Autonomous Driving Hazard Detection via Multi-Model Redundancy

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous driving systems face challenges in detecting and preventing unsafe control operations due to the limitations of existing redundancy methods, which may not adequately cover systematic and random faults, leading to potential hazardous situations.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a redundant system using multiple machine learning objects, such as deep neural networks (DNNs), including PlanningNet, SafetyNet, LegalNet, and MoralNet, which operate from different perspectives to verify and modify action planning, providing diverse fault coverage and ensuring safety, legality, and ethical considerations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If traditional redundancy methods are used for fault detection, then systematic and random fault coverage is provided, but the detection capability for hazardous driving situations is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvefault detection capabilityVSAvoidredundancy system configuration
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies inversion by training one machine learning model (SafetyNet) to detect unsafe driving situations by learning from inverted or adversarial examples of hazardous behavior. This allows the system to identify hazards by understanding what constitutes unsafe patterns, rather than only learning safe driving patterns, thereby improving hazard detection capability without proportionally increasing system complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary machine learning-based safety checker that acts as a mediator between the primary driving control system and the actuators. This intermediary layer analyzes sensor inputs and proposed actions to detect potential hazards before execution, providing enhanced fault detection capability while maintaining a modular architecture that limits overall system complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If multiple machine learning objects with different perspectives are implemented, then diverse fault coverage and safety are improved, but computational complexity and processing time increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety and fault coverageVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-training multiple machine learning models with different perspectives (safety, legality, ethics) during an offline phase. During real-time operation, these pre-trained models can quickly evaluate hazards without requiring extensive computation, thereby providing diverse fault coverage while minimizing processing time loss

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the safety checking function into multiple specialized machine learning objects, each responsible for a specific aspect (safety, legality, ethics). This segmentation allows each model to be optimized for its specific task and enables parallel processing of different safety dimensions, improving overall safety coverage while managing computational complexity through modular evaluation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Productivity

If machine learning objects are trained using the same data, then training efficiency is improved, but detection diversity and hazard identification capability are reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraining efficiencyVSAvoidhazard detection accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by using the same training dataset but applying different preprocessing, augmentation, or selection strategies to create specialized training subsets for each machine learning model. For example, SafetyNet may receive augmented versions of the data with hazardous scenarios emphasized, while LegalNet receives data filtered for traffic rule compliance examples. This allows efficient use of the base dataset while creating diverse detection capabilities across different models

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS20220083068A1Detection of hazardous driving using machine learning
Publication Date: 2022.03.17 NVIDIA CORP
  • US20220083068A1 patent drawing
  • US20220083068A1 patent drawing
  • US20220083068A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An autonomous driving system could create or exacerbate a hazardous driving situation due to incorrect machine learning, algorithm design, sensor limitations, environmental conditions or other factors. This technology presents solutions that use machine learning to detect when the autonomous driving system is in this state e.g., erratic or reckless driving and other behavior, in order to take remedial action to prevent a hazard such as a collision.