Autonomous Vehicle Passenger Interaction for Traffic Deadlock Merging

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous vehicles face delays and inconveniences in heavy traffic situations due to conservative navigation rules that prevent them from merging or proceeding, leading to prolonged wait times and potential traffic backups.

Innovation Solution

An autonomous vehicle system that identifies abnormal driving situations, such as deadlocks or excessive traffic, and prompts passengers to interact with human drivers to negotiate for yielding or merging opportunities, allowing the vehicle to temporarily violate navigation rules to improve traffic flow while maintaining safety.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the autonomous vehicle follows conservative navigation rules to ensure safety, then collision prevention is improved, but driving time increases and traffic flow efficiency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoiddriving time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts navigation rule adherence based on real-time human interaction outcomes. When human negotiation succeeds, the system temporarily violates conservative rules to improve traffic flow, while maintaining safety through continuous monitoring and rule reversion capability when interactions fail.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the parameter of rule adherence from fixed (always follow rules) to variable (follow rules unless human interaction succeeds). This allows the vehicle to adapt its safety margin and rule compliance level based on the success of human negotiation, reducing unnecessary waiting time while maintaining adequate safety.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Reliability

If the autonomous vehicle follows conservative navigation rules to prevent accidents, then safety is improved, but traffic flow efficiency and productivity deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidtraffic flow efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically switches between rule-following and rule-violating modes based on human interaction success. This dynamic behavior allows the vehicle to contribute to improved traffic flow efficiency by successfully negotiating with other drivers, while maintaining safety through the ability to revert to conservative rules when negotiation fails.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from human interaction outcomes to adjust its navigation behavior. Successful human negotiation provides positive feedback that allows the system to temporarily violate rules for improved traffic flow, while unsuccessful interactions provide negative feedback that reinforces conservative rule-following behavior.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If the autonomous vehicle waits for ideal merging situations according to rules, then safety is improved, but driving time and passenger convenience worsen

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoidwaiting time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDuration of action of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary human interaction before attempting to violate merging rules. By negotiating with other drivers in advance, the system creates permission to proceed with non-conservative merging actions, reducing waiting time while maintaining safety through pre-established social contract.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

Human interaction serves as an intermediary mechanism between the autonomous vehicle's merging desire and the conservative rules. The human negotiation process mediates the conflict, allowing the system to temporarily bypass rules when human approval is obtained, thus reducing waiting time while maintaining safety through human oversight.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS11801852B2Actively adapting to driving environments based on human interactions
Publication Date: 2023.10.31 TOYOTA JIDOSHA KK
  • US11801852B2 patent drawing
  • US11801852B2 patent drawing
  • US11801852B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method performed by an autonomous vehicle includes identifying a condition preventing the autonomous vehicle from proceeding along an intended route. The method also includes prompting a passenger of the autonomous vehicle to interact with a driver of a first vehicle in response to identifying the condition. The method further includes receiving, from the passenger, an input at an interface of the autonomous vehicle indicating a successful interaction or an unsuccessful interaction with the driver. The method also includes controlling the autonomous vehicle to proceed along the intended route based on the input indicating the successful interaction with the driver.