Adaptive Driver Input Interface for Autonomous Vehicle Trust

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Many drivers are uncomfortable and distrust autonomous vehicle systems due to issues such as vehicle wandering, inappropriate following distances, and inconsistent throttle and braking responses.

Innovation Solution

A vehicle control system with a single-handed interface device that integrates steering, throttle, and braking actuators, allowing users to adjust vehicle speed and direction through a pivotable drive controller and rotatable steering controller, with a control system that learns and adapts to user preferences.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If autonomous vehicle control systems operate without human control input, then automation level is improved, but driver trust and comfort deteriorate due to rigid control behavior

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveautonomous vehicle operationVSAvoiddriver trust

Core Design Contradiction:

Extent of automationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system monitors driver inputs on the interface device and uses this feedback to dynamically adjust control parameters. The control system learns from repeated driver corrections and modifies autonomous control behavior accordingly, creating a closed-loop system that adapts to driver preferences while maintaining automation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The control system transitions from static, pre-programmed autonomous control to dynamic adaptation. Control parameters such as steering angle, throttle response, and braking force are continuously adjusted based on real-time driver input patterns, allowing the system to evolve its behavior to match individual driver preferences.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If autonomous control parameters are fixed, then system reliability is improved, but adaptability to individual driver preferences deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontrol system stabilityVSAvoiddriver preference adaptation

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system establishes baseline control parameters in advance for stable autonomous operation. These pre-set parameters provide a reliable foundation that ensures safe and consistent vehicle control while allowing subsequent adaptation to individual driver preferences through learned adjustments.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system modifies control parameters dynamically based on driver input patterns. By changing parameters such as steering responsiveness, acceleration rates, and braking force in response to driver corrections, the system maintains stability while adapting to individual preferences over time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Ease of operation

If the interface device allows extensive driver control adjustments, then driver comfort is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedriver comfortVSAvoidcontrol system complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

A single interface device integrates multiple control functions including steering, acceleration, and braking inputs. This multi-functional design allows extensive driver control adjustments through one unified interface rather than requiring separate controls for each function, maintaining ease of operation while managing complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system combines multiple control inputs from the interface device into a unified control signal processing pathway. By merging steering, throttle, and brake inputs through a single adaptive control architecture, the system provides comprehensive driver control without proportionally increasing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

4Reliability

If the control system continuously adapts to driver inputs, then driver trust is improved, but loss of original autonomous control logic increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedriver trustVSAvoidoriginal control instructions

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial adaptation by modifying only certain control parameters based on driver inputs while preserving the core autonomous control logic. Not all parameters are adjusted equally, and adjustments are made selectively to maintain the integrity of the original autonomous driving algorithms while incorporating driver preferences.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS12502961B2System with user input for autonomous vehicle control

Publication Date: 2025.12.23 FCA US LLC

AI summary

A system for controlling a vehicle includes a steering actuator, a brake actuator a throttle actuator, an interface device and a control system. The interface device has a drive controller coupled to the brake actuator and the throttle actuator, and a steering controller coupled to the steering actuator. The control system is responsive to actuation of the interface device to change one or both of the speed and direction of the vehicle as compared to the instructions executed by the vehicle controller, and the control system is responsive to actuation of the interface device to adjust the instructions as a function of the actuation of the interface device in at least some operating conditions.