Route Segment Selector for Human-Powered and Motorized Transport

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current transportation methods lack an efficient system to automatically select between human-powered and motorized options based on traveler well-being objectives, such as physical exertion levels and environmental conditions, leading to suboptimal route planning that may not align with the traveler's capabilities or preferences.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method that determines a traveler's well-being objectives and physical capabilities, then generates a recommended route by selectively incorporating human-powered and motorized transport options, ensuring the route meets the objectives without exceeding the traveler's ability to perform, using a processor with a computer-readable storage medium to execute program instructions for route optimization.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a routing system selects motorized transport options to reduce travel time and energy consumption, then productivity and energy efficiency improve, but traveler well-being objectives such as physical activity requirements are not met

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetravel timeVSAvoidwell-being objective fulfillment
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The routing system divides the journey into multiple segments, selecting different transport modes for different portions. Human-powered options are integrated into specific route segments to meet physical activity requirements, while motorized options are used for other segments to maintain productivity and time efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system applies different transport mode qualities to different parts of the route based on local requirements. Certain route portions are designated for human-powered transport to satisfy well-being objectives, while other portions use motorized transport for efficiency, creating a customized mix tailored to specific traveler needs and route characteristics.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If a routing system prioritizes human-powered transport options to meet physical activity requirements, then traveler well-being objectives are met, but travel time increases and productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvewell-being objective fulfillmentVSAvoidtravel time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The routing system dynamically adjusts the mix of transport modes based on real-time considerations of traveler capabilities, route characteristics, and well-being objectives. The proportion of human-powered versus motorized transport is flexibly optimized to balance physical activity requirements with time constraints, rather than following a fixed approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes key parameters such as the percentage of human-powered transport, route distance, and transport mode selection to optimize both well-being fulfillment and travel time. By adjusting these parameters based on traveler profiles and route conditions, the system achieves a balanced solution that satisfies physical activity requirements without excessive time penalties.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Adaptability or versatility

If a routing system provides customized route options based on traveler capabilities, then adaptability to individual needs improves, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecustomization to traveler capabilitiesVSAvoidrouting system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The routing system incorporates traveler-provided information about their own capabilities, preferences, and well-being objectives to automatically generate customized routes. By leveraging self-service input from travelers regarding their physical abilities and requirements, the system reduces the need for complex external assessment mechanisms while still achieving high customization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from traveler inputs about their capabilities and preferences to continuously refine and personalize route recommendations. This feedback loop enables the system to adapt to individual travelers without requiring overly complex initialization procedures, as the customization evolves based on user-provided information and routing outcomes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS10539425B2Transport option selector
Publication Date: 2020.01.21 KYNDRYL INC
  • US10539425B2 patent drawing
  • US10539425B2 patent drawing
  • US10539425B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Aspects generate customized routes by automatically selecting between human-powered and motorized transport option segments, by determining a well-being objective of a traveler and an amount of the human-powered transport option for the traveler to perform to meet requirements of the well-being objective. Aspects generate recommended routes to a destination from a current location of the traveler that meets the well-being objective by selecting between route segment portions of usage of a human-powered option and of a motorized transport option, and include a first segment of usage of the human-powered transport option in response to determining that said included first segment requires an amount of effort that meets the well-being objective and does not exceed an amount of the human-powered transport option that the traveler is currently able to perform.