Envelope-Based Route Comparison Across Routing Systems

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing techniques for comparing routes generated by different routing systems are slow, resource-intensive, and produce unreliable results due to differences in map data and algorithmic variations between these systems, particularly in the geospatial domain.

Innovation Solution

A route-comparing system that generates an envelope around one route to identify deviations from another, classifies the cause of these deviations, and performs actions to improve the routing systems based on the classification, such as modifying map data or routing logic to align routes within a specified tolerance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If general-purpose techniques (Fréchet distance, Harsdorf distance, Dynamic Time Warping) are used to compare routes, then route comparison can be performed, but the processing time is slow and resource demands are high

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveroute comparison reliabilityVSAvoidprocessing time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the route comparison process into distinct phases: generating an envelope around the reference route, identifying deviation segments where candidate routes exit the envelope, and classifying deviation causes. This segmentation transforms the computationally intensive continuous comparison into discrete, manageable segments that can be processed efficiently.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent extracts only the necessary comparison elements by creating an envelope around the reference route and focusing analysis only on segments where candidate routes deviate from this envelope. This extraction eliminates the need to analyze entire route paths, significantly reducing processing time while maintaining comparison reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Productivity

If general-purpose techniques are used to compare routes from different routing systems, then comparison is possible, but the results are unreliable due to map data and algorithmic differences

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveroute comparison efficiencyVSAvoiddeviation detection accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an envelope as an intermediary geometric construct that serves as a common reference frame for comparing routes from different routing systems. This envelope acts as a mediator that translates routes into a unified comparison framework, eliminating the impact of different map data and algorithms while maintaining reliable deviation detection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the comparison parameter from direct route coordinate matching to envelope-based spatial relationship analysis. By transforming the problem into checking whether route segments lie inside or outside the envelope, the system achieves reliability independent of the underlying routing system differences.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Measurement precision

If detailed route comparison is performed to identify all deviations, then accurate classification is achieved, but computational resources are excessively consumed

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeviation detection precisionVSAvoidcomputational resource consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts only the deviation segments where candidate routes exit the envelope, rather than analyzing the entire route. This extraction focuses computational resources only on the portions of the route that actually differ, maintaining high detection precision while minimizing resource consumption.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by performing detailed analysis only on segments where deviations occur (outside the envelope) rather than analyzing the complete route. This partial analysis achieves sufficient precision for deviation detection while avoiding the excessive resource consumption of full-route comparison.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentEP4644840A1Identifying and resolving deviations between routes generated by different routing systems
Publication Date: 2025.11.05 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • EP4644840A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4644840A1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP4644840A1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A technique is described herein for reliably comparing a first route produced by a first routing system with a second route produced by a second routing system. In some implementations, the technique includes: generating an envelope that encloses second-route data associated with the second route; identifying a segment of the first route having first-route data points that lie outside the envelope; classifying a cause of a deviation associated with the segment based on segment data that describes the segment; and performing an action based on classification of the deviation. The technique is fast, resource efficient, accurate, and resilient to the fact that the first and second routing systems potentially use different rules and/or map data to produce their routes. The results of the technique can be leveraged to improve the performance of the first routing system.