Cooperative driving and collision avoidance by distributed receding horizon control

US9669828B2 · US · B2

Patent metadata
FieldValue
Publication numberUS-9669828-B2
Application numberUS-201213486598-A
CountryUS
Kind codeB2
Filing dateJun 1, 2012
Priority dateJun 1, 2012
Publication dateJun 6, 2017
Grant dateJun 6, 2017

How to read this patent

A practical reading order for non-experts. Skip the full description unless you need deep technical detail.

  1. Title

    What the patent document calls the invention.

  2. Abstract

    A short plain-language summary of the technical disclosure.

  3. Assignees and inventors

    Who owns or filed the patent and who is credited as inventor.

  4. Key dates

    Filing, priority, publication, and grant dates set the timeline.

  5. First independent claim

    The legal scope of protection — read this for what is actually claimed.

  6. CPC / IPC classifications

    Technology tags used to group this patent with similar filings.

  7. Citations and related patents

    Prior art links and similar publications in this corpus.

Abstract

Official abstract text for this publication.

Distributed control of vehicles with coordinating cars that implement a cooperative control method, and non-coordinating cars that are presumed to follow predictable dynamics. A cooperative control method can combine distributed receding horizon control, for optimization-based path planning and feedback, with higher level logic, to ensure that implemented plans are collision free. The cooperative method can be completely distributed with partially synchronous execution, and can afford dedicated time for communication and computation, features that are prerequisites for implementation on real freeways. The method can test for conflicts and can calculate optimized trajectories by adjusting parameters in terminal state constraints of an optimal control problem.

First claim

Opening claim text (preview).

The invention claimed is: 1. A method for controlling a first coordinating vehicle, the method comprising: receiving trajectory messages from a plurality of second coordinating vehicles in a communication range, the trajectory messages including vehicle trajectory information for a predetermined update interval; calculating an assumed trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle by solving an optimal control problem, the optimal control problem not including an avoidance constraint; detecting a conflict based on the received trajectory information and the calculated assumed trajectory; and when a conflict is detected, adjusting terminal state constraints in the optimal control problem and calculating, with the adjusted constraints in the optimal control problem, an optimized trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle such that the detected conflict is resolved, wherein the optimal control problem includes cost terms including a move suppression (MS) term indicating an amount that the optimized trajectory may deviate from the assumed trajectory. 2. A controller for a first coordinating vehicle, the controller comprising: a communication terminal configured to receive trajectory messages from a plurality of second coordinating vehicles in a communication range, the trajectory messages including vehicle trajectory information for a predetermined update interval; and a computer processor configured to execute instructions stored on a non-transitory memory, the instructions including calculating an assumed trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle by solving an optimal control problem, the optimal control problem not including an avoidance constraint, detecting a conflict based on the received trajectory information and the calculated assumed trajectory, and when a conflict is detected, adjusting terminal state constraints in the optimal control problem and calculating, with the adjusted constraints in the optimal control problem, an optimized trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle such that the detected conflict is resolved, wherein the optimal control problem includes cost terms including a move suppression (MS) term indicating an amount that the optimized trajectory may deviate from the assumed trajectory. 3. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein the conflict is detected by determining, based on the received trajectory information and the calculated assumed trajectory, whether a first avoidance boundary of the first coordinating vehicle and a second avoidance boundary of any one of the second coordinating vehicles intersect during the update interval. 4. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein: the terminal state constraints include a velocity term and a vehicle spacing term; and when a conflict is detected, the processor adjusts the velocity term and/or the vehicle spacing term in the optimal control problem such that the detected conflict is resolved. 5. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein during each of successive update intervals, the computer processor is further configured to: recursively detect conflicts between the first coordinating vehicle and each of the second coordinating vehicles that will occur during the update interval; and calculate the optimized trajectory for each of the recursively detected conflicts. 6. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein the computer processor is further configured to: classify the detected conflict based on a predetermined rule set; and adjust the terminal state constraints based on the detected conflict classification. 7. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein the assumed trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle is calculated by solving the optimization control problem with terminal constraints modified by a high-level maneuver plan. 8. The controller according to claim 2 , further comprising: a sensor configured to detect a position and speed information for a non-coordinating vehicle within a predetermined detection range, wherein the processor determines trajectory information for the non-coordinating vehicle based on the detected position and speed information, and the processor detects a conflict between the first coordinating vehicle and the non-coordinating vehicle based on the determined trajectory information and the assumed trajectory. 9. The controller according to claim 5 , wherein during each of the successive update intervals, the communication terminal is further configured to: transmit the optimized trajectory to the second coordinating vehicles; and receive updated trajectory messages from the second coordinating vehicles. 10. The controller according to claim 5 , wherein the assumed trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle in a current update interval is initially set to the calculated optimized trajectory from an immediately preceding update interval. 11. The controller according to claim 5 , wherein the assumed trajectory for the first coordinating vehicle in a current update interval is initially set, in the absence of a high-level maneuver plan, by extrapolating the optimized trajectory from an immediately preceding update interval. 12. The controller according to claim 5 , wherein the processor is further configured to, during each of the successive update intervals, calculate the optimized trajectory for the detected conflict with an earliest loss-of-separation that requires action by the first coordinating vehicle. 13. The controller according to claim 6 , wherein the conflict classification is based on a position of the first coordinating vehicle relative to a conflicting vehicle, of the second coordinating vehicles, which is determined to be in conflict with the first coordinating vehicle. 14. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein when a conflict is detected, the MS term is set such that the amount from which the optimized trajectory may deviate from the assumed trajectory is increased. 15. The controller according to claim 8 , wherein the processor sets a third avoidance boundary for the non-coordinating vehicle, the third avoidance boundary being smaller in size than the first and second avoidance boundaries. 16. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein the optimal control problem does not include at least one of (1) an avoidance constraint between the first coordinating vehicle and another vehicle and (2) an avoidance constraint between the first coordinating vehicle and a road boundary. 17. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein the optimal control problem does not include an avoidance constraint between the first coordinating vehicle and another vehicle and does not include an avoidance constraint between the first coordinating vehicle and a road boundary. 18. The controller according to claim 2 , wherein the computer processor is further configured to control the first coordinating vehicle based upon the optimized trajectory. 19. A vehicle coordination system comprising a plurality of coordinating vehicles, each vehicle (i=1, 2, 3, . . . , N) having a controller including: a communication terminal configured to receive trajectory messages from each vehicle, of the plurality of coordinating vehicles, in a communication range, the trajectory messages including vehicle trajectory information for a predetermined update interval; and a computer processor configured to execute instructions stored on a non-transitory memory, the instructions including: calculating an assumed trajectory by solving an optimal control problem, the optimal control problem not includ

Assignees

Inventors

Classifications

  • G08G1/161Primary

    Decentralised systems, e.g. inter-vehicle communication · CPC title

  • Platooning, i.e. convoy of communicating vehicles · CPC title

  • with means for avoiding collisions between vehicles (vehicle fittings for automatically controlling speed including means for detecting potential obstacles B60K31/0008; avoiding obstacles by action on the steering system B62D; radar, sonar, lidar systems designed for anti-collision purposes G01S13/93, G01S15/93, G01S17/93) · CPC title

  • the prediction being responsive to vehicle dynamic parameters · CPC title

  • by at least one leading vehicle of the fleet · CPC title

Patent family

Related publications grouped by family.

External sources

Frequently asked questions

Answers are generated from the same data shown on this page.

What does patent US9669828B2 cover?
Distributed control of vehicles with coordinating cars that implement a cooperative control method, and non-coordinating cars that are presumed to follow predictable dynamics. A cooperative control method can combine distributed receding horizon control, for optimization-based path planning and feedback, with higher level logic, to ensure that implemented plans are collision free. The cooperati…
Who is the assignee on this patent?
Caveney Derek Stanley, Dunbar William Bruce, Toyota Motor Eng & Mfg North America Inc
What technology area does this patent fall under?
Primary CPC classification G08G1/161. Mapped technology areas include Physics.
When was this patent published?
Publication date Tue Jun 06 2017 00:00:00 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) (B2). Legal status and post-grant events are not shown on this page.
What related patents are in patentsdb?
We list 8 related publications on this page (citations in our corpus or others sharing the same primary CPC).