Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
Claims 1-15 are currently presented for Examination.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP21306797.8, filed on 04/21/2020.
Claim objections
The claims have numerous issues with antecedent basis. The Examiner suggests amending the claims such that the first recitation of each distinct element uses articles such as “a”/”an”, later recitations referring back to the same distinct element uses articles such as “the”/”said”, to use disambiguating modifiers (e.g., first, second, etc.) when there are multiple distinct elements with the same base term, and that the use of modifiers for each distinct element is kept consistent. Below is a non-exhaustive list of examples of these issues:
Claim 5 recites the limitation “further preselected threshold light intensity”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 3 already defined the preselected threshold light intensity. Is it the same or different. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the stored light strength buffer”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim This should be “the stored light intensity buffer”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) as being indefinite because the scope of the claim is unclear due to ambiguous alternative language in step (e). Claim 8 recites: “…
wherein step e comprises: e1) …;
or wherein step e comprises: e1′) …; e2) …; e3) …; e4) …; and e5) …”
It is unclear from the claim language whether step (e) requires: (i) only step e1; or (ii) steps e1′ through e5; or whether steps e2–e5 are required regardless of whether step e1 or step e1′ is performed. The placement of the term “or” renders the scope of step (e) ambiguous, and therefore the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be determined with reasonable certainty. Accordingly, claim 8 fails to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §101
5. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. These claims are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
(Step 1) Is the claims to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter?
Claims: 1-14 are directed to method or process that falls on one of statutory category.
Claim: 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that falls on one of statutory category that is manufacture.
Step 2A Prong 1
Claim 1 and 15 recites
A method for determining a total light distribution of a pixel headlamp via a computing unit, wherein the pixel headlamp comprises a plurality of individual light sources, and wherein a light intensity of a respective individual light source can be influenced by energization of the respective individual light source, comprising the steps of:
a) providing a texture on the computing unit comprising a two-dimension array having coordinates; (The use of a two-dimensional array, row/column indices as coordinates, and discretization points (sampling) to represent a continuous light distribution is fundamentally a mathematical concept. So, it also falls under the “Mathematical Concepts” of abstract ideas. The computer acts merely as a tool to execute these mathematical calculations. The "texture" in this context is just a data structure (a 2D grid). It is similar to using a spreadsheet or a matrix to represent a map; the abstract idea is the mapping of space into a numerical grid. The act of "providing" this texture can be interpreted as a mental process or a process that can be performed by a human using pencil and paper)
b) providing a maximum energization individual light distribution for each individual light source on the computing unit, wherein the maximum energization individual light distribution represents at least the light intensity of the individual light source per coordinate at maximum energization of the individual light source; (A "maximum energization individual light distribution" characterized as a mathematical representation or data set (light intensity per coordinate). So, it also falls under the “Mathematical Concepts” of abstract ideas. The act of "providing" this distribution can be interpreted as a mental process or a process that can be performed by a human using pencil and paper.)
c) determining a maximum energization data structure taking into account all the maximum energization individual light distributions and the texture, wherein the maximum energization data structure comprises a target coordinates list having target coordinates entries, one light intensity list per target coordinates entry having at least one light intensity entry, and one individual light source identification list per target coordinates entry having at least one identification entry, and wherein the maximum energization data structure at least represents which individual light sources influence the light intensity per coordinate of the texture, and to what extent, at maximum energization; (The data structure represents a formulaic relationship where individual light distributions are summed to determine maximum intensity per texture coordinate, which is a mathematical calculation and falls under the mathematical concepts of abstract idea. The creation of a "target coordinates list" linked with "light intensity lists" and "identification lists" is a method of organizing data to facilitate calculation, which is recognized as an abstract idea of mental process)
d) providing a relative energization value for each individual light source on the computing unit, wherein the relative energization value represents the energization of the individual light source; (Thus limitation describes a method of representing data ("relative energization value"). This is akin to a mathematical algorithm or a "mental process" (assigning values based on observation) to determine status, which falls under the category of abstract ideas.) and
e) determining the total light distribution, taking into account the maximum energization data structure and the relative energization values of the individual light sources. The process of combining individual light source data (using "relative energization values" and a "maximum energization data structure") to find the total light field relies heavily on mathematical equation see spec para [0020]. So, it falls under the “Mathematical Concepts” of abstract idea)
Step 2A, Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
In accordance with Step 2A, Prong 2, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Also, the “providing…” limitation is merely data gathering step or a generic computer function so which is considered as insignificant extra-solution activity as cited in MPEP 2106.05(g). The additional elements of the computing unit and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a generic computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f); The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
In view of Step 2B, the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than the recited exception,
i.e., whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, adds an inventive concept to the claim. Also, the “providing…” limitation is merely data gathering step or a generic computer function so which is considered as insignificant extra-solution activity as cited in MPEP 2106.05(g) and have recognized the following computer functions as well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014). The additional elements of the computing unit and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a generic computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f); The claim is directed to an abstract idea. Thus, claim 1 and 15 are not patent eligible.
Claim 2 further recites wherein step c) comprises the following steps:c1) creating the target coordinates list without target coordinates entries; and c2) successive processing of all maximum energization individual light distributions, taking into account all coordinates of the texture, comprising:
c2.1) determining the light intensity of the maximum energization individual light distribution on a coordinate of the texture; c2.2) checking whether the target coordinates list has a target coordinates entry at the coordinate of the texture; and performing one of the following: c2.3) in the case of the target coordinates list not having a target coordinates entry at the coordinate, creating the target coordinates entry by adding the coordinate as the target coordinate to the target coordinates list and applying the light intensity list and the individual light source identification list for the corresponding target coordinates entry, wherein the light intensity list comprises the light intensity entry representing the light intensity of the individual light source on the coordinate of the texture, and the individual light source identification list comprises the identification entry identifying the individual light source; or c2.4) in the case of the target coordinates list having a target coordinates entry at the coordinate, adding a further light intensity entry to the light intensity list, and a further identification entry to the individual light source identification list. The steps describe a logical method of organizing information (light intensities and their source identifications at specific coordinates) that a human can perform, with pen and paper. The described process constitutes an abstract idea (specifically a method of organizing/manipulating data) and a mathematical concept because it operates on data (coordinates, intensities) via rules (checking, adding) without creating a transformative, non-abstract technical result. It is similar to a mental, logistical process of auditing light sources on a grid, which falls under the category of abstract ideas (such as algorithms or methods of computation). Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 3 further recites wherein, in step c), a maximum energization data structure is provided, which, in the light intensity list, exclusively comprises light intensity entries which exceed a preselected threshold light intensity, and the corresponding individual light source identification lists exclusively comprise identification entries of individual light sources whose light intensity entries exceed the preselected threshold light intensity. This claim limitation is categorized as a Mental Process of an abstract idea. It describes the mental act of reviewing a list and selecting items based on a criterion (threshold), which can be performed in the human mind or with pen and paper. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 4 further recites wherein the method additionally comprises, after step c2.1), the following step:
determining whether the light intensity of the maximum energization individual light distribution on the coordinate exceeds the preselected threshold intensity, and performing steps c2.2) through c2.4) for this coordinate based on the threshold light intensity being exceeded. This claim limitation is categorized as a Mental Process of an abstract idea. It describes the mental act of reviewing a list and selecting items based on a criterion (threshold), which can be performed in the human mind or with pen and paper. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 5 further recites wherein the method additionally comprises step b2) of determining a compressed maximum energization individual light distribution from the maximum energization individual light distribution; wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution represents at least the light intensity of the individual light source in the coordinate region that is irradiated by the individual light source at maximum energization in such a way that the light intensity exceeds a further preselected threshold light intensity or a threshold light intensity based upon a preselected percentage threshold value, and wherein, in step c), the maximum energization data structure is determined taking into account all the compressed maximum energization individual light distributions. and mental processes (MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)). The step b2) defines a process of manipulating data (compressed maximum energization individual light distribution) based on thresholding light intensity, which is a mathematical calculation (comparing values and applying percentages) that can be performed in the human mind or with a pen and paper. The determination of a compressed maximum energization individual light distribution is an abstract idea because it describes a method of "organizing information" through mathematical manipulation (thresholding/filtering) of data rather than a physical alteration of the light source itself. It is a mathematical concept (data filtering) and a mental process (a calculation that can be done with pen and paper) that qualifies as an abstract idea under Step 2A Prong 1. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 6 further recites herein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution is determined by means of an edge detection algorithm; or wherein the determination of the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution comprises determining an effectively illuminated, rectangular coordinate region by the following steps: providing a scattered light-reduced maximum energization individual light distribution by reducing a scattered light component in the maximum energization individual light distribution; determining a maximum light intensity and a coordinate having the maximum light intensity in the scattered light-reduced maximum energization individual light distribution; determining the threshold light intensity taking into account the maximum light intensity and the preselected percentage threshold value; and determining the effectively illuminated, rectangular coordinate region, taking into account the scattered light-reduced maximum energization individual light distribution, the coordinate having the maximum light intensity, and the threshold light intensity. The claim describes a method of evaluating data to find a rectangle, which is a process of mental steps (mental process) and calculations (mathematical concept). It is an abstract idea because it describes a process that can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 7 further recites wherein the method additionally comprises, after step d), the following steps:
d1) creating a target coordinates buffer from the target coordinates list, a light intensity buffer from all the light intensity lists, and an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure (22), wherein the target coordinates buffer contains a number of ZK elements which corresponds to the number of target coordinates entries of the target coordinates list, and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element; The step involves organizing data (Target coordinates, intensity, IDs) into buffers, which can be performed in the human mind or on a general-purpose computer using standard data structures. The additional elements of d2) storing the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer, and the individual light source identification buffer on the computing unit is an insignificant extra-solution activity, as it is merely a repository for the data generated by the mental process and are basic computer functions that is well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iv) Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93;. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 8 further recites wherein the-step e) comprises: e1) creating a target coordinates buffer from the target coordinates list, a light intensity buffer from all the light intensity lists, and an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure, wherein the target coordinates buffer contains a number of ZK elements which corresponds to the number of target coordinates entries of the target coordinates list, and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element; or wherein step e) comprises:
e1′) loading the stored target coordinates buffer, the stored light strength buffer, and the stored individual light source identification buffer on the computing unit; e2) transmitting the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer , and the individual light source identification buffer to a graphics card of the computing unit; e3) creating an energization value buffer from the provided relative energization values; e4) transmitting the energization value buffer to the graphics card of the computing unit; and e5) determining the total light distribution by means of the graphics card of the computing unit, taking into account the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer, the individual light source identification buffer, and the energization value buffer. The steps (e1-e5) describe creating buffers (elements, intensities, ID data) and performing calculations to "determine the total light distribution". This is a mathematical manipulation of data structures (buffers) to simulate a physical phenomenon (light), which is a "method of organizing human activity" or "mathematical concept". The computer and graphics card are used as tools to perform these calculations, but the essence of the steps is the calculation itself, not a physical transformation of a tangible object. Also, transmitting step is recognized as computer functions that is well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) i. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g., using the Internet to gather data, Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362 (utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1745 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (using a telephone for image transmission); OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network); but see DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1258, 113 USPQ2d 1097, 1106 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 9 further recites wherein, in step e5), a computer shader having shading units is used, wherein each shader unit processes one ZK element in isolation, and/or wherein the execution strings of the computer shader run in parallel on several shader units of the graphics card. It is merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f);. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 10 further recites wherein the maximum energization individual light distribution provided in step b) represents an item of color information of the individual light source per coordinate, in addition to the light intensity of the individual light source per coordinate, and the light-intensity list of the maximum energization data structure comprises a combined light intensity-color information entry. The process of taking light intensity and color information for individual light sources per coordinate and organizing it into a "combined light intensity-color information entry" is a way of organizing information. This type of data manipulation or mathematical calculation can be performed mentally or with pen and paper. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 11 further recites a one-time performance of steps a) through c) is followed by repeated, successive performance of steps d) and e). This is a mental process or mathematical algorithm (repetitive, iterative manipulation of numbers) that could be done by a person with a pencil and paper, thus falling under the "mental processes" or "mathematical concepts" category of abstract ideas. See also claim 1. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 12 further recites wherein the pixel headlamp comprises more than 200 individual light sources. It is no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h). Also, this is adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(g) for mere data gathering. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 13 further recites wherein the method is for simulating a total light distribution of a pixel headlamp in a night journey of a virtual motor vehicle. It is viewed as a mathematical concept or a mental process that can be performed in the human mind (e.g., calculating light angles and intensities with pen and paper,) or via generic computer programming. The use of algorithms and calculations to simulate a physical phenomenon in a virtual space, recite an abstract idea. Also, it is no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(h). Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim 14 further recites wherein a one-time performance of steps a) through c) is followed by a one-time performance of steps e1) or a one-time performance of steps e1′) and e2), and repeated, successive performances of steps e3) through e5). This is a mental process or mathematical algorithm (repetitive, iterative manipulation of numbers) that could be done by a person with a pencil and paper, thus falling under the "mental processes" or "mathematical concepts" category of abstract ideas. See also claim 8. Claim therefore, when taken as a whole, still does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Claim recites unpatentable ineligible subject matter for the same reasoning and analysis as mentioned for claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claim(s) 1-2, 10-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rüddenklau et al. "Real-Time Lighting of High-Definition Headlamps for Night Driving Simulation." International Journal On Advances in Systems and Measurements 12.3 & 4 (2019): 72-88.
Regarding claim 1 and 15
Claim 1- Rüddenklau teaches a method for determining a total light distribution of a pixel headlamp by means of a computing unit wherein the pixel headlamp comprises a plurality of individual light sources and wherein a light intensity of the individual light source can be influenced by energization of the individual light source, (see page 73-74-HD systems are characterized by a great number of independent controllable light sources. Their illumination areas concentrate on sharply defined solid angle intervals with small overlapping areas. The total light distribution of such a headlamp result from the superposition of all the individual light distributions. The individual light distributions are measured with running the corresponding LEDs at full power. During normal operation, the LEDs can be dimmed independently of each other in the range of 0-100% by specifying their electrical currents. For testing the simulation technique presented in this contribution, the HD84-Matrix-LED headlamp developed by HELLA is used.) comprising the steps of:
Claim 15- Rüddenklau a teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium having processor-executable instructions for determining a total light distribution of a pixel headlamp via a computing unit, wherein the pixel headlamp comprises a plurality of individual light sources, and wherein a light intensity of a respective individual light source can be influenced by energization of the respective individual light source, and wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, facilitate (see page 73-74-HD systems are characterized by a great number of independent controllable light sources. Their illumination areas concentrate on sharply defined solid angle intervals with small overlapping areas. The total light distribution of such a headlamp result from the superposition of all the individual light distributions. The individual light distributions are measured with running the corresponding LEDs at full power. During normal operation, the LEDs can be dimmed independently of each other in the range of 0-100% by specifying their electrical currents. For testing the simulation technique presented in this contribution, the HD84-Matrix-LED headlamp developed by HELLA is used. See also table 1)
a) providing a texture on the computing unit comprising a two- dimension array having coordinates (see fig 5 and page 76- In concrete terms, each luminous intensity distribution is converted into a texture, as illustrated in the upper left area of Figure 5. see para 77-78 and fig 6-7-As a consequence, the texture contains 900x900 data points, which are also called texels. Another important point is the indexing of textures. Figure 6 can be used for understanding. Texture coordinates or uv coordinates are always used normalized. If the uv coordinates correspond exactly to a texel of the texture, its value can be returned unchanged. The condition or this is that u M and v N are elements of the natural numbers. In the other case, the neighboring texels of the access coordinates (u; v) must be found first, which are designated by tll; tlr; tul and tur in Figure 7.)
b) providing a maximum energization individual light distribution for each individual light source on the computing unit, wherein the maximum energization individual light distribution represents at least the light intensity of the individual light source per coordinate at maximum energization of the individual light source, (see page 74-75-In order to simulate the light distribution of a HD headlamp in any situation, the characteristics of the emitted light must be known for each individual light source in it. Therefore, the luminous intensity distribution is measured for each light source, in concrete terms 95 times, of the headlamp and especially for each LED of the HD84-Matrix. The individual light distributions are measured with running the corresponding LEDs at full power. See page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source k at full power in the discretized direction of the vertical angle.)
c) determining a maximum energization data structure taking into account all the maximum energization individual light distributions and the texture wherein the maximum energization data structure comprises a target coordinates list having target coordinates entries, one light intensity list per target coordinates entry having at least one light intensity entry, and one individual light source identification list per target coordinates entry having at least one identification entry, and wherein the maximum energization data structure at least represents which individual light sources influence the light intensity per coordinate of the texture and to what extent, at maximum energization, (see page 76-The light distribution Lk of the light source k with k 2 f1;Kg of an HD headlamp with a total of K individual light sources then has the form Lk 2 RMN 0 . "The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix contains the luminous intensity of the light source k at full power in the discretized direction of the vertical angle om and the horizontal angle On in Candela")
Examiner note: See fig 5 - The "Texture-Representation of LIDs" (1, 2, 3) implies the use of texture coordinates (UV coordinates. These coordinates define where in the texture map the intensity data for specific LEDs is stored, effectively serving as target coordinate entries for mapping light output to a scene. The "Intensity List" clearly shows "Intensity" entries (e.g., 3%, 8%, 15%, constant, time-dependent) associated with specific LEDs. This list contains the calculated intensity values for each light source based on input conditions. The "Intensity List" also includes "LED ID" entries (e.g., 1, 2, 3) which uniquely identify each individual light source. This identification list corresponds to the individual light source identification list described in the claim for the maximum energization data structure.
d) providing a relative energization value for each individual light source on the computing unit, wherein the relative energization value represents the energization of the individual light source, (see page 76-Once both, the individual light distributions and the temporary intensity list, are available, the total light distribution can be calculated. This can be achieved by adding the individual light distributions weighted by the relative current values. see page 78-relative current value ik 2 [0; 1] of individual light source k) and
e) determining the total light distribution taking into account the maximum energization data structure and the relative energization values of the individual light sources. (see page 76 and fig 5-)
PNG
media_image1.png
175
453
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein step c) comprises the following steps:
c1) creating the target coordinates list without target coordinates entries; and c2) successive processing of all maximum energization individual light distributions, taking into account all coordinates of the texture, (see page 79- After completion of the shader operations for all texels, the target texture contains the contribution of the light source k within the total light distribution, whereby a single component of the sum in the data flow visualized by Figure 9 is mapped. In order to obtain the complete light distribution of the headlamp, all texels of the render target Tcomb are first initialized with 0. Then the Cookie Combiner is applied to the target texture repeatedly with iterating through all individual light sources by changing the parameters Tk and ik.)
comprising:
c2.1) determining the light intensity of the maximum energization individual light distribution on a coordinate of the texture; (See page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source k at full power in the discretized direction of the vertical angle. see page 79-In the first step within processing, the shader reads the light intensity value tuv of the given individual light texture Tk at position (u; v) corresponding to the texel to be written to in the render target (line 1).)
c2.2) checking whether the target coordinates list has a target coordinates entry at the coordinate of the texture; and performing one of the following: c2.3) in the case of the target coordinates list not having a target coordinates entry at the coordinate, creating the target coordinates entry by adding the coordinate as the target coordinate to the target coordinates list and applying the light intensity list and the individual light source identification list for the corresponding target coordinates entry, wherein the light intensity list comprises the light intensity entry representing the light intensity of the individual light source on the coordinate of the texture, and the individual light source identification list comprises the identification entry identifying the individual light source; or c2.4) in the case of the target coordinates list having a target coordinates entry at the coordinate, adding a further light intensity entry to the light intensity list, and a further identification entry to the individual light source identification list. (See page 79-After completion of the shader operations for all texels, the target texture contains the contribution of the light source k within the total light distribution, whereby a single component of the sum in the data flow visualized by Figure 9 is mapped. In order to obtain the complete light distribution of the headlamp, all texels of the render target Tcomb are first initialized with 0. Then the Cookie Combiner is applied to the target texture repeatedly with iterating through all individual light sources by changing the parameters Tk and ik. The rendering is done with additive blending (see Figures 8 and 9) so the previous values in the render target are not overwritten by the returns of the shader but added to it)
Regarding claim 10
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein the maximum energization individual light distribution provided in step b) represents an item of color information of the individual light source per coordinate, in addition to the light intensity of the individual light source per coordinate, and the light-intensity list of the maximum energization data structure comprises a combined light intensity-color information entry.(see page 76-77, see fig 5, 8- This uses the total light distribution determined by the Cookie Combiner and, using a lighting model, determines the color pixel by pixel, which results from the object and light properties as well as the geometric relationships. The individual entries of the texture encode the color at the respective place then typically in the 3 RGB channels (red, green, blue) and a 4th transparency channel (_ channel). In this case, textures are used to encode light intensity distributions. As a consequence, the texture contains 900x900 data points, which are also called texels. Using the same resolution as the measured luminous intensity distributions, each texel corresponds directly to a measuring point of the distribution. In classic color textures the values of the R, G, B and A channels of a texel are encoded with 8 bit fixed-point, whereby each texel contains 32-bit information (RGBA32 texture).)
Regarding claim 11
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein a one-time performance of steps a) through c) is followed by repeated, successive performance of steps d) and e). (See page 76 and fig 5-In concrete terms, each luminous intensity distribution is converted into a texture, as illustrated in the upper left area of Figure 5. See page 74-The individual light distributions are measured with running the corresponding LEDs at full power. See page 79-After completion of the shader operations for all texels, the target texture contains the contribution of the light source k within the total light distribution, whereby a single component of the sum in the data flow visualized by Figure 9 is mapped. In order to obtain the complete light distribution of the headlamp, all texels of the render target Tcomb are first initialized with 0. Then the Cookie Combiner is applied to the target texture repeatedly with iterating through all individual light sources by changing the parameters Tk and ik. The rendering is done with additive blending (see Figures 8 and 9) so the previous values in the render target are not overwritten by the returns of the shader but added to it)
Regarding claim 12
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein the pixel headlamp comprises more than 200 individual light sources. (See page 72 and section Introduction-With this technology, resolutions of several tens of thousands up to a million pixels can be achieved. See page 74- The variety of the representable light distributions is limited only by the resolution of the headlamp, which can range from approx. 100 to several 10,000 pixels, and the permissible values of the electrical current depending on the light technology used)
Regarding claim 13
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein the method is for simulating a total light distribution of a pixel headlamp in a night journey of a virtual motor vehicle. (See abstract- Introducing high-definition headlamp systems in the automotive industry opens up a wide range of possibilities for improving existing and developing new types of dynamic lighting functions. Due to the complexity and subjectivity of light distributions of modern headlamp systems, simulation-based development is indispensable. This contribution presents a first real-time simulation of high-definition systems in virtual environments. As it turns out, the presented implementation is well suited in terms of appearance and computational performance as a basis for a night driving simulation.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
7. Claim(s) 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rüddenklau et al. ("Real-Time Lighting of High-Definition Headlamps for Night Driving Simulation." International Journal on Advances in Systems and Measurements 12.3 & 4 (2019): 72-88) in view of Waldner et al. ("Hardware-in-the-loop-simulation of the light distribution of automotive matrix-led-headlights." 2019 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM). IEEE, 2019.)
Regarding claim 3
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein, in step c), a maximum energization data structure is provided, which, in the light intensity list, exclusively comprises light intensity entries (See page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source k at full power in the discretized direction of the vertical angle and see fig 5)
Rüddenklau does not teach the light intensity list, exclusively comprises light intensity entries which exceed a preselected threshold light intensity, and the corresponding individual light source identification lists exclusively comprise identification entries of individual light sources whose light intensity entries exceed the preselected threshold light intensity.
In the related field of invention, Waldner teaches the light intensity list, exclusively comprises light intensity entries which exceed a preselected threshold light intensity, and the corresponding individual light source identification lists exclusively comprise identification entries of individual light sources whose light intensity entries exceed the preselected threshold light intensity. (see section IV Waldner)
PNG
media_image2.png
484
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include the light intensity list, exclusively comprises light intensity entries which exceed a preselected threshold light intensity, and the corresponding individual light source identification lists exclusively comprise identification entries of individual light sources whose light intensity entries exceed the preselected threshold light intensity as taught by Waldner in the system of Rüddenklau for using the complete real headlight system in a virtual testing scenario. With the Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the engineer can evaluate real headlights in predefined and repeatable scenarios at any time in the lab. The virtual test scenarios can be reproductions form real test drives or worst-case analysis for specialized applications. In the Hardware-in-the-Loop test the real headlight can be exposure to heat, cold or water to evaluate the effects of environmental conditions. By using the presented Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the duration and number of necessary night test drives can be reduced. Also, imperfections and faults can be found faster and earlier in the development process. The simulation calculates the light distribution in the virtual world from the intensities under consideration of the actual driving dynamics. (see Introduction, Waldner)
Regarding claim 4
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein the method additionally comprises, after step c2.1), the following step: determining the light intensity…on the coordinate; (See page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source k at full power in the discretized direction of the vertical angle and see fig 5)
Rüddenklau does not teach determining whether the light intensity of the maximum energization individual light distribution on the coordinate exceeds the preselected threshold intensity.
In the related field of invention, Waldner teaches whether the light intensity of the maximum energization individual light distribution on the coordinate exceeds the preselected threshold intensity. (see section IV Waldner)
PNG
media_image2.png
484
975
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Rüddenklau further teaches performing steps c2.2) through c2.4) for this coordinate (see claim 2-Rüddenklau) based on the threshold light intensity being exceeded.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include whether the light intensity of the maximum energization individual light distribution on the coordinate exceeds the preselected threshold intensity as taught by Waldner in the system of Rüddenklau for using the complete real headlight system in a virtual testing scenario. With the Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the engineer can evaluate real headlights in predefined and repeatable scenarios at any time in the lab. The virtual test scenarios can be reproductions form real test drives or worst-case analysis for specialized applications. In the Hardware-in-the-Loop test the real headlight can be exposure to heat, cold or water to evaluate the effects of environmental conditions. By using the presented Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the duration and number of necessary night test drives can be reduced. Also, imperfections and faults can be found faster and earlier in the development process. The simulation calculates the light distribution in the virtual world from the intensities under consideration of the actual driving dynamics. (see Introduction, Waldner)
Regarding claim 5
Rüddenklau does not teach wherein the method additionally comprises step b2) of determining a compressed maximum energization individual light distribution from the maximum energization individual light distribution; wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution represents at least the light intensity of the individual light source in the coordinate region that is irradiated by the individual light source at maximum energization in such a way that the light intensity exceeds a further preselected threshold light intensity or a threshold light intensity based upon a preselected percentage threshold value.
However, Waldner further teaches wherein the method additionally comprises step b2) of determining a compressed maximum energization individual light distribution from the maximum energization individual light distribution; wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution represents at least the light intensity of the individual light source in the coordinate region that is irradiated by the individual light source at maximum energization in such a way that the light intensity exceeds a further preselected threshold light intensity or a threshold light intensity based upon a preselected percentage threshold value, (see section IV-The camera adjustment is a multi-step progress, which requires the adjustment of multiple parameters in the correct order. The basic idea of the adjustment process is projecting light distributions with known intensity values on the wall. Then using the knowledge about the true Iv,max and Iv to calculate the camera parameters for an optimal I for (3). The chosen Rüddenklau light distribution determinate ~Iv,max so that the goal of the following image process is calculating the optimal relative distribution I from the image.)
PNG
media_image3.png
562
1131
media_image3.png
Greyscale
and
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein, in step c), the maximum energization data structure is determined taking into account all the compressed maximum energization individual light distributions. (See Rüddenklau page 76-Once both, the individual light distributions and the temporary intensity list, are available, the total light distribution can be calculated. This can be achieved by adding the individual light distributions weighted by the relative current values)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include wherein the method additionally comprises step b2) of determining a compressed maximum energization individual light distribution from the maximum energization individual light distribution; wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution represents at least the light intensity of the individual light source in the coordinate region that is irradiated by the individual light source at maximum energization in such a way that the light intensity exceeds a further preselected threshold light intensity or a threshold light intensity based upon a preselected percentage threshold value as taught by Waldner in the system of Rüddenklau for using the complete real headlight system in a virtual testing scenario. With the Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the engineer can evaluate real headlights in predefined and repeatable scenarios at any time in the lab. The virtual test scenarios can be reproductions form real test drives or worst-case analysis for specialized applications. In the Hardware-in-the-Loop test the real headlight can be exposure to heat, cold or water to evaluate the effects of environmental conditions. By using the presented Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the duration and number of necessary night test drives can be reduced. Also, imperfections and faults can be found faster and earlier in the development process. The simulation calculates the light distribution in the virtual world from the intensities under consideration of the actual driving dynamics. (see Introduction, Waldner)
Regarding claim 6
Rüddenklau does not teach wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution is determined by means of an edge detection algorithm.
However, Waldner further teaches wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution is determined by means of an edge detection algorithm; (see section IV.D-The variance of the Laplacian is the chosen metric for this paper. With the Laplace-Filter L the optimization strategy is maximizing the variance of the second derivative of the image which represents the sharpness of the edges. The light distribution of headlights has soft edges compared to ordinary pictures, so finding the optimal focus point with an autofocus algorithm can be difficult. Changing the Rüddenklau light distribution to a stripe pattern with full or no power sharps the edges of the pixels and makes the optimum more unique. See Section IV.F)
PNG
media_image3.png
562
1131
media_image3.png
Greyscale
or wherein the determination of the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution comprises determining an effectively illuminated, rectangular coordinate region by the following steps:
providing a scattered light-reduced maximum energization individual light distribution by reducing a scattered light component in the maximum energization individual light distribution;
determining a maximum light intensity and a coordinate having the maximum light intensity in the scattered light-reduced maximum energization individual light distribution;
determining the threshold light intensity taking into account the maximum light intensity and the preselected percentage threshold value; and
determining the effectively illuminated, rectangular coordinate region, taking into account the scattered light-reduced maximum energization individual light distribution, the coordinate having the maximum light intensity, and the threshold light intensity.
Examiner note: Under the BRI, claim 6 contains “or” that creates alternative implementations of step. Therefore, for step compressed maximum energization individual light distribution is determined by means of an edge detection algorithm is performed, it will meet the claim requirement. In the rejection, Examiner consider the edge detection algorithm embodiment for prior art rejection to meet claim 6. The additional steps are not required if the edge detection embodiment is taught. IN Waldner, Edges are detected using Laplacian operator and non-illuminated regions are removed via thresholding, thus Waldner teaches determining a compressed light distribution based on edge detection algorithm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include wherein the compressed maximum energization individual light distribution is determined by means of an edge detection algorithm as taught by Waldner in the system of Rüddenklau for using the complete real headlight system in a virtual testing scenario. With the Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the engineer can evaluate real headlights in predefined and repeatable scenarios at any time in the lab. The virtual test scenarios can be reproductions form real test drives or worst-case analysis for specialized applications. In the Hardware-in-the-Loop test the real headlight can be exposure to heat, cold or water to evaluate the effects of environmental conditions. By using the presented Hardware-in-the-Loop simulation the duration and number of necessary night test drives can be reduced. Also, imperfections and faults can be found faster and earlier in the development process. The simulation calculates the light distribution in the virtual world from the intensities under consideration of the actual driving dynamics. (see Introduction, Waldner)
8. Claim(s) 7-9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rüddenklau et al. ("Real-Time Lighting of High-Definition Headlamps for Night Driving Simulation." International Journal on Advances in Systems and Measurements 12.3 & 4 (2019): 72-88) in view of Olsson et al. ("Clustered deferred and forward shading." Proceedings of the Fourth ACM SIGGRAPH/Eurographics Conference on High-Performance Graphics. 2012.)
Regarding claim 7
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein the method additionally comprises, after step d), the following steps:
d1) creating a target coordinates buffer from the target coordinates list, (see page 76-Adiscretized light distribution can be interpreted as a matrix. (See page 78 and fig 8-More precisely, the render target of the Cookie Combiner-Shader is a texture Tcomb with the same type and dimensions as the textures of the individual light distributions - a scalar floating-point texture with 900x900 texels. See page 79-80- The other parameter represents the relative intensity ik with which this light source is currently operated. Its code is executed for each texel of the render target Tcomb in parallel (see lower area of Figure 8), whereby the individual threads can be distinguished by further inherent parameters u and v constituting the normalized coordinates of the thread specific texel of the render target. Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
a light intensity buffer from all the light intensity lists, (see page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source. See page 79-80- In the first step within processing, the shader reads the light intensity value tuv of the given individual light texture Tk at position (u; v) corresponding to the texel to be written to in the render target (line 1). Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
wherein the target coordinates buffer contains a number of ZK elements which corresponds to the number of target coordinates entries of the target coordinates list, (see page 76-Adiscretized light distribution can be interpreted as a matrix. The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source. See page 78 and fig 8-More precisely, the render target of the Cookie Combiner-Shader is a texture Tcomb with the same type and dimensions as the textures of the individual light distributions - a scalar floating-point texture with 900x900 texels. See page 80- Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
d2) storing the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer, and the individual light source identification buffer on the computing unit. (see page 86 and table I-The results discussed below were recorded on a mobile PC, whose specification can be found in Table I.)
Rüddenklau does not teach an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element.
In the related field of invention, Olsson teaches an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure, (see page 6-In the sorting approach, we explicitly store this index for each pixel. This is achieved by tracking Rüddenklaus back to the originating pixel, and, when the unique cluster list is established, storing the index to the correct pixel in a full screen buffer.)
and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element; (see section 3.4-For Tiled Shading, a simple 2D lookup, based on the screen-space coordinates, is sufficient to retrieve light-list offset and count. When using page tables, after the unique clusters are found, we store the cluster index back to the physical memory location used to store the cluster key earlier)
and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element as taught by Olsson in the system of Rüddenklau in order to investigate the Clustered Shading. Clustered Shading enables using normal information to perform per-cluster back-face culling of lights, again reducing the number of lighting computations. Clustered Shading not only outperforms tiled shading in many scenes, but also exhibits better worst-case behavior under tricky conditions (e.g. when looking at high-frequency geometry with large discontinuities in depth). Additionally, Clustered Shading enables real-time scenes with two to three orders of magnitudes more lights than previously feasible (up to around one million light sources). (see Abstract, Olsson)
Regarding claim 8
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein the method additionally comprises, after step d), the following steps:
e1) creating a target coordinates buffer from the target coordinates list, (see page 76-Adiscretized light distribution can be interpreted as a matrix. (See page 78 and fig 8-More precisely, the render target of the Cookie Combiner-Shader is a texture Tcomb with the same type and dimensions as the textures of the individual light distributions - a scalar floating-point texture with 900x900 texels. See page 79-80- The other parameter represents the relative intensity ik with which this light source is currently operated. Its code is executed for each texel of the render target Tcomb in parallel (see lower area of Figure 8), whereby the individual threads can be distinguished by further inherent parameters u and v constituting the normalized coordinates of the thread specific texel of the render target. Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
a light intensity buffer from all the light intensity lists, (see page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source. See page 79-80- In the first step within processing, the shader reads the light intensity value tuv of the given individual light texture Tk at position (u; v) corresponding to the texel to be written to in the render target (line 1). Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
wherein the target coordinates buffer contains a number of ZK elements which corresponds to the number of target coordinates entries of the target coordinates list, (see page 76-Adiscretized light distribution can be interpreted as a matrix. The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source. See page 78 and fig 8-More precisely, the render target of the Cookie Combiner-Shader is a texture Tcomb with the same type and dimensions as the textures of the individual light distributions - a scalar floating-point texture with 900x900 texels. See page 80- Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
or wherein step e) comprises:
e1′) loading the stored target coordinates buffer, the stored light strength buffer, and the stored individual light source identification buffer on the computing unit;
e2) transmitting the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer, and the individual light source identification buffer to a graphics card of the computing unit;
e3) creating an energization value buffer from the provided relative energization values; (see page 86-All relative current values are randomly selected between 0% and 100% for each calculation. See fig 8 –(weighting ik))
e4) transmitting the energization value buffer to the graphics card of the computing unit; (see page 86- The analysis in the profiler shows that combining the 95 floating point textures on the CPU requires an average of 0.45ms (min: 0.27ms, max: 0.64ms). With cookie combining, however, the CPU acts primarily as the client of the GPU. It instructs the graphics card to execute the Cookie Combiner shader by creating draw calls and defines the relevant context information, such as the render target or the current individual light distribution. See fig 8) and
e5) determining the total light distribution by means of the graphics card of the computing unit, taking into account the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer, the individual light source identification buffer, and the energization value buffer. (SEE PAGE 79-the Cookie Combiner is applied to the target texture repeatedly with iterating through all individual light sources by changing the parameters Tk and ik. The rendering is done with additive blending (see Figures 8 and 9), After applying the Cookie Combiner to all individual light sources k = 1; : : : ;K, the render target Tcomb contains the total luminous intensity distribution. See page 86- So it is not surprising that the GPU has a significantly higher average calculation time of 4.61ms (min: 4.44ms, max: 4.73ms).)
Rüddenklau does not teach an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element.
In the related field of invention, Olsson teaches an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure, (see page 6-In the sorting approach, we explicitly store this index for each pixel. This is achieved by tracking Rüddenklaus back to the originating pixel, and, when the unique cluster list is established, storing the index to the correct pixel in a full screen buffer.)
and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element; (see section 3.4-For Tiled Shading, a simple 2D lookup, based on the screen-space coordinates, is sufficient to retrieve light-list offset and count. When using page tables, after the unique clusters are found, we store the cluster index back to the physical memory location used to store the cluster key earlier)
and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element as taught by Olsson in the system of Rüddenklau in order to investigate the Clustered Shading. Clustered Shading enables using normal information to perform per-cluster back-face culling of lights, again reducing the number of lighting computations. Clustered Shading not only outperforms tiled shading in many scenes, but also exhibits better worst-case behavior under tricky conditions (e.g. when looking at high-frequency geometry with large discontinuities in depth). Additionally, Clustered Shading enables real-time scenes with two to three orders of magnitudes more lights than previously feasible (up to around one million light sources). (see Abstract, Olsson)
Examiner note: Under the BRI, claim 8 contains “or” that creates alternative implementations of step (e). Therefore, for step (e) it is satisfied if either e1 is performed or e11-e5 are performed. In the rejection, Examiner consider the e1 buffer creation embodiment for prior art rejection to meet claim 8. The additional steps e11-e5 are not required if the e1 embodiment is taught.
Regarding claim 9
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein, in step e5), a computer shader having shading units is used, wherein each shader unit processes one ZK element in isolation, and/or wherein the execution strings of the computer shader run in parallel on several shader units of the graphics card. (See page 78-Once a way has been found to digitally map luminous intensity distributions to a graphics card compatible manner, the next step is to determine the total light distribution from the individual ones. The result can then be used to adjust the light intensity in the lighting pass, more precisely in the Headlight-Shader executed in it (see Section III-C), depending on the direction. Vividly, this realization is comparable to a dynamic transparency film, by which a homogeneous light source is filtered to produce the desired radiation characteristic. Texturing of light sources to vary the luminous intensity indifferent beam directions is already established. Such light textures are called cookies, explaining the name of the Cookie Combiner-Shader. Its task is to combine the textures of the individual light distributions into a total light distribution texture according to Equation (4). Figure 9 illustrates the data flow of the combining procedure on a mathematical level. The implementation of this calculation as a shader enables the highly parallel execution on the graphics card, which is necessary to fulfill the real-time requirements.)
Regarding claim 14
Rüddenklau further teaches wherein a one-time performance of steps a) through c) (See page 76 and fig 5-In concrete terms, each luminous intensity distribution is converted into a texture, as illustrated in the upper left area of Figure 5. See page 74-The individual light distributions are measured with running the corresponding LEDs at full power. See page 79-After completion of the shader operations for all texels, the target texture contains the contribution of the light source k within the total light distribution, whereby a single component of the sum in the data flow visualized by Figure 9 is mapped. In order to obtain the complete light distribution of the headlamp, all texels of the render target Tcomb are first initialized with 0. Then the Cookie Combiner is applied to the target texture repeatedly with iterating through all individual light sources by changing the parameters Tk and ik. The rendering is done with additive blending (see Figures 8 and 9) so the previous values in the render target are not overwritten by the returns of the shader but added to it)
is followed by a one-time performance of steps e1) or a one-time performance of steps e1′) and e2), e1) creating a target coordinates buffer from the target coordinates list, (see page 76-Adiscretized light distribution can be interpreted as a matrix. (See page 78 and fig 8-More precisely, the render target of the Cookie Combiner-Shader is a texture Tcomb with the same type and dimensions as the textures of the individual light distributions - a scalar floating-point texture with 900x900 texels. See page 79-80- The other parameter represents the relative intensity ik with which this light source is currently operated. Its code is executed for each texel of the render target Tcomb in parallel (see lower area of Figure 8), whereby the individual threads can be distinguished by further inherent parameters u and v constituting the normalized coordinates of the thread specific texel of the render target. Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
a light intensity buffer from all the light intensity lists, (see page 76-The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source. See page 79-80- In the first step within processing, the shader reads the light intensity value tuv of the given individual light texture Tk at position (u; v) corresponding to the texel to be written to in the render target (line 1). Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
wherein the target coordinates buffer contains a number of ZK elements which corresponds to the number of target coordinates entries of the target coordinates list, (see page 76-Adiscretized light distribution can be interpreted as a matrix. The entry lk(m; n) of row m and column n of the Lk matrix now contains the luminous intensity of the light source. See page 78 and fig 8-More precisely, the render target of the Cookie Combiner-Shader is a texture Tcomb with the same type and dimensions as the textures of the individual light distributions - a scalar floating-point texture with 900x900 texels. See page 80- Their common render target is the light buffer, visualized in the lower area of Figure 10)
and repeated, successive performances of steps e3) through e5). e3) creating an energization value buffer from the provided relative energization values; (see page 86-All relative current values are randomly selected between 0% and 100% for each calculation. See fig 8 –(weighting ik))
e4) transmitting the energization value buffer to the graphics card of the computing unit; (see page 86- The analysis in the profiler shows that combining the 95 floating point textures on the CPU requires an average of 0.45ms (min: 0.27ms, max: 0.64ms). With cookie combining, however, the CPU acts primarily as the client of the GPU. It instructs the graphics card to execute the Cookie Combiner shader by creating draw calls and defines the relevant context information, such as the render target or the current individual light distribution. See fig 8) and
e5) determining the total light distribution by means of the graphics card of the computing unit, taking into account the target coordinates buffer, the light intensity buffer, the individual light source identification buffer, and the energization value buffer. (SEE PAGE 79-the Cookie Combiner is applied to the target texture repeatedly with iterating through all individual light sources by changing the parameters Tk and ik. The rendering is done with additive blending (see Figures 8 and 9), After applying the Cookie Combiner to all individual light sources k = 1; : : : ;K, the render target Tcomb contains the total luminous intensity distribution. See page 86- So it is not surprising that the GPU has a significantly higher average calculation time of 4.61ms (min: 4.44ms, max: 4.73ms).)
Rüddenklau does not teach an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element.
In the related field of invention, Olsson teaches an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure, (see page 6-In the sorting approach, we explicitly store this index for each pixel. This is achieved by tracking Rüddenklaus back to the originating pixel, and, when the unique cluster list is established, storing the index to the correct pixel in a full screen buffer.)
and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element; (see section 3.4-For Tiled Shading, a simple 2D lookup, based on the screen-space coordinates, is sufficient to retrieve light-list offset and count. When using page tables, after the unique clusters are found, we store the cluster index back to the physical memory location used to store the cluster key earlier)
and
Examiner note: Under the BRI, claim 14 contains “or” that creates alternative implementations of step (e). Therefore, for step (e) it is satisfied if either steps e1) is performed or steps e1′) and e2), are performed. In the rejection, Examiner consider the e1 buffer creation embodiment for prior art rejection to meet claim 14. The additional steps e11 and e2 are not required if the e1 embodiment is taught.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Headlamps system for Night Driving Simulation as disclosed by Rüddenklau to include an individual light source identification buffer from all the individual light source identification lists of the maximum energization data structure and the target coordinates buffer comprises a starting point and a length specification for each ZK element as taught by Olsson in the system of Rüddenklau in order to investigate the Clustered Shading. Clustered Shading enables using normal information to perform per-cluster back-face culling of lights, again reducing the number of lighting computations. Clustered Shading not only outperforms tiled shading in many scenes, but also exhibits better worst-case behavior under tricky conditions (e.g. when looking at high-frequency geometry with large discontinuities in depth). Additionally, Clustered Shading enables real-time scenes with two to three orders of magnitudes more lights than previously feasible (up to around one million light sources). (see Abstract, Olsson)
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Neukam et al. US20210162913A1
ii. Discussing the method for lighting the vehicle surroundings of the motor vehicle, control devices for controlling the pixel lamp of the motor vehicle.
Funk et al. US20190202343A1
ii. Discussing the method of motor vehicle having at least one headlight for illuminating the surroundings of the motor vehicle and a control device for controlling the headlight, wherein the headlight comprises a plurality of lighting segments that are arranged in the manner of a matrix and that can be actuated separately by the control device for providing a lighting brightness that can be predefined separately for the individual lighting segments, wherein the control parameter predefining the specific lighting brightness for each of the lighting segments can be calculated by the control device in at least one computing step as a function of input parameters that can be provided by at least one vehicle device.
11. All claims 1-15 are rejected.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PURSOTTAM GIRI whose telephone number is (469)295-9101. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:30 PM, Monday to Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RENEE CHAVEZ can be reached at 5712701104. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PURSOTTAM GIRI/
Examiner, Art Unit 2186
/RENEE D CHAVEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2186
Prosecution Insights