lower the evaluation of the congestion level of the charging station 10 and the lower the reliability. As in the above-described embodiment, the reliability determination unit 314 may weightedly add the reliability (individual reliability) of the devices, usage records, reviews, and congestion level included in the charging station 10, and determine the result of the weighted addition as the overall reliability. By determining a route by preferentially selecting charging stations 10 that have a high reliability according to the evaluation based on the above-described SBOM and a high reliability according to the evaluation of the congestion level, it is possible to determine a route that allows safe and comfortable charging of an EV vehicle.

[0112] (5) Variation 5 The charging station reliability information described in the above embodiment is information indicating the reliability rank of each of the multiple charging stations 10 included in the delivery system 1, but is not limited to this. For example, the charging station reliability information may be information indicating the reliability value of each charging station without ranking.

[0113] (6) Modification 6 The above-described route determination device 30 is applied to the delivery system 1 that delivers packages using electric vehicles, but is not limited to this and can be applied to systems for various purposes. For example, the route determination device 30 can also be applied to systems that use electric vehicles to collect and deliver packages, provide door-to-door sales, or provide door-to-door repair services. In short, the route determination device 30 disclosed herein may be a device that, when receiving a travel request that includes one or more destinations and requests that an electric vehicle travel via the destinations, determines a route for the electric vehicle that passes through the destination included in the travel request and one or more charging stations 10, based on the reliability of each charging station 10.

[0114] (7) Modification 7 For example, when the pressure level (degree of pressure on electricity demand) of an area including a charging station 10 on the determined shortest route is equal to or higher than a reference value, the second route determination unit 340 may determine the shortest route via a charging station 10 included in an area adjacent to the area where the pressure level is less than the reference value.

[0115] FIG. 19 is a diagram showing an example of functions of the route determination device 300 of this modified example. As shown in FIG. 19, the route determination unit 3170 differs from the above-described embodiment in that it further includes a pressure level acquisition unit 350. The pressure level acquisition unit 350 acquires a pressure level indicating the degree of pressure on power demand for each region. The pressure level may be acquired from an external device or a server. The pressure level acquisition unit 350 may also acquire information necessary for calculating the pressure level (information indicating grid power, demanded power, etc.) from an external device and calculate the pressure level for each region based on the acquired information.

[0116] After determining the shortest route in the same manner as in the above-described embodiment, the second route determination unit 340 can acquire the congestion level of the area on the shortest route that includes the charging station 10 via the congestion level acquisition unit 350. If the congestion level of the area on the shortest route that includes the charging station 10 is equal to or greater than a reference value, the second route determination unit 340 refers to the congestion level for each area acquired by the congestion level acquisition unit 350, and selects an area whose congestion level is less than the reference value from among areas adjacent to the area on the shortest route that includes the charging station 10 (surrounding areas).

[0117] The second route determination unit 340 then uses the map information stored in the map information storage unit 316 to identify one or more routes for the EV vehicle from departure from the warehouse, passing through the delivery destination included in the delivery request received by the delivery request receiving unit 310 and one or more charging stations 10 included in the area (selected area) where the pressure level is less than the reference value, to return to the warehouse, and determines the route with the shortest travel distance from the one or more identified routes. The first route determination unit 330 determines the route for the EV vehicle so as to approach the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 based on the reliability of one or more charging stations 10 included in the area where the pressure level is less than the reference value, which is included in the charging station reliability information acquired by the reliability acquisition unit 320. The specific determination method is the same as in the above-described embodiment. Furthermore, for example, the charging station reliability information in this modification may be information in which information indicating the reliability and information indicating the area are associated with each other for each charging station 10.

[0118] For example, as shown by the dotted line in FIG. 20 , assume that the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 is warehouse → charging station 10E (reliability rank "A") → delivery destination S → delivery destination T → warehouse. In this example, it is assumed that the congestion level of area A, which includes charging station 10E, is equal to or higher than a reference value. Therefore, the second route determination unit 340 refers to the congestion level for each area acquired by the congestion level acquisition unit 350 and selects area B, which is adjacent to area A and has a congestion level lower than the reference value. Then, the second route determination unit 340 determines the shortest route from among one or more routes for the EV vehicle that pass through the delivery destinations S and T and the charging station 10 included in area B and return to the warehouse. Here, as shown by the solid line in FIG. 20 , assume that the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 is warehouse → charging station 10F (reliability rank "A") → delivery destination S → delivery destination T → warehouse. In this example, the reliability rank of the charging station 10F on the shortest route is "A" (the reliability is above the threshold), and there is no need to switch to a nearby charging station 10 with a higher reliability, so the first route determination unit 330 can determine the shortest route determined by the second route determination unit 340 as the route for the EV vehicle.

[0119] Here, for example, if the reliability of charging station 10F is less than a threshold (for example, the reliability rank is "C") and there is a charging station 10 with a reliability equal to or higher than the threshold around charging station 10F, first route determination unit 330 can also determine a route for the EV vehicle so that the EV vehicle passes through the charging station 10 with a reliability equal to or higher than the threshold instead of charging station 10F. The method for determining this route is the same as in the above-described embodiment.

[0120] FIG. 21 is a flowchart showing an example of the operation of the route determination device 300 of this modified example. As shown in FIG. 21 , first, the delivery request receiving unit 310 receives a delivery request (step S101). Next, the reliability obtaining unit 320 obtains charging station reliability information from the reliability storage unit 315 (step S102). Next, the second route determination unit 340 determines the shortest route for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination included in the delivery request and one or more charging stations 10, using the delivery request obtained in step S101 and the map information stored in the map information storage unit 316 (step S103). The processing content of steps S101 to S103 in FIG. 21 is the same as the processing content of steps S1 to S3 in FIG. 17 .

[0121] Next, the congestion level acquisition unit 350 acquires the congestion level for each region (step S104). Next, the second route determination unit 340 determines whether the congestion level of the region including the charging station 10 on the shortest route determined in step S103 is equal to or greater than a reference value (step S105).

[0122] If the result of step S105 is positive (step S105: Yes), the second route determination unit 340 selects an area from the neighboring areas where the pressure level is less than the reference value (step S106).The second route determination unit 340 then determines the shortest route from among one or more routes for the EV vehicle that passes through the delivery destination identified in the delivery request received in step S101, the charging station 10 included in the area selected in step S106, and returns to the warehouse (step S107).Then, the process proceeds to step S108.

[0123] On the other hand, if the result of step S105 above is negative (step S105: No), second route determination unit 340 does not re-determine the shortest route, and the process proceeds to step S108. The processing content of subsequent steps S108 to S114 is the same as the processing content of steps S4 to S10 in FIG. 17 . In short, as in the above-described embodiment, if a charging station 10 whose reliability is below the threshold exists on the shortest route and, in addition, a charging station 10 whose reliability is equal to or higher than the threshold exists around the charging station 10, route determination device 300 determines a route for the EV vehicle such that the EV vehicle passes through a charging station 10 whose reliability is equal to or higher than the threshold (second charging station) instead of a charging station 10 whose reliability is below the threshold (first charging station).

[0124] The above-described embodiment can be arbitrarily combined with the above-described modified examples, and the above-described modified examples can also be arbitrarily combined with each other.

[0125] REFERENCE SIGNS LIST 1 Delivery system 10 Charging station 20 Charging station management server 30 Route determination device 35 EV vehicle management server 40 Network 50 Terminal 100 EV charger 110 Power meter 120 Charging station control device 130 Network switch 310 Delivery request receiving unit 311 SBOM acquisition unit 312 Usage record acquisition unit 313 Review acquisition unit 314 Reliability determination unit 315 Reliability storage unit 316 Map information storage unit 317 Route determination unit 318 Route information output unit 320 Reliability acquisition unit 330 First route determination unit 340 Second route determination unit

Claims

1. a travel request receiving step of receiving a travel request that includes one or more destinations and requests that the electric vehicle travel via the destinations; a reliability acquisition step of acquiring the reliability of each of a plurality of charging stations, which are facilities for charging the electric vehicle, from a reliability storage unit in which the reliability of each of the plurality of charging stations is stored; a first route determination step of determining, when the travel request is received in the travel request receiving step, a route for the electric vehicle that passes through the destination included in the travel request and one or more of the charging stations, based on the reliability acquired in the reliability acquisition step; a route information output step of outputting route information indicating the route of the electric vehicle determined in the first route determination step, Route determination method.

2. the first route determination step determines a route for the electric vehicle by preferentially selecting the charging station having a high reliability from among a plurality of candidate charging stations. The method of claim 1 .

3. a second route determination step of determining a shortest route for the electric vehicle that passes through the destination included in the travel request and one or more of the charging stations; the first route determination step determines a route of the electric vehicle based on the reliability acquired in the reliability acquisition step so as to approach the shortest route determined in the second route determination step; The route determination method according to claim 2 .

4. the second route determination step determines the shortest route for the electric vehicle in accordance with a charge amount of the electric vehicle to be used; The route determination method according to claim 3 .

5. In the first route determination step, when a first charging station indicating the charging station whose reliability is less than a threshold exists on the shortest route determined in the second route determination step, and a second charging station indicating the charging station whose reliability is equal to or greater than the threshold exists around the first charging station, the route of the electric vehicle is determined to go via the second charging station instead of the first charging station. The route determination method according to claim 3 .

6. the first route determination step determines an amount of charge to be applied to the electric vehicle at the charging station based on a position of the charging station on the determined route of the electric vehicle; The method of claim 1 .

7. The travel request includes a delivery request requesting delivery of a package by the electric vehicle. The method of claim 1 .

8. further comprising a reliability determination step of determining the reliability; The reliability determining step includes: determining the reliability in response to an evaluation of the charging station; The method of claim 1 .

9. the evaluation includes an evaluation based on software configuration information of each of a plurality of devices included in the charging station; the evaluation based on the software configuration information includes at least one of an evaluation regarding a risk, an evaluation regarding a vulnerability, and an evaluation regarding a license; The method of determining a route according to claim 8.

10. The evaluation based on the software configuration information includes an evaluation regarding a license. The method of claim 9 .

11. The evaluation of the license is based on whether the software is within its support period or on the frequency of software updates. The method of claim 9 .

12. The software configuration information is an SBOM. The method of claim 9 .

13. the reliability determination step determines at least one of an evaluation regarding the risk, an evaluation regarding the vulnerability, and an evaluation regarding the license based on the SBOM, and determines the reliability according to the obtained evaluation. The method of claim 12.

14. the evaluation includes an evaluation regarding a charging time and an evaluation regarding a waiting time of the charging station; The reliability determining step includes: the smaller the difference between the actual charging time and the estimated charging time at the charging station, the higher the evaluation of the charging time at the charging station and the higher the reliability; determining the reliability such that the smaller the difference between the actual waiting time and the expected waiting time at the charging station, the higher the evaluation of the waiting time at the charging station and the greater the reliability; The method of determining a route according to claim 8.

15. The evaluation includes an evaluation based on user reviews; the reliability determining step determines the reliability such that the reliability increases as the evaluation based on the user's review increases. The method of determining a route according to claim 8.

16. the evaluation includes an evaluation regarding a congestion level of the charging station; the reliability determining step determines the reliability such that the higher the congestion level of the charging station, the lower the evaluation of the congestion level of the charging station and the smaller the reliability. The method of determining a route according to claim 8.

17. The method further includes a pressure level acquisition step of acquiring a pressure level indicating a degree of pressure on the demand for electricity for each region, In the second route determination step, when a congestion level of an area including the charging station on the determined shortest route is equal to or higher than a reference value, a shortest route is determined that passes through the charging station included in an area adjacent to the determined area, the area having a congestion level lower than the reference value. The route determination method according to claim 3 .

18. a travel request receiving unit that receives a travel request that includes one or more destinations and requests that the electric vehicle travel via the destinations; a reliability acquisition unit that acquires the reliability of each of a plurality of charging stations, which are facilities for charging the electric vehicle, from a reliability storage unit that stores the reliability of each of the plurality of charging stations; a route determination unit that, when the travel request receiving unit receives the travel request, determines a route for the electric vehicle that passes through the destination included in the travel request and at least one of the charging stations, based on the reliability acquired by the reliability acquisition unit; a route information output unit that outputs route information indicating the route of the electric vehicle determined by the route determination unit, Route determination device.

19. On the computer, a travel request receiving step of receiving a travel request that includes one or more destinations and requests that the electric vehicle travel via the destinations; a reliability acquisition step of acquiring the reliability of each of a plurality of charging stations, which are facilities for charging the electric vehicle, from a reliability storage unit in which the reliability of each of the plurality of charging stations is stored; a route determination step of determining, when the travel request is received in the travel request receiving step, a route for the electric vehicle that passes through the destination included in the travel request and at least one of the charging stations, based on the reliability acquired in the reliability acquisition step; a route information output step of outputting route information indicating the route of the electric vehicle determined by the route determination step.