Autonomous Driving Mode Switching with Driver Safety Checks

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous vehicles face challenges in safely transitioning between manual and autonomous driving modes due to various environmental, vehicle, and driver conditions, requiring comprehensive assessments and corrective actions to ensure safe operation.

Innovation Solution

A method that involves accessing protocol data to assess vehicle and environmental status, identifying preventive conditions, and generating a sequence of tasks for the driver to complete before switching modes, with continuous monitoring and potential corrective actions by the vehicle's computer or driver.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If comprehensive environmental, vehicle, and driver assessments are conducted before mode switching, then safety and reliability are improved, but system complexity and time consumption increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The comprehensive assessment is segmented into three independent modules: environmental condition assessment (weather, road conditions, traffic), vehicle condition assessment (sensor functionality, system status), and driver condition assessment (attentiveness, readiness). Each module operates independently with its own checklist, allowing parallel processing while maintaining comprehensive coverage for safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

All necessary assessments and checks are performed preliminarily before the actual mode switching occurs. The system proactively identifies and flags any conditions that would prevent safe mode transition, requiring corrective actions to be completed beforehand. This ensures safety is verified in advance, preventing unsafe transitions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If comprehensive environmental, vehicle, and driver assessments are conducted before mode switching, then safety and reliability are improved, but time consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs continuous monitoring and reassessment of environmental, vehicle, and driver conditions throughout the mode transition process. Rather than conducting discrete, time-consuming assessments, the monitoring operates continuously to detect changes in real-time, reducing overall transition time while maintaining comprehensive safety verification.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Solution Approach 2:

The assessment process is made dynamic and adaptive. The system adjusts the depth and duration of assessments based on current conditions - for example, if conditions are favorable and stable, assessments can be quicker, while borderline cases receive more thorough evaluation. This dynamic approach optimizes the balance between safety and time consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Ease of operation

If the system provides detailed checklists and corrective tasks to the driver, then ease of operation is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveease of operationVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system introduces an intermediary layer between the complex assessment algorithms and the driver. This intermediary generates simplified, actionable checklists and corrective tasks that present only the essential information the driver needs. The complexity of the underlying system is abstracted away, leaving the driver with clear, easy-to-follow instructions while the system handles the complex processing in the background.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If the system monitors and corrects conditions automatically, then safety is improved, but extent of automation increases which may reduce driver awareness

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidautomation level
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements continuous feedback loops where automated monitoring detects conditions and provides real-time notifications to the driver about required corrective actions. The driver receives feedback on their compliance with safety requirements, and the system adjusts its automation level accordingly - providing more guidance when conditions are borderline and allowing more autonomy when conditions are clearly safe. This maintains safety while preserving driver awareness and engagement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12168448B2Engaging and disengaging for autonomous driving
Publication Date: 2024.12.17 WAYMO LLC
  • US12168448B2 patent drawing
  • US12168448B2 patent drawing
  • US12168448B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Aspects of the present disclosure relate switching between autonomous and manual driving modes. In order to do so, the vehicle's computer may conduct a series of environmental, system, and driver checks to identify certain conditions. The computer may correct some of these conditions and also provide a driver with a checklist of tasks for completion. Once the tasks have been completed and the conditions are changed, the computer may allow the driver to switch from the manual to the autonomous driving mode. The computer may also make a determination, under certain conditions, that it would be detrimental to the driver's safety or comfort to make a switch from the autonomous driving mode to the manual driving mode.