Driver Prompt Selection Using Status Sensing and Driving Scenarios

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current vehicle prompting systems fail to provide effective and direct alerts to drivers during autonomous or human driving, leading to discomfort and safety risks due to simultaneous alerts from multiple devices.

Innovation Solution

A method that utilizes a driver status sensing system, including a camera, odor identification, and interconnected smart devices, to select suitable prompts based on driver status and scenario, using vibrations, sounds, and texts to alert drivers appropriately.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If multiple reminders are used simultaneously regardless of scenarios and driver statuses, then the alert coverage is improved, but the driver comfort deteriorates due to simultaneous alerting sounds from multiple devices

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealert coverageVSAvoiddriver comfort
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different alerting strategies to different driver statuses and scenarios. For example, when the driver is focused on driving, only subtle prompts are used; when the driver is distracted or in autonomous mode, more prominent alerts are applied. This localized adaptation resolves the contradiction by tailoring alert intensity to specific contexts rather than applying uniform multi-device alerting.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts which devices issue alerts based on real-time driver status detection. The alert configuration changes from static multi-device simultaneous alerting to dynamic single-device or multi-device coordination based on driver engagement level, scenario type, and detected driver status, thereby maintaining reliability while preserving comfort.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If multiple devices issue alerting sounds simultaneously, then the alert effectiveness is improved, but the driver experiences panic and safety risks

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealert effectivenessVSAvoiddriver panic
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies partial action by selectively activating only the necessary alerting devices based on driver status and scenario, rather than activating all devices simultaneously. This prevents excessive alerting that causes panic while maintaining sufficient effectiveness through targeted device selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses driver status sensing systems to continuously monitor driver state and adjusts alerting behavior accordingly. This feedback mechanism prevents panic-inducing simultaneous alerts by adapting alert intensity and device selection to actual driver needs, resolving the contradiction between effectiveness and panic prevention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Device complexity

If simple voice reminders are used via vehicle control terminal, then the device complexity is reduced, but the prompt effectiveness deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem simplicityVSAvoidprompt effectiveness
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system integrates multiple alerting devices (vehicle control terminal, mobile phone, wearable device, seat) into a unified multi-functional alerting system. Each device can issue alerts independently or in coordination, providing universal coverage across different driver statuses and scenarios while maintaining manageable complexity through centralized control logic.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The vehicle control device acts as an intermediary that coordinates between the driver status sensing system and multiple alerting devices. It processes driver status information and scenario data, then selectively activates appropriate alerting devices, thereby enhancing prompt effectiveness without requiring direct complex integration between all components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentEP4282728A1Method for prompting driver, and vehicle control device
Publication Date: 2023.11.29 NIO TECH ANHUI CO LTD
  • EP4282728A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4282728A1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP4282728A1 patent drawingFigure 4

AI summary

The invention relates to a method for prompting a driver, the method including: (S110) receiving driver status information from a driver status sensing system; (S120) determining a current driving scenario; and (S130) selecting a suitable prompt from among a plurality of candidate prompts based on the driver status information in combination with the driving scenario, to remind or alert a driver. The invention further relates to a vehicle control device (2000), a computer program product, and a vehicle.