Autonomous Collision Escape Path Planning for Multi-Object Traffic

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current collision avoidance systems in vehicles are unable to effectively monitor multiple objects and adjust the vehicle's path based on the behavior of these objects, limiting their ability to prevent accidents.

Innovation Solution

The system predicts the behavior of moving objects using machine learning models and Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithms to calculate collision probabilities and determine the safest path for the vehicle, incorporating data from various sensors such as LIDAR, RADAR, and cameras to assess the vehicle's surroundings.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If current collision avoidance systems automatically brake when an object is detected, then the vehicle can avoid simple collisions, but the system cannot monitor numerous objects and adjust the vehicle's path based on object behavior

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveability to monitor numerous objects and adjust pathVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the monitoring task by dividing the environment into multiple zones (front, rear, left, right) and assigning different sensor types to different zones. Multiple objects are tracked independently with individual probability calculations, allowing the system to handle numerous objects without overwhelming complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary actions by continuously predicting object behaviors and calculating collision probabilities before actual collisions occur. Monte Carlo Tree Search algorithms pre-compute multiple possible future scenarios and their associated collision risks, enabling proactive path adjustment rather than reactive braking.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If the system uses machine learning models and Monte Carlo Tree Search to predict object behavior and calculate collision probabilities, then collision avoidance accuracy improves, but computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision probability calculation accuracyVSAvoidcomputational complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by focusing computational resources on calculating collision probabilities for objects that pose actual threats. Not all detected objects require full Monte Carlo Tree Search analysis - only those within critical zones and exhibiting dangerous behavior patterns receive intensive computational attention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses machine learning models trained on historical data to create simplified copies of complex collision scenarios. These trained models can quickly evaluate new situations without performing full Monte Carlo simulations, reducing real-time computational complexity while maintaining accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Reliability

If the vehicle autonomously determines the safest path based on real-time data analysis, then collision avoidance capability improves, but response time may be affected

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecollision avoidance reliabilityVSAvoidpath calculation time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements periodic action by updating collision probability calculations and path determinations at fixed time intervals rather than continuously. This periodic refresh approach maintains reliable collision avoidance while preventing excessive computational overhead that would consume unnecessary processing time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary path planning by pre-calculating multiple possible escape routes and their associated collision probabilities. When a threat is detected, the vehicle can quickly switch to a pre-evaluated safe path rather than computing a new path from scratch, reducing response time while maintaining reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enables the vehicle to autonomously avoid collisions by determining the safest path based on real-time data analysis, enhancing safety and reducing the risk of accidents in complex driving environments.

Implementation Method 1

incorporating data from various sensors such as LIDAR, RADAR, and cameras to assess the vehicle's surroundings

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectLIDAR: LIDAR

Implementation Method 2

incorporating data from various sensors such as LIDAR, RADAR, and cameras to assess the vehicle's surroundings

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectRADAR: Radar

Data Source

PatentUS11922462B2Vehicle autonomous collision prediction and escaping system (ACE)
Publication Date: 2024.03.05 NIO TECH ANHUI CO LTD
  • US11922462B2 patent drawing
  • US11922462B2 patent drawing
  • US11922462B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Embodiments herein relate to an autonomous vehicle or self-driving vehicle. The system can determine a collision avoidance path by: 1) predicting the behavior/trajectory of other moving objects (and identifying stationary objects); 2) given the driving trajectory (issued by autonomous driving system) or predicted driving trajectory (human), establishing the probability for a collision that can be calculated between the vehicle and one or more objects; and 3) finding a path to minimize the collision probability.