Automated Driving Risk-Based Component Switching
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Highly automated driving systems in motor vehicles face challenges in accurately diagnosing faults, leading to potential increased accident risks due to incorrect fault detection and switchover between function components, which can result in either continued operation with faulty components or suboptimal performance of backup components.
Innovation Solution
Implement a continuous risk assessment method to determine the accident risk of both primary and secondary function components, switching only when the secondary component's risk is lower, and alerting the driver to take over if the risk exceeds a predefined threshold.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a fault case is identified that does not even exist objectively, then a switchover to the second function component may mistakenly take place, but this increases the accident risk due to suboptimal control performance
Solution Approach 1:
The system continuously monitors the behavior of function components and feeds this information back to the risk assessment module. The risk assessment then adjusts the control strategy based on the assessed accident risk, creating a closed-loop feedback system that dynamically responds to component performance without relying solely on binary fault detection
Solution Approach 2:
Instead of relying on fixed fault thresholds, the system changes the parameter from binary fault presence/absence to a continuous accident risk probability. This allows for more nuanced decision-making where the switchover is triggered by assessed risk levels rather than absolute fault conditions, reducing false positives while maintaining safety
2Ease of operation
If the driver is assured of a takeover time of 15 seconds, then the driver can attend to matters not related to driving or sleep, but this reduces the driver's availability as fallback level for monitoring the function
Solution Approach 1:
The highly automated driving function performs self-monitoring and self-assessment of its own operational status and accident risk. The system independently evaluates whether it can safely continue operation or requires driver takeover, reducing the need for continuous driver monitoring while maintaining safety through automated self-diagnosis and risk management
3Reliability
If a switchover takes place from a first function component to a second function component upon fault detection, then emergency operation is maintained, but this may increase accident risk if the fault detection is incorrect or the second component performs suboptimally
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts the control strategy based on real-time risk assessment rather than following a static failover protocol. The decision to switch components is not predetermined but adapts to the current driving situation and assessed accident risk, allowing the system to maintain the first component if risk remains low or switch to the second component only when risk assessment justifies the transition
Data Source
AI summary
A highly automated driving function for controlling a motor vehicle includes a plurality of function components. A method for controlling the motor vehicle includes steps of executing the driving function using a first function component, comparing the behavior of the first function component to a specified behavior, ascertaining that the behavior of the first function component deviates from the specified behavior, ascertaining a first accident risk if the driving function continues to be executed with the aid of the first function component, ascertaining a second accident risk if the execution of the driving function continues with the aid of a second function component, and executing the driving function with the aid of the particular function component whose allocated accident risk is the lowest.