Autonomous Driving Action Control for Deliberate-Reflex Conflicts
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Autonomous driving systems face challenges in ensuring safety and comfort due to conflicts between deliberate and reflex actions, which can lead to incorrect action selection and stress for passengers, as they often require different processing times and may not account for driver preferences.
Innovation Solution
A driving control apparatus with a detection section, deliberate action determination section, reflex action determination section, and action control section that processes local and global information to determine actions, resolves conflicts between deliberate and reflex actions using various resolution modes, and allows driver intervention, ensuring safe and comfortable travel.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If the system processes all detection results through comprehensive analysis to determine autonomous driving actions, then the accuracy and safety of action selection is improved, but the processing time increases and may cause conflicts between deliberate and reflex actions
Solution Approach 1:
The autonomous driving control system is divided into two independent processing pathways: a deliberate action determination section that performs comprehensive analysis for safety-critical decisions, and a reflex action determination section that processes detections rapidly for time-critical responses. This segmentation allows each pathway to optimize for its specific function without compromising the other.
Solution Approach 2:
An action control section serves as an intermediary that receives outputs from both deliberate and reflex action determination sections, resolves conflicts between them, and determines the final autonomous driving action. This mediator coordinates the two pathways to ensure safe and timely responses.
2Speed
If the system prioritizes fast reflex actions for immediate safety responses, then the response time is reduced, but the accuracy and consideration of global context may be compromised
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments action determination into reflex actions handled by a dedicated section for speed, and deliberate actions handled by another section for accuracy. Each segment processes information appropriate to its function without being constrained by the other's requirements.
Solution Approach 2:
The reflex action determination section is pre-configured with predetermined actions for common emergency scenarios, enabling immediate response without requiring comprehensive analysis at the moment of decision. This preliminary preparation ensures rapid response while maintaining accuracy for time-critical situations.
3Reliability
If the system implements comprehensive conflict resolution mechanisms between deliberate and reflex actions, then the safety and reliability are improved, but the device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The action control section acts as a specialized intermediary component with predefined conflict resolution logic. Rather than implementing complex resolution mechanisms throughout the entire system, this single mediator handles all conflicts between deliberate and reflex actions using predetermined rules, thereby managing complexity centrally.
Solution Approach 2:
The system changes the parameter of conflict resolution from a complex multi-step process to a set of predetermined rules with priority levels. By parameterizing the resolution logic in terms of action priorities and time-criticality, the system achieves reliable conflict management with reduced structural complexity.
4Reliability
If the system focuses on achieving safe autonomous driving through standardized control, then the reliability is improved, but the ability to tailor driving to driver preferences is reduced
Solution Approach 1:
The action control section dynamically selects between deliberate and reflex actions based on real-time conditions, action priorities, and time-criticality assessments. This dynamic decision-making allows the system to adapt its behavior to different driving situations while maintaining safety standards.
Solution Approach 2:
The system incorporates driver feedback mechanisms that allow drivers to express preferences and intervene in autonomous driving decisions. This feedback loop enables the system to learn and adapt to individual driver preferences over time while maintaining the safety framework established by the dual action determination pathways.
Data Source
AI summary
The present disclosure relates to a driving control apparatus, a driving control method, and a program that can resolve a conflict between a deliberate action and a reflex action during determination of a next action in autonomous driving.During autonomous driving, a reflex action is determined as a simplified action on the basis of detection results detected by a variety of sensors provided in a vehicle, and a deliberate action ranked higher than a reflex action is determined through elaborate processing. A plurality of resolution modes are made available to deal with a possible conflict between the reflex action and the deliberate action, and by which of the resolution modes the conflict is resolved is specified in advance so that the conflict is resolved by the specified resolution mode. The present disclosure is applicable to motor vehicles that drive autonomously.