Driver Intention Judgment via Head and Toe Angular Velocity
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for judging a driver's intention to prevent dangerous driving at unsignalized intersections are inadequate, as they rely on extensive and impractical equipment like eye mark recorders and self-assessed questionnaire tests, which fail to quantify a driver's preventive intention effectively and cannot reliably detect a 'braking stance' without pedal operation.
Innovation Solution
A system using angular velocity sensors to detect head and toe movements, combined with GPS for position data, to judge visually checking motions and braking stances, issuing alarms when necessary motions are not performed, and recording data for quantitative analysis.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If an eye mark recorder is used to detect driver's line of sight, then the ability to predict driver's danger awareness is improved, but the device complexity and burden on driver increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts the essential function of line of sight detection from the complex eye mark recorder system and implements it using simpler angular velocity sensors that detect head movement. This separates the core detection need from the cumbersome original device, achieving the same measurement precision with significantly reduced complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent replaces the mechanical/optical eye mark recorder system with an electronic sensor-based system using angular velocity sensors. This substitution eliminates the need for extensive optical equipment and complex data processing systems while maintaining the ability to detect driver attention and line of sight direction.
2Device complexity
If only accelerator and brake pedal operation amounts are measured, then the measurement system remains simple, but the ability to judge braking stance is insufficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent combines multiple detection methods into a unified system: pedal operation sensors, angular velocity sensors for foot movement, and GPS for position data. This merging allows the system to detect braking stance through multiple indicators (foot movement toward brake pedal, reduction in acceleration, position changes) rather than relying on a single measurement, thereby improving accuracy without excessive complexity.
Solution Approach 2:
The angular velocity sensor serves multiple functions: detecting head movement for line of sight analysis, detecting foot movement for braking stance detection, and providing data for overall driver behavior analysis. This multi-functionality improves measurement precision across multiple parameters while avoiding the need for separate specialized sensors for each function.
3Ease of operation
If self-assessed questionnaire tests are used to select drivers for reeducation, then the selection process remains simple, but the ability to quantitatively measure dangerous drive preventive intention is insufficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements continuous feedback collection through sensors that monitor actual driving behavior (head movements, foot movements, pedal operations, vehicle position). This objective feedback replaces subjective self-assessment, allowing quantitative measurement of preventive intention based on actual demonstrated behavior rather than claimed attitudes. The system provides both real-time feedback to drivers and accumulated data for evaluating reeducation effectiveness.
Data Source
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3~4
AI summary
A dangerous drive preventive intention judging system (10) includes a computer (12), and the computer (12) acquires angular velocity data from an angular velocity sensor (14) attached to a head of a driver, an angular velocity sensor (16) attached to a right toe thereof, and current position data from a position detecting device (18), and records the data in a driving data recording device (24). When a motor vehicle approaches a dangerous place such as an unsignlized intersection, it can be determined whether or not a visually checking motion and a braking stance as a motion for dangerous drive prevention is performed on the basis of the angular velocity data. For example, judgment results of the visually checking motion and the braking stance with respect to the dangerous place are recorded in the driving data recording device (24). Furthermore, when it is determined that a visually checking motion and a braking stance are not performed, an alarm is generated from an alarming device (22).