Vehicle Operator Assistance Corridor-Based Framework
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current automotive active safety systems are limited in their ability to accurately assess threats and provide effective assistance due to their path-based and reactive nature, which fails to consider complex scenarios, multiple hazards, and realistic vehicle dynamics, leading to inaccurate threat assessments and inappropriate interventions.
Innovation Solution
A corridor-based framework for threat assessment and semi-autonomous control that uses model predictive control to generate optimal vehicle trajectories within a safe driving corridor, considering vehicle dynamics, stability constraints, and terrain interactions, allowing for adaptable and configurable operator assistance modes from warnings to autonomous control.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Device complexity
If path-based reactive control is used, then the system is simple to implement, but the threat assessment accuracy deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary threat assessment by evaluating multiple potential trajectories and hazards before the actual maneuver is executed. The threat assessment module proactively identifies potential collisions and evaluates risk levels in advance, allowing the system to prepare appropriate responses rather than reacting after a hazard is immediately present.
Solution Approach 2:
The system transitions from static path-based control to dynamic trajectory-based control. Instead of following predetermined paths, the system continuously generates and evaluates multiple dynamic trajectories considering vehicle dynamics, stability constraints, and real-time hazard positions. This dynamic approach enables more accurate threat assessment by adapting to changing conditions.
2Measurement precision
If multiple hazards and complex scenarios are considered, then the threat assessment accuracy improves, but the computational complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The threat assessment process is segmented into distinct modules: hazard identification, trajectory generation, collision evaluation, and risk assessment. Each module handles a specific aspect of the complex assessment, processing information in manageable stages. This segmentation allows the system to consider multiple hazards and complex scenarios without overwhelming computational demands at any single processing stage.
Solution Approach 2:
The system evaluates multiple trajectories beyond what is strictly necessary for basic control, assessing a broader range of potential paths than immediately required. This partial excessive action ensures thorough hazard consideration and accurate threat assessment, while the modular architecture prevents computational overload by processing these evaluations efficiently in parallel where possible.
3Manufacturing precision
If realistic vehicle dynamics and stability constraints are incorporated, then the control accuracy improves, but the system complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system incorporates realistic vehicle dynamics by dynamically adjusting control parameters such as steering angle, acceleration, and deceleration based on vehicle state, road conditions, and hazard proximity. Stability constraints are enforced through parameter bounds and rate limits that reflect physical vehicle capabilities. These parameter changes enable accurate control while maintaining manageable system complexity through efficient parameter management.
4Reliability
If proactive threat assessment is implemented, then the safety performance improves, but the response time requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary threat assessment continuously in the background, evaluating potential hazards and generating candidate trajectories before they become immediate threats. This preliminary action allows the system to have responses ready in advance, improving safety performance without significantly increasing actual response time when hazards materialize.
Solution Approach 2:
The threat assessment and trajectory evaluation operate continuously rather than intermittently, maintaining an ongoing analysis of the driving environment. This continuous useful action ensures that the system is always prepared to respond quickly to emerging hazards, improving safety performance while maintaining efficient response times through constant readiness.
Data Source
AI summary
Various types and levels of operator assistance are performed within a unified, configurable framework. A model of the device with a model of the environment and the current state of the device and the environment are used to iteratively generate a sequence of optimal device control inputs that, when applied to a model of the device, generate an optimal device trajectory through a constraint-bounded corridor or region within the state space. This optimal trajectory and the sequence of device control inputs that generates it is used to generate a threat assessment metric. An appropriate type and level of operator assistance is generated based on this threat assessment. Operator assistance modes include warnings, decision support, operator feedback, vehicle stability control, and autonomous or semi-autonomous hazard avoidance. The responses generated by each assistance mode are mutually consistent because they are generated using the same optimal trajectory.