Multi-computer communication in 5G/6G for traffic safety

Patent metadata

Field	Value
Publication number	US-11514792-B2
Application number	US-202217738424-A
Country	US
Kind code	B2
Filing date	May 6, 2022
Priority date	Jun 13, 2019
Publication date	Nov 29, 2022
Grant date	Nov 29, 2022

Abstract

Vehicle collisions can be mitigated by cooperative actions by three separate computers: a mobile processor in a vehicle, a workstation in a roadside access point, and a remote supercomputer. By exchanging 5G or 6G messages, the computers can cooperatively test a wide range of mitigation solutions, select the best solution, and rapidly transmit it, thereby enabling the vehicles to avoid the collision—or at least to minimize the harm of the collision. The supercomputer (and potentially the other computers) can use AI-based models to optimize the best avoidance strategy. The vehicle's on-board processor can pre-emptively start implementing its own best solution while the other computers are still calculating. Then, if the access point solution or the supercomputer solution appears to be more effective, it can switch to the better strategy. By exploiting high-speed communication and coordinated processor power, most traffic collisions can be avoided.

First claim

The invention claimed is:

1. A method for a wireless access point proximate to a roadway, to mitigate an imminent collision between a subject vehicle and a second vehicle on the roadway, the method comprising:
a. receiving, by the access point, from the subject vehicle, a wireless message requesting emergency assistance in avoiding an imminent collision, and providing traffic data comprising at least positions and velocities of the subject vehicle and the second vehicle;
b. transferring the traffic data to a supercomputer;
c. determining, by an access point processor in the access point, whether the collision can be avoided when the subject vehicle implements a first sequence of actions;
d. if the collision can be avoided according to the first sequence of actions, transmitting the first sequence of actions to the subject vehicle;
e. receiving at the access point, from the supercomputer, a second sequence of actions; and
f. transmitting, to the subject vehicle, the second sequence of actions.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the first and second sequences of actions are transmitted according to 5G or 6G technology.

3. The method of claim 1 , further comprising requesting a high-speed uncontested data link between the access point and the supercomputer.

4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:
a. determining or receiving a plurality of predetermined sequences of actions, and storing the plurality of predetermined sequences of actions in a non-transitory computer-readable medium operably connected to the access point processor;
b. determining, by the access point processor, whether the collision can be avoided according to each of the predetermined sequences of actions; and
c. if a particular sequence of actions, of the plurality of predetermined sequences of actions, can avoid the collision, transmitting the particular sequence of actions to the subject vehicle; and
d. if none of the predetermined sequences of actions can avoid the collision, then calculating an expected harm of the collision according to each of the predetermined sequences of actions, and transmitting, to the subject vehicle, a least-harm sequence of actions that is predicted to cause the least amount of harm in the collision.

5. The method of claim 4 , further comprising:
a. if none of the predetermined sequences of actions can avoid the collision, transmitting, to a first-responder station, an emergency message comprising at least a location of the collision.

6. The method of claim 4 , wherein the calculating the expected harm comprises estimating a number of fatalities, a number of injuries, and an amount of property damage in the collision, and adding the number of fatalities times a first coefficient plus the number of injuries times a second coefficient plus the amount of property damage times a third coefficient, the sum comprising the expected harm.

7. The method of claim 4 , wherein the calculating the expected harm comprises estimating a number of fatalities and a first probability associated with the fatalities, a number of injuries and a second probability associated with the injuries, and an amount of property damage in the collision and a third probability associated with the property damage, and adding the number of fatalities times the first probability times a first coefficient, plus the number of injuries times the second probability times a second coefficient, plus the amount of property damage times the third probability times a third coefficient, the sum comprising the expected harm.

8. The method of claim 1 , wherein each action comprises an acceleration or a deceleration or a steering action of the subject vehicle.

9. The method of claim 8 , wherein each action further comprises a time duration and an intensity of the acceleration or deceleration or steering action.

10. The method of claim 8 , wherein each sequence further comprises one or more branch points, each branch point comprising a conditional with at least two alternatives, the at least two alternatives being selected according to the conditional.

11. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:
a. varying one or more parameters of the predetermined sequences of actions, each parameter comprising a time duration or an intensity of an acceleration or braking or steering action; and
b. determining whether the predetermined sequence of actions, so varied, would avoid the collision or minimize a harm of the collision.

12. Non-transitory computer-readable media in a subject vehicle on a roadway, the media containing instructions that, when implemented by a computing environment in the subject vehicle, cause a method to be performed, the method comprising:
a. measuring, according to sensors mounted in or on the subject vehicle, traffic data comprising at least a distance to a second vehicle and a relative velocity of the second vehicle relative to the subject vehicle;
b. determining, according to the measuring, that a collision between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle is imminent;
c. transmitting, to a wireless access point proximate to the roadway, the traffic data and a request for computational assistance, from the access point and from a remote supercomputer, to avoid the collision;
d. receiving, from the access point, a first wireless message indicating a first sequence of actions determined by a processor in the access point; and
e. receiving, from the access point, a second wireless message indicating a second sequence of actions determined by the remote supercomputer.

13. The media of claim 12 , the method further comprising:
a. determining or receiving, by the subject vehicle, a plurality of predetermined sequences of actions configured to attempt to avoid traffic collisions;
b. calculating, by an on-board processor in the subject vehicle, based at least in part on the traffic data, whether each of the predetermined sequences of actions can avoid the collision when implemented by the subject vehicle; and
c. if a successful-avoidance sequence of actions, of the plurality of predetermined sequences of actions, is calculated to avoid the collision, then implementing the successful-avoidance sequence of actions.

14. The media of claim 12 , the method further comprising:
a. if none of the predetermined sequences of actions is calculated to avoid the collision, estimating an amount of harm caused by the collision according to each of the predetermined sequences of actions; and
b. implementing a lowest-harm sequence of actions having the lowest estimated harm caused by the collision.

15. The media of claim 14 , the method further comprising:
a. comparing the first sequence of actions, the second sequence of actions, and a third sequence of actions comprising either the successful-avoidance sequence of actions or the lowest-harm sequence of actions;
b. if any of the first, second, and third sequences of actions can avoid the collision, implementing which of the first, second, and third sequences of actions can avoid the collision;
c. if none of the first, second, and third sequences of actions can avoid the collision, selecting whichever of the first, second, and third sequence of actions is estimated to cause the lowest amount of harm; and
d. implementing the selected sequence of actions.

16. The media of claim 15 , the method further comprising:
a. if the selected sequence of actions differs from a sequence of actions already being implemented, ceasing the sequence of actions already being implemented before implementing the selected sequence of actions.

17. The media of claim 16

Assignees

• Newman David E
• Massengill R Kemp
• Autonomous Roadway Intelligence Llc

Inventors

• Newman David E
• Massengill R Kemp

Classifications

• H04W4/90

  Services for handling of emergency or hazardous situations, e.g. earthquake and tsunami warning systems [ETWS] · CPC title

• H04W4/029

  Location-based management or tracking services · CPC title

• G06Q50/265 Primary

  Personal security, identity or safety · CPC title

• B60W10/04

  including control of propulsion units · CPC title

• H04L67/1097

  for distributed storage of data in networks, e.g. transport arrangements for network file system [NFS], storage area networks [SAN] or network attached storage [NAS] · CPC title