Autonomous Vehicle Fallback Task Control for Safe Self-Recovery

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous vehicles face challenges in safely operating when they cannot complete primary tasks due to malfunctions or low resources, lacking executable instructions, and there is a need for fallback tasks to ensure safe operation and maintenance without human intervention.

Innovation Solution

A system with processors and memory that manage fallback tasks by receiving status updates, determining trigger conditions, and executing fallback instructions such as driving to a base location or maintenance depot, allowing the vehicle to autonomously navigate to a safe location for servicing or reconnection.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If autonomous vehicles operate without human drivers, then productivity and transportation efficiency are improved, but reliability deteriorates due to malfunctions and lack of human intervention

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetransportation efficiencyVSAvoidsafe operation
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-configures fallback tasks and trigger conditions before autonomous operation begins. When malfunctions occur or resources are depleted, the vehicle automatically executes pre-planned fallback procedures without human intervention, ensuring continuous safe operation while maintaining high productivity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The autonomous vehicle monitors its own status, detects malfunctions and resource levels, and autonomously executes fallback tasks without human assistance. The system self-manages safety protocols, maintaining reliability while enabling unmanned productive operation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

2Reliability

If fallback tasks are implemented for autonomous operation, then reliability is improved through safe fallback procedures, but device complexity increases due to additional monitoring and execution systems

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafe operationVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The fallback task management system integrates multiple functions into a unified architecture: status monitoring, trigger condition evaluation, task selection, and execution control all operate within the existing autonomous vehicle control system, avoiding significant complexity increases while ensuring reliable safe operation

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Reliability

If continuous monitoring of status updates is performed, then reliability is improved through early detection of trigger conditions, but use of energy increases due to constant system monitoring

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection accuracyVSAvoidenergy consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs status monitoring and trigger condition evaluation at periodic intervals rather than continuously, reducing energy consumption while maintaining reliable detection of malfunctions and resource depletion conditions that require fallback task execution

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

4Ease of operation

If fallback tasks are executed autonomously without human intervention, then ease of operation is improved, but loss of time occurs when fallback tasks interrupt primary tasks

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautonomous operationVSAvoidtask completion time
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system adjusts the priority and execution timing of fallback tasks based on the severity of trigger conditions and current vehicle state. Less critical fallback tasks are scheduled to execute after primary tasks complete, while critical safety-related fallback tasks interrupt primary tasks immediately, optimizing both autonomous operation and task completion time based on dynamic parameter changes

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS20240346933A1Fallback requests for autonomous vehicles
Publication Date: 2024.10.17 WAYMO LLC
  • US20240346933A1 patent drawing
  • US20240346933A1 patent drawing
  • US20240346933A1 patent drawing

AI summary

Aspects of the present disclosure relate to a system having a memory, a plurality of self-driving systems for controlling a vehicle, and one or more processors. The processors are configured to receive at least one fallback task in association with a request for a primary task and at least one trigger of each fallback task. Each trigger is a set of conditions that, when satisfied, indicate when a vehicle requires attention for proper operation. The processors are also configured to send instructions to the self-driving systems to execute the primary task and receive status updates from the self-driving systems. The processors are configured to determine that a set of conditions of a trigger is satisfied based on the status updates and send further instructions based on the associated fallback task to the self-driving systems.