Autonomous Vehicle Team Negotiation Protocol

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional autonomous vehicle systems struggle to effectively integrate multiple vehicles with varying capabilities to perform complex tasks, require human supervision, and are limited by communication range and latency, leading to inefficiencies and single points of failure.

Innovation Solution

Autonomous vehicles negotiate their roles within teams based on capabilities and task requirements without human intervention, using on-board processing and communication systems to form teams and optimize task performance through message exchange and localized planning.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If conventional autonomous vehicle systems use teams of vehicles to perform complex tasks, then task capability and versatility are improved, but system complexity and integration difficulty increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetask capabilityVSAvoidsystem complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system segments complex tasks into smaller sub-tasks that can be independently assigned to different vehicles based on their capabilities. Each vehicle autonomously negotiates and executes its assigned portion, reducing the complexity of coordinating entire teams while maintaining versatile task execution through distributed task decomposition

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a universal task negotiation protocol that enables vehicles of different types and capabilities to interact through a common framework. This multi-functional communication interface allows heterogeneous vehicles to integrate into teams without requiring complex vehicle-specific integration logic, thus improving versatility while managing system complexity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

2Reliability

If human operators supervise autonomous vehicle teams, then control and coordination are improved, but operational latency and response time increase

Engineering Contradiction:

ImprovecontrolVSAvoidoperational latency

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

Vehicles autonomously negotiate task assignments and coordinate their actions through onboard processing without requiring human operator intervention. The self-service negotiation protocol enables vehicles to independently resolve coordination issues, maintain reliable control, and eliminate the time delays inherent in human-in-the-loop supervision

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements continuous feedback loops where vehicles report their status, capabilities, and task completion progress to the team negotiation system. This automated feedback mechanism enables real-time coordination and dynamic task reallocation without human intervention, maintaining control reliability while minimizing operational latency

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Reliability

If human operators communicate with each vehicle, then supervisory control is improved, but communication range limitations and single points of failure are introduced

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvesupervisory controlVSAvoidoperational area

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary autonomous negotiation system that relays coordination messages between vehicles without requiring direct human-to-vehicle communication. This intermediary digital communication layer extends the effective operational area beyond human operator range and eliminates single points of failure by distributing communication through multiple vehicle nodes rather than relying on centralized human supervision

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Adaptability or versatility

If vehicles with varying capabilities are integrated into teams, then task versatility is improved, but integration difficulty and coordination complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetask versatilityVSAvoidintegration difficulty

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The negotiation protocol allows each vehicle to advertise its specific local capabilities (sensors, actuators, processing power) and have tasks assigned based on those localized qualities. This capability-based task allocation enables heterogeneous vehicles to integrate into teams effectively, matching specific tasks to specific vehicle strengths without requiring complex universal integration logic

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Data Source

PatentUS10432729B2Autonomous team formation and task negotiation among unmanned vehicles

Publication Date: 2019.10.01 SOUTHWEST RES INST

AI summary

A system of autonomous vehicles for forming a team of autonomous vehicles to perform a designated set of tasks. Each vehicle stores data representing its own capabilities that match the tasks, data representing needed capabilities for the team to perform the tasks, and data representing the capabilities of all current team members. Each of the vehicles is equipped with a communications system operable to send and receive join request messages and join response messages. All join request message contain the capabilities of the sending vehicle. All join response messages contain current team capabilities data. Upon receipt of a join request message, a vehicle compares needed capabilities data to the received capabilities data, and if there are matched capabilities, it updates the team capabilities data and transmits a join response message. Upon receipt of a join response message, if the message indicates the sending vehicle has joined the team, the receiving vehicle updates the team capabilities list.