Autonomous Vehicle Honking Control for Imminent Collision Alerts

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous vehicles face challenges in preventing collisions due to drivers not paying attention or failing to notice their presence, necessitating a system for timely alerting nearby vehicles of potential collisions.

Innovation Solution

An autonomous vehicle system equipped with sensors and an onboard computer that processes data to identify potential collisions, determining imminent risks and initiating controlled honking to alert other vehicles, while avoiding repetitive honking to prevent annoyance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If automated honking is initiated to alert other vehicles of potential collisions, then collision prevention effectiveness is improved, but vehicle annoyance and noise pollution increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision prevention effectivenessVSAvoidvehicle annoyance and noise pollution
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adjusts honking parameters including volume intensity, duration, and frequency based on the assessed collision risk level. For lower risk scenarios, softer and shorter honks are used, while higher risk scenarios trigger louder and longer honks, optimizing the balance between effectiveness and annoyance

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The honking system employs periodic action by using multiple short honk sequences rather than continuous honking. The system can issue a series of spaced honks to maintain alert effectiveness while allowing silence intervals that reduce overall noise pollution and driver annoyance

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

2Device complexity

If sensors are mounted at fixed locations on the autonomous vehicle, then system simplicity is maintained, but detection coverage and collision identification accuracy are limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem simplicityVSAvoiddetection coverage and collision identification accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The detection system is segmented into multiple independent sensor units positioned at different locations on the vehicle (front, rear, sides). Each sensor covers a specific zone, and the system integrates data from all segments to achieve comprehensive coverage and accurate collision risk assessment

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system transitions from single-point fixed sensor detection to multi-dimensional spatial detection by placing sensors at various positions around the vehicle. This creates a three-dimensional detection network that covers all approach directions, significantly improving detection coverage without substantially increasing system complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

3Reliability

If repetitive honking is used to ensure alert effectiveness, then collision prevention reliability is improved, but driver annoyance and noise pollution worsen

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealert effectivenessVSAvoiddriver annoyance and noise pollution
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system varies honk parameters such as volume, duration, and interval timing based on the persistent risk condition. Instead of uniform repetitive honking, the system adapts parameters to maintain effectiveness while minimizing annoyance, stopping honking once the risk condition resolves

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The honking system incorporates feedback mechanisms that monitor both the collision risk status and the response of the other vehicle. The system adjusts the repetition and intensity of honks based on whether the other vehicle appears to be alerted or changing behavior, reducing repetitive honking when the alert has been effective

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12528407B2Automated honking system for collision prevention
Publication Date: 2026.01.20 GM CRUISE HOLDINGS LLC
  • US12528407B2 patent drawing
  • US12528407B2 patent drawing
  • US12528407B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods for identifying potential collisions in which another vehicle may collide with the AV. The AV detects the other vehicle and determines the other vehicle speed, acceleration, and trajectory. The AV determines that there is a risk of collision if the other vehicle continues on its current trajectory at its current speed and its current acceleration. When an AV determines there is an imminent risk that another vehicle may collide with the AV, the AV can initiate a honk to alert the other vehicle of the potential collision. In some examples, the AV can identify a potential rear end collision, and the AV can honk at the vehicle approaching it from behind. In other examples, the approaching vehicle can come from any direction. Honking is designed to be limited so that an AV does not initiate too many honks.