Systems and methods for hazard mitigation

• US 10,059,335 B2
• Filed: 10/11/2017
• Issued: 08/28/2018
• Est. Priority Date: 04/11/2016
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: David E. Newman, Massengill R. Kemp
• Original Assignee: Autonomous Roadway Intelligence, LLC
• Inventors: Newman, David E., Massengill, R. Kemp
• Primary Examiner(s): Sample, Jonathan L
• Application Number:
  US15/729,757
• Publication Number:
  US 20180043887A1
• Time in Patent Office: 321 Days
• CPC Class Codes: B60Q 9/008 for anti-collision purposes
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 10/04 including control of propulsion units
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 10/18 including control of braking systems
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 10/184 with wheel brakes
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 10/20 including control of steering systems
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2050/143 Alarm means
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2420/403 Image sensing, e.g. optical camera
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2420/408 Radar; Laser, e.g. lidar
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2420/54 Audio sensitive means, e.g. ultrasound
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2420/60 Doppler effect
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2552/05 Type of road, e.g. motorways, local streets, paved or unpaved roads
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2554/00 Input parameters relating to objects
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2554/4041 Position
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2554/80 Spatial relation or speed relative to objects
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2554/801 Lateral distance
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2554/802 Longitudinal distance
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2554/804 Relative longitudinal speed
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2555/20 Ambient conditions, e.g. wind or rain
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2710/00 Output or target parameters relating to a particular sub-units
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 2754/10 Spatial relation or speed relative to objects
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 30/085 : Taking automatic action to adjust vehicle attitude in preparation for collision, e.g. braking for nose dropping
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 30/09 : Taking automatic action to avoid collision, e.g. braking and steering
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 30/095 : Predicting travel path or likelihood of collision
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 30/0956 : the prediction being responsive to traffic or environmental parameters
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 50/12 : Limiting control by the driver depending on vehicle state, e.g. interlocking means for the control input for preventing unsafe operation
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 50/14 : Means for informing the driver, warning the driver or prompting a driver intervention
• CPC Class Codes: B60W 50/16 : Tactile feedback to the driver, e.g. vibration or force feedback to the driver on the steering wheel or the accelerator pedal
• CPC Class Codes: G05D 1/0214 : in accordance with safety or protection criteria, e.g. avoiding hazardous areas monitoring the location of vehicles within a certain area, e.g. forbidden or allowed areas, in traffic control systems for road vehicles G08G1/13
• CPC Class Codes: G08G 1/16 : Anti-collision systems road vehicle drive control systems for predicting or avoiding probable or impending collision otherwise than by control of a particular sub-unit B60W30/08
• CPC Class Codes: G08G 1/166 : for active traffic, e.g. moving vehicles, pedestrians, bikes
• CPC Class Codes: G08G 1/167 : Driving aids for lane monitoring, lane changing, e.g. blind spot detection

Abstract

A system and method to avoid collisions on highways, and to minimize the fatalities, injury, and damage when a collision is unavoidable. The system includes sensor means to detect other vehicles, and computing means to evaluate when a collision is imminent and to determine whether the collision is avoidable. If the collision is avoidable by a sequence of controlled accelerations and decelerations and steering, the system implements that sequence of actions automatically. If the collision is unavoidable, a different sequence is implemented to minimize the overall harm of the unavoidable collision. The system further includes indirect mitigation steps such as flashing the brake lights automatically. An optional post-collision strategy is implemented to prevent secondary collisions, particularly if the driver is incapacitated. Adjustment means enable the driver to set the type and timing of automatic interventions.

Claims

1. A non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising instructions for causing a computing environment to perform a method for mitigating vehicle collisions, the method comprising:

detecting, with a sensor mounted on a subject vehicle, a second vehicle;

calculating whether a collision is avoidable or unavoidable, wherein the collision is avoidable if the collision can be avoided by accelerating or decelerating or steering the subject vehicle according to a first calculated set of one or more sequential accelerations or decelerations or steering actions, and wherein the collision is unavoidable if the collision cannot be avoided by accelerating or decelerating or steering the subject vehicle;

if the collision is unavoidable, calculating wherein on each vehicle a contact is projected to occur, and estimating, based on the calculated contact locations of each vehicle, the number of fatalities or a number of injuries expected to occur in the projected collision;

calculating, according to a formula, an amount of harm expected according to the projected collision; and

calculating and implementing a second set of one or more sequential accelerations or decelerations or steering actions to adjust the point of contact on each vehicle, such that the calculated amount of harm due to the collision is minimized.

2. The medium of claim 1, wherein the implementing includes causing the subject vehicle to strike the second vehicle at a point of contact that avoids both a subject vehicle passenger compartment and a second vehicle passenger compartment.

3. A non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising instructions for causing a computing environment to perform a method for mitigating vehicle collisions, the method comprising:

detecting, with a sensor mounted on a subject vehicle, a second vehicle;

determining whether the subject vehicle is projected to collide with the second vehicle;

if the subject vehicle is projected to collide with the second vehicle, calculating whether the collision can be avoided by accelerating the subject vehicle according to a first sequence of actions;

if the first sequence of actions avoids the collision, then implementing the first sequence of actions;

if the first sequence of actions fails to avoid the collision, then calculating how much harm would be caused by the collision, and calculating whether the collision could be avoided by any of a plurality of sequences of actions, and calculating how much harm would be caused by collisions according to each of the plurality of sequences of actions;

and implementing a particular sequence of actions that would cause the least harm;

wherein each sequence of actions includes a plurality of actions, each action comprising activating a brake or a steering mechanism or a throttle of the subject vehicle, and each action being applied at a predetermined time and with a predetermined intensity and for a predetermined time interval.

4. The method of claim 3, further including:

calculating or determining an unavoidability criterion; and

when the unavoidability criterion has been met, responsively starting implementation of the particular sequence of actions that would cause the least harm.

5. The method of claim 4, wherein the unavoidability criterion comprises:

calculating a predetermined number of sequences of actions; and

determining that all of the calculated sequences of actions would fail to avoid the collision.

6. The method of claim 4, wherein the unavoidability criterion comprises:

reading previously-prepared sequences of actions from computer-readable media;

calculating a predetermined number of the previously-prepared sequences of actions; and

determining that all of the read and calculated previously-prepared sequences of actions would fail to avoid the collision.

7. The method of claim 4, wherein the unavoidability criterion comprises:

modifying durations or intensities of accelerations in a plurality of sequences of actions;

calculating whether the collision would occur with the sequences of actions having the modified durations or intensities of accelerations;

determining that all of the sequences of actions, with accelerations thus modified, would fail to avoid the collision.

8. The method of claim 4, wherein the unavoidability criterion comprises a particular time.

9. The method of claim 8, wherein the particular time is equal to a calculated time to collision, minus a time estimated to be required to implement a selected sequence of actions.

10. The method of claim 8, wherein the particular time comprises a time when a calculated harm would substantially increase absent an implementation of a selected sequence of actions.

11. A non-transitory computer readable medium, comprising instructions for causing a computing environment to perform a method for mitigating vehicle collisions, the method comprising:

detecting a second vehicle;

determining whether a collision is projected to occur between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle;

if a collision is projected to occur, then calculating a first set of sequential actions to avoid the collision between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle;

if the first set of sequential actions avoids the collision, implementing the first set of sequential actions; and

if the first set of sequential actions fails to avoid the collision, calculating a second set of sequential actions,

if the first and second sets of sequential actions both fail to avoid the collision, then calculating how much harm would be caused by the first set and by the second set of sequential actions, and implementing whichever set of sequential actions would cause the least harm, and continuing to control the subject vehicle according to the least harm sequence during the collision and after the collision.

12. The method of claim 11, further including:

automatically reading previously-prepared sequences of actions from non-transitory computer-readable media; and

responsive to an imminent collision, determining whether the collision can be avoided by implementing at least one of the previously-prepared sequences of actions.

13. The method of claim 12, further including:

selecting, based on relative distances or velocities or accelerations of the second vehicle relative to the subject vehicle, which of the previously-prepared sequences of actions to calculate.

14. The method of claim 12, further including:

varying parameters of a particular previously-prepared sequences of actions; and

calculating whether the collision can be avoided by implementing the particular sequence thus varied.

15. The method of claim 11, wherein the first or second set of sequential actions includes a conditional action or limit.

16. The method of claim 15, wherein the conditional action is a branch leading to one of a plurality of actions, such that only one action of two separate potential actions is implemented.

17. The method of claim 15, wherein the conditional action includes a limit that is approached by doing the action, such that a conditional action is performed until the limit is reached.

18. The method of claim 11, further including calculating, based on sensor data from a sensor mounted on the subject vehicle, a rate of change of acceleration of a particular vehicle.

19. The method of claim 18, further including determining from the rate of change of acceleration that a driver of the particular vehicle is attempting to change a speed or direction of the particular vehicle.

20. The method of claim 11, further including:

measuring a velocity or an acceleration of the subject vehicle during an automatic intervention;

calculating a deviation between the selected sequence of actions and the measured velocity or acceleration of the subject vehicle; and

transmitting a corrective control signal related to the calculated deviation.

21. The method of claim 11, further including:

while a set of sequential actions is being implemented;

measuring a position and a velocity and an acceleration of the subject vehicle;

measuring a position and a velocity and an acceleration of the second vehicle;

recalculating the implemented sequence of actions in view of the measured positions and velocities and accelerations; and

revising the sequence of actions being implemented accordingly.

22. The method of claim 11, further including transmitting, responsive to a determination that a collision is unavoidable, a message requesting help.

23. The method of claim 22, wherein the message includes an activation time and instructions to withhold any response until the activation time has expired.

24. The method of claim 22, further including transmitting, after a collision has occurred, a second message that includes information about the collision.

25. The method of claim 22, further including:

calculating, after a collision has occurred, what injuries have likely occurred; and

transmitting a second message that includes information about the calculated injuries.

26. The method of claim 11, further including;

while an automatic intervention is being implemented;

determining that the collision has been avoided; and

then instructing the subject vehicle driver to resume control.

27. The method of claim 11, further including:

implementing an automatic intervention;

then determining that all hazards have passed;

then instructing the subject vehicle driver to resume control; and

then, upon determining that the subject vehicle driver is responsive, ending the automatic intervention.

28. The method of claim 11, further including:

responsive to a determination that a collision is unavoidable, illuminating rear-facing warning lights on the subject vehicle, the warning lights being visibly different from standard brake lights.

29. The method of claim 28, wherein the warning lights comprise:

red lights which are substantially brighter than standard brake lights;

back-up lights;

other white rear-facing lights;

other colored rear-facing lights;

or

a first light positioned on the right side of the subject vehicle and a second light positioned on the left side of the subject vehicle, the first and second lights being illuminated in an alternating sequence.

30. The method of claim 11, further comprising:

determining, based on a sensor mounted on the subject vehicle, that the subject vehicle brakes are being activated more strongly than a predetermined threshold; and

then illuminating rear-facing warning lights on the subject vehicle, the warning lights being visibly different from standard brake lights.