In-Vehicle Alarm System with Subtle Feedback and Silent Emergency Response

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing vehicle alarm systems may alert attackers when triggered, posing a risk to victims in emergency situations, and may not function effectively if the victim's phone is unavailable or they cannot use it safely.

Innovation Solution

A system that detects alarm triggers and provides subtle feedback to avoid detection by assailants, while wirelessly contacting emergency responders with vehicle location and identification data, using processors and communication protocols to ensure discreet notification and assistance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If a traditional alarm system is triggered to alert emergency responders, then help can be summoned, but the assailant may detect the alarm and escalate their actions towards the victim

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvealarm activationVSAvoidassailant escalation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system provides different feedback responses based on the type of trigger detected. For manual triggers, subtle feedback is provided to avoid assailant detection, while automated triggers may receive different handling. This localized differentiation resolves the contradiction by adapting the response quality to the specific trigger context.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces an intermediary assessment layer that determines the trigger type before activating the alarm. This intermediary step allows the system to evaluate whether the trigger is intentional or accidental, and to choose appropriate feedback intensity, thereby preventing assailant detection while maintaining reliable emergency response.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Reliability

If a panic alarm is activated to notify emergency personnel, then assistance can be obtained, but the victim may expose their location and identity to the assailant

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveemergency notificationVSAvoidvictim safety
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system provides subtle, localized feedback only to the vehicle's authorized systems rather than broad public notification. This selective feedback approach allows emergency notification to proceed while minimizing exposure to assailants who may be monitoring for alarm activation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary assessment of trigger type before full alarm activation. This preliminary action allows the system to prepare emergency notification while controlling the timing and manner of activation, reducing the risk of immediate assailant detection and escalation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Loss of information

If the alarm system provides obvious feedback to confirm activation, then the victim knows help is summoned, but the assailant may detect the feedback and intensify their assault

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevictim awarenessVSAvoidassailant detection
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of informationVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system provides subtle feedback through localized channels (vehicle systems) rather than obvious public feedback. This allows the victim to receive confirmation of alarm activation through the vehicle's existing interfaces without creating detectable signals that would alert the assailant.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses the vehicle's existing systems as an intermediary to convey alarm status to the victim. This intermediary approach allows information transfer to the victim without direct exposure to the assailant, maintaining victim awareness while preventing assailant detection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Object-affected harmful factors

If the alarm system remains silent to avoid assailant detection, then victim safety is improved, but the victim may not know that the alarm has been activated

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveassailant detectionVSAvoidvictim awareness
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system provides subtle feedback through localized vehicle systems that are not detectable by external assailants. This allows the victim to receive confirmation of alarm activation through the vehicle's existing interfaces without creating detectable signals that would alert the assailant.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback mechanisms that provide confirmation to the victim of alarm activation through subtle, localized channels. This feedback ensures the victim knows help is summoned while maintaining the stealth required to prevent assailant detection and escalation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS9688246B2Method and apparatus for in-vehicle alarm activation and response handling
Publication Date: 2017.06.27 FORD GLOBAL TECH LLC
  • US9688246B2 patent drawing
  • US9688246B2 patent drawing
  • US9688246B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A system includes one or more processors configured to detect activation of an alarm trigger in communication with the one or more processors. The processors are further configured to determine a type of trigger and provide a subtle feedback response, based on the type of trigger, designed to avoid detection by an assailant. The processors are additionally configured to wirelessly contact an emergency responder and provide data usable in determining a vehicle location and a vehicle identification.