Autonomous Vehicle Planning With Tree Search and Agent Prediction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Autonomous vehicles face challenges in safely and effectively navigating driving scenarios due to the need for efficient planning of manoeuvres that account for the anticipated behavior of other vehicles and agents, which existing technologies have not adequately addressed.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented autonomous vehicle planner uses a tree search algorithm to determine a sequence of manoeuvres by simulating the anticipated behavior of external agents through a generative behavior model, trained on real-world driving data, to generate control signals for safe navigation.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a tree search algorithm is used to plan manoeuvres, then the ability to account for anticipated behavior of other vehicles is improved, but the computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety in navigating driving scenariosVSAvoidplanning system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The planning system is segmented into distinct functional modules: a tree search algorithm for exploring maneuver sequences, a generative behavior model for predicting external agent responses, and an inverse planner for inferring agent goals. This modular segmentation allows each component to specialize in a specific aspect of the planning task, improving overall reliability while managing complexity through clear separation of concerns.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The generative behavior model performs preliminary action by pre-computing and caching predicted responses of external agents to various maneuvers before the actual planning decision is made. This preliminary computation of agent behaviors allows the tree search algorithm to evaluate maneuver sequences more efficiently, reducing the computational burden during real-time planning while maintaining high reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If real-world driving data is used to train the generative behavior model, then the accuracy of anticipating external agent behavior is improved, but the data processing requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of behavior predictionVSAvoidtraining data volume
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The inverse planner changes parameters by inferring high-level goal parameters (such as destination locations, maneuver intentions, and behavior patterns) from low-level observational data. Instead of directly using raw trajectory data for prediction, the system transforms the data into meaningful goal parameters that characterize agent behavior, thereby improving prediction accuracy while reducing the effective data volume needed for training.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The generative behavior model creates simplified copies or representations of complex real-world driving behaviors by learning goal distributions from training data. Rather than storing and processing all raw driving data, the system creates compact probabilistic models (goal distributions) that capture essential behavioral patterns, achieving high prediction accuracy with reduced data storage and processing requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Loss of information

If the inverse planner is used to determine goal likelihood, then the understanding of external agent intent is improved, but the computational time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinformation about agent goalsVSAvoidplanning computation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The inverse planner applies partial action by computing goal likelihoods for only the most relevant goals rather than exhaustively evaluating all possible goals. The system prioritizes computing probabilities for goals that are most likely based on observed behavior patterns, obtaining sufficient information about agent intent without the excessive computational time required for complete goal space enumeration.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback mechanisms where the tree search algorithm receives goal likelihood information from the inverse planner to guide its exploration of maneuver sequences. This feedback allows the planner to focus computational resources on promising maneuver sequences that are consistent with inferred agent goals, reducing overall computation time while maintaining accurate understanding of agent intent.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP3863904B1Planning for an autonomous vehicle
Publication Date: 2025.11.26 FIVE AI LTD
  • EP3863904B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3863904B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3863904B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

An autonomous vehicle (AV) planning method comprises: receiving sensor inputs pertaining to an AV; processing the AV sensor inputs to determine an encountered driving scenario; in an AV planner, executing a tree search algorithm to determine a sequence of AV manoeuvres corresponding to a path through a constructed game tree; and generating AV control signals for executing the determined sequence of AV manoeuvres; wherein the game tree has a plurality of nodes representing anticipated states of the encountered driving scenario, and the anticipated driving scenario state of each child node is determined by updating the driving scenario state of its parent node based on (i) a candidate AV manoeuvre and (ii) an anticipated behaviour of at least one external agent in the encountered driving scenario.