RFS Tracking Apparatus Reducing Hypothesis Combinations

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

RFS tracking systems face challenges in real-time processing due to an exponential increase in the number of hypotheses and operations required, making them difficult to apply in in-vehicle tracking applications where real-time processing is necessary.

Innovation Solution

A tracking apparatus with an information acquiring section, a tracker generating section, a state predicting section, and a state updating section, which includes an observation allocating section and a hypothesis generating section, to allocate observation points to trackers based on distance and generate hypotheses, reducing the number of combinations and computational load.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If RFS tracking uses information from all observation points within a certain range, then tracking accuracy is improved, but the number of hypotheses and computational operations increase exponentially

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetracking accuracyVSAvoidreal-time processing capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the tracking problem into two distinct phases: a prediction phase that uses motion models to forecast target states without considering observation points, and an update phase that selectively incorporates observation data. This segmentation allows the system to avoid the exponential complexity of traditional RFS tracking while maintaining accuracy by only processing relevant observations after prediction.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs prediction as a preliminary action before updating with observation data. By predicting target states in advance using motion models, the system establishes expected positions and velocities before comparing them with actual observations. This preliminary prediction reduces the computational burden during the update phase, as the system only needs to evaluate observations against predicted states rather than all possible combinations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If RFS tracking processes all observation points for each tracker, then comprehensive tracking is achieved, but the number of hypotheses increases exponentially

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetracking reliabilityVSAvoidnumber of hypotheses
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by treating prediction and update operations differently. The prediction phase uses motion models appropriate for each target's local characteristics (e.g., constant velocity for moving targets, static model for stationary objects), while the update phase selectively applies observation data based on local relevance. This localized approach reduces the need to generate hypotheses for all observation-point-tracker combinations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent inverts the traditional tracking approach by performing prediction before updating, rather than updating with all observations first and then filtering. This inversion allows the system to predict target states independently of observation points, then selectively update only with relevant observations, thereby avoiding the exponential generation of hypotheses that occurs when all observation points are processed for each tracker simultaneously.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

3Productivity

If traditional tracking updates state using one closest observation point, then computational load is reduced, but tracking accuracy decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputational efficiencyVSAvoidtracking accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

By performing prediction as a preliminary action, the system establishes expected target states before comparing with observations. This prediction step provides a reference framework that guides the subsequent update process, allowing the system to efficiently determine which observation points are relevant without having to evaluate all possible combinations, thus maintaining both accuracy and efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback by using predicted states as the basis for selecting and weighting observation data during the update phase. The prediction provides expected values that serve as feedback for evaluating which observations are most relevant, allowing the system to accurately update tracker states while avoiding the computational burden of processing all observation points equally.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS20240069187A1Tracking apparatus
Publication Date: 2024.02.29 DENSO CORP
  • US20240069187A1 patent drawing
  • US20240069187A1 patent drawing
  • US20240069187A1 patent drawing

AI summary

An observation allocating section exclusively allocates an observation point to each existing tracker in accordance with a distance between observation information acquired by an information acquiring section and observation information indicated by a predictive distribution. A hypothesis generating section generates a hypothesis likelihood and a hypothesis distribution, for each target tracker and for each hypothesis belonging to a hypothesis group including a first hypothesis and a second hypothesis. The first hypothesis is a hypothesis that the observation point is a result of observation of a subject target. The second hypothesis is a hypothesis that the observation point is not a result of observation of the subject target. The hypothesis likelihood is the likelihood of the hypothesis. The hypothesis distribution is the state distribution updated on the assumption that the hypothesis is correct.