Vehicle Cut-In Detection Using Multi-Index Avoidance Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) struggle to effectively prevent cut-in collisions, as they rely solely on braking and avoidance controls based on basic physical quantities, failing to anticipate and respond to unexpected maneuvers by adjacent vehicles.

Innovation Solution

A vehicle system incorporating a camera and radar to detect targets, process image and radar data, and control braking and steering devices based on multiple indices including lateral velocity, heading angle, and collision probability to anticipate and adjust avoidance control timing.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If basic physical quantity-based ADAS control is used, then the system is simple to operate, but it fails to detect and respond to cut-in attempts from adjacent lanes

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecut-in avoidance capabilityVSAvoidcontrol system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments the detection and control process into distinct modules: lane detection module, target vehicle detection module, cut-in attempt determination module (with multiple indices), and avoidance control module. This segmentation allows complex cut-in avoidance functionality to be achieved through coordinated simple modules, improving reliability without overwhelming system complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary detection and analysis of adjacent lane targets by calculating multiple indices (lateral velocity, heading angle, collision possibility) before a cut-in actually occurs. The controller determines cut-in attempts in advance and prepares avoidance control strategies proactively, enabling timely response while maintaining manageable system complexity through structured preliminary assessment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Measurement precision

If multiple indices (lateral velocity, heading angle, collision possibility) are calculated to determine cut-in attempts, then the detection accuracy improves, but the processing time and computational load increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecut-in attempt detection accuracyVSAvoidcontrol response time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system calculates multiple indices (lateral velocity, heading angle, collision possibility) simultaneously rather than sequentially, using partial information from each sensor to contribute to the overall determination. This parallel processing approach achieves high detection accuracy through comprehensive index evaluation while minimizing processing time by avoiding exhaustive sequential analysis.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The controller continuously monitors the calculated indices and adjusts the avoidance control strategy based on real-time feedback from the multi-index assessment. This feedback mechanism enables the system to maintain high detection accuracy by dynamically adjusting control parameters based on the current state of all indices, while the iterative nature of the feedback loop optimizes response time by building upon previous control actions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

3Manufacturing precision

If avoidance control timing is adjusted based on collision prediction point location, then the control timing precision improves, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveavoidance control timing precisionVSAvoidcontrol algorithm complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system applies different control timing strategies based on the local characteristics of the collision prediction point location. When the prediction point is in the front direction, one timing strategy is applied, while when it is in the rear direction, a different timing strategy is used. This localized approach achieves precise control timing adaptation without requiring a completely complex unified algorithm, as each local region has its own optimized control rule.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS12576834B2Vehicle and method of controlling the same
Publication Date: 2026.03.17 HYUNDAI MOTOR CO LTD
  • US12576834B2 patent drawing
  • US12576834B2 patent drawing
  • US12576834B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A vehicle includes a camera and radar to detect a target in the external field of view. A controller processes the data to control braking or steering devices. The controller detects a target in an adjacent lane and calculates indexes based on the target's lateral velocity, heading angle, and collision probability. If the indexes meet predetermined values, the controller identifies a cut-in attempt and adjusts avoidance control timing by controlling braking or steering.