Route ETA Prediction Using Historical Driver Path Probabilities

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing routing systems for vehicle fleets require significant processing power and incur high costs due to frequent re-routing requests as drivers deviate from suggested routes, necessitating frequent API calls to recalculate optimal paths.

Innovation Solution

A system that utilizes historical route data and machine learning to predict the probability of a driver following a particular route, optimizing route selection and minimizing re-routing requests by calculating an estimated time of arrival based on adjustment factors and historical data.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If traditional routing systems recalculate routes frequently in response to driver deviations, then route accuracy is improved, but processing power requirements and API call costs increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveroute accuracyVSAvoidprocessing power
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by analyzing historical route data and driver behavior patterns in advance to predict future driver deviations. Machine learning models are trained beforehand to identify probable deviation points and alternative routes drivers are likely to take, allowing the system to prepare optimized route suggestions proactively rather than reactively calculating routes after deviations occur.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms by continuously monitoring actual driver behavior against predicted behavior patterns. When drivers deviate from suggested routes, the system uses this feedback to refine its machine learning models and improve future predictions. This closed-loop feedback reduces the need for frequent recalculations by progressively improving the accuracy of initial route suggestions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If traditional routing systems recalculate routes frequently in response to driver deviations, then route accuracy is improved, but API call costs increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveroute accuracyVSAvoidAPI call volume
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary actions by analyzing historical route data and driver behavior patterns in advance to predict future driver deviations. Machine learning models are trained beforehand to identify probable deviation points and alternative routes drivers are likely to take, allowing the system to prepare optimized route suggestions proactively rather than reactively calculating routes after deviations occur.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms by continuously monitoring actual driver behavior against predicted behavior patterns. When drivers deviate from suggested routes, the system uses this feedback to refine its machine learning models and improve future predictions. This closed-loop feedback reduces the need for frequent recalculations by progressively improving the accuracy of initial route suggestions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Measurement precision

If routing systems provide detailed turn-by-turn navigation, then driver guidance accuracy is improved, but the complexity of route calculation and processing increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvenavigation accuracyVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies segmentation by breaking down the complex routing problem into manageable components: historical data analysis, driver behavior prediction, deviation point identification, and turn-by-turn instruction generation. Each component is handled by specialized machine learning models or algorithms that process specific aspects of the routing problem independently, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining high navigation accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces intermediary elements such as predicted deviation points and behavioral probability models that act as mediators between raw historical data and final route suggestions. These intermediaries simplify the calculation process by filtering and structuring information in ways that make subsequent route optimization more efficient and less computationally intensive.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS20250347521A1Systems and methods for real-time estimated time of arrival in route selection and navigation
Publication Date: 2025.11.13 ZUM SERVICES INC
  • US20250347521A1 patent drawing
  • US20250347521A1 patent drawing
  • US20250347521A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A server computer receives a routing request for providing a ride service and retrieves a start location and destination from the request. The server computer identifies a plurality of routes connecting the start location and destination among historical route information collected over a period of time. The routes are traveled by one or more vehicles and reported during the period of time. The server computer identifies a selected route, including a plurality of waypoints, among the plurality of routes based on the selected route having a higher probability to be taken. The server computer multiplies an identified time duration for each waypoint with a determined adjustment factor for each time duration to determine an augmented time duration for each waypoint, determines a sum of all the augmented time durations as the estimated time for arrival, and transmits the estimated time of arrival to the user device.