Autonomous Vehicle Path Planning Using Uncertainty Risk Maps

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing path planning systems for autonomous vehicles face challenges in ensuring safety and reliability, particularly in complex operating situations, due to the need for extensive manual work and the difficulty in integrating uncertainties and heuristics or formal methods across various scenarios.

Innovation Solution

A risk map is used to quantify and mitigate risks by incorporating uncertainties in vehicle actuation capabilities and surrounding environments, allowing for real-time path planning that accounts for potential hazards and uncertainties, thereby providing a more flexible and scalable solution.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional path planning systems use detailed environmental modeling and complex constraint optimization to ensure safety, then path reliability is improved, but device complexity and manual work increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepath safetyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces complex mechanical/path optimization algorithms with a neural network-based learning system. The neural network is trained offline to learn safe paths directly from sensor data and environmental models, substituting the need for runtime complex constraint optimization and detailed environmental modeling with a trained intelligent system that generalizes across scenarios.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs path planning computations in advance by training a neural network offline using extensive environmental models and constraint data. This preliminary training phase captures complex safety requirements and environmental constraints, allowing the system to make rapid path decisions during runtime without重新 performing complex optimizations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Ease of operation

If heuristic methods are used to check path safety in path planning systems, then ease of operation is improved, but reliability decreases due to inability to account for all possible situations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveimplementation easeVSAvoidpath safety
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms the path safety checking problem from a heuristic qualitative assessment into a quantitative neural network classification task. By changing the approach from rule-based heuristics to a learned model that processes environmental parameters and predicts safety outcomes, the system achieves both ease of implementation and high reliability through data-driven generalization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces heuristic rule-based safety checking with a neural network-based safety assessment system. The neural network learns safety patterns from training data and can evaluate paths in complex situations beyond the scope of predefined heuristics, providing more reliable safety checks while maintaining ease of operation through a unified learning-based framework.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If formal methods are used to verify path safety, then reliability is improved, but device complexity and difficulty of implementation increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepath safetyVSAvoidverification complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent substitutes formal verification methods with a neural network-based safety assessment system. Instead of using complex formal methods to prove path safety, the system uses a trained neural network that has learned safety patterns from extensive training data, achieving reliable safety verification through learning rather than formal proof.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent enables the system to learn safety requirements and verification rules automatically from training data without manual specification. The neural network self-learns what constitutes a safe path by analyzing training examples, eliminating the need for manual formal verification rule creation and reducing implementation complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Reliability

If extensive data collection is performed to statistically prove safety, then reliability is improved, but loss of time and productivity decrease due to intractable amounts of data required

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety proofVSAvoiddata collection time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs extensive data collection and safety analysis in advance during the offline neural network training phase. By pre-processing and learning from extensive training data before deployment, the system accumulates safety knowledge beforehand, allowing rapid runtime decisions without needing to collect and analyze extensive data during actual operation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent creates a trained neural network model that captures safety patterns learned from extensive training data. This model copy contains the distilled safety knowledge and can be deployed to make rapid safety assessments without requiring the original extensive training dataset to be present during runtime operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Data Source

PatentUS12377837B2Path planning in autonomous driving environments
Publication Date: 2025.08.05 ZENUITY AB
  • US12377837B2 patent drawing
  • US12377837B2 patent drawing
  • US12377837B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A path planning method and system for a vehicle. The method includes obtaining risk map of a surrounding environment of vehicle. Risk map is formed based on an actuation capability of the vehicle and location of free-space areas in the surrounding environment, actuation capability including uncertainty estimation for actuation capability and the location of free-space areas comprising an uncertainty estimation for the estimated location of free-space areas. Risk map includes risk parameter for each of a plurality of area segments included in the surrounding environment of the vehicle. Obtaining at least one candidate path for vehicle, determining total risk value for each candidate path based on risk parameters of a set of area segments intersected by the at least one path, selecting a candidate path, of at least one candidate path, fulfilling a risk value criterion, and generating, at an output, a first signal indicative of selected candidate path.