DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the Examiner is requiring descriptive text
labels. The unlabeled rectangular boxes shown in the drawing should be provided with descriptive text
labels [MPEP 608.02(b) examiner note]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d)
are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended
replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of
the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing
should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must
be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be
renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings
for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled
in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the
changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required
corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-3,5,12-14,16, and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Suzuki (JP 2020032894 A) (hereinafter Suzuki) in view of Lee (US 20210171030 A1) (hereinafter Lee).
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki teaches a motion system for a vehicle(Suzuki, page 2 line 35, device that controls the motion of a vehicle ), the motion system comprising:
an arbitration module configured to arbitrate a request(Feature requesting modules such as different driving assistant systems are similar to Suzuki’s driving assistance application (hereinafter, simply referred to as “application”). Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit 5 arbitrates the request received from the application) and one or more constraints received from each of a plurality of feature requesting modules(Constraints are disclosed in the specifications as limits that are not to be exceeded or must be reached (upper limit or lower limit) such as acceleration limit. Suzuki has a similar mechanism of selecting(arbitrating) the upper limit of an acceleration(acceleration constraint).Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki, page 19 , line 14, the arbitration unit 22 performs each of the vertical IF package (lower limit), the vertical IF package (upper limit)). Suzuki, page 15 , line 24, the target acceleration (upper limit) is a data item for designating the required acceleration (upper limit) of the application. The requested acceleration (upper limit) selected by the arbitration of the request arbitration unit 5 is set as the target acceleration (upper limit)). Suzuki, page 3, line 13,the information processing device according to the present invention arbitrates requests output from each of the plurality of driving support applications to the actuator. Suzuki, page 21, line 24, long broken lines parallel to the horizontal axis represent the upper and lower limits of the required driving force set based on the required acceleration from a driving support application such as automatic driving or cruise control) to generate a resultant request(Suzuki, page 4, line 50, the request arbitration unit 5 generates result information including the arbitration result, and transmits the generated result information to the execution units 1a to 1c.) and one or more resultant constraints(Suzuki, page 19, line 38, the arbitration unit 22 of the request arbitration unit 5 outputs the vertical IF packages (lower limit side) and (upper limit side) selected as the arbitration result to the request generation units 6 and 7, and is selected as the arbitration result).
While Suzuki teaches about arbitrating request from driving support applications (feature requestors), and sending resultant request to actuators, it fails to disclose a profile generation module configured to determine whether to modify at least one of the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints, and output i) the resultant request or a modified version of the resultant request as a first profile request, and ii) the one or more resultant constraints or a modified version of the one or more resultant constraints as one or more profile constraints; and
a vehicle motion control module configured, based on the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints, to control one or more actuators of the vehicle.
However, Lee, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about a vehicle travel control system discloses a profile generation module configured to determine whether to modify at least one of the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Lee discloses determining whether a target speed profile/request is within predetermined range, and updating the profile if it exceeds the predefined range. Lee, paragraph 16, a speed profile of the host vehicle until the host vehicle makes another stop; comparing, by the launch profile generator, the recorded speed profile with the target speed profile of the host vehicle; and revising the target speed profile when a deviation between the recorded speed profile and target speed profile is greater than a predetermined range. ), and output i) the resultant request or a modified version of the resultant request as a first profile request(Lee, paragraph 79, the controller 2 controls the launch driving of the host vehicle based on the profile which is a speed or torque profile provided by the launch profile generator 10 at S108). Lee, paragraph 127, the launch profile generator 10 revises the previously defined speed profile (or the previously defined torque profile) at S127 so that the revised speed or torque profile is stored and used for next launch driving of the host vehicle.), and ii) the one or more resultant constraints or a modified version of the one or more resultant constraints as one or more profile constraints(Lee discloses limiting the values for speeds to a predefined value which corresponds to speed profile constraint. Lee, paragraph 69, the values to update the profile (e.g., the speed profile) may be limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit); and
a vehicle motion control module configured, based on the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints, to control one or more actuators of the vehicle(Lee, paragraph 14, controlling, by the controller, at least one of the speed or acceleration of the host vehicle based on at least one of the revised target torque profile or target speed profile. Lee, paragraph 83, The controller 2 controls the host vehicle based on the generated or selected speed or braking pressure profile (collectively, “braking profile”) at S212).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Suzuki with Lee profile generator to generate a motion profile and modify the resultant request of Suzuki when modification is required. Lee teaches generating and revising/modifying motion profile based on deviation between target speed profile(request) and recorded speed profile. By incorporating Lee’s profile generator, it is possible to generate a horizon/motion profile with values limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the arbitration module is configured, based on one or more feature requirements, to arbitrate the request(The specification discloses an example of feature requirement can include an acceleration rate as a function of acceleration pedal and speed. Suzuki, page 12, line 45, the arbitration result longitudinal ID is a data item for setting an identifier of an acceleration request source adopted in the power train control unit 10. The power train control unit 10 receives instruction information including the required acceleration in the vertical direction selected by the arbitration in the request arbitration unit 5 and the driver request acceleration based on the accelerator pedal operation. Suzuki, page 14 , line 45, the accelerator pedal driver required acceleration is a data item for setting a required acceleration calculated based on the amount of depression of the accelerator pedal by the driver. The accelerator pedal driver request acceleration can be set based on information notified from the power train control unit 10 to the request arbitration unit 5. Suzuki, page 21 , line 26, the instruction information generated by the request generation unit 6 based on the arbitration result by the request arbitration unit 5 and the driver request acceleration corresponding to the operation of the accelerator pedal are simultaneously input to the power train control unit 10.)and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules(The specification discloses that constraints are limits that are not to be exceeded such as acceleration limit. Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki has a similar mechanism of arbitrating the upper limit request which is similar to an acceleration constraint. Suzuki, page 15 , line 24, the target acceleration (upper limit) is a data item for designating the required acceleration (upper limit) of the application. The requested acceleration (upper limit) selected by the arbitration of the request arbitration unit 5 is set as the target acceleration (upper limit). Suzuki, page 3, line 13,the information processing device according to the present invention arbitrates requests output from each of the plurality of driving support applications to the actuator.) to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Suzuki, page 4, line 50,, the request arbitration unit 5 generates result information including the arbitration result, and transmits the generated result information to the execution units 1a to 1c. Suzuki, page 19, line 38, the arbitration unit 22 of the request arbitration unit 5 outputs the vertical IF packages (lower limit side) and (upper limit side) selected as the arbitration result to the request generation units 6 and 7, and is selected as the arbitration result).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the arbitration module is configured, based on a detected hardware failure, to arbitrate the request(The specification discloses hardware failure can be motor or sensor failure. Suzuki discloses an actuator similar to a motor, with failure state that the arbitration unit can use to arbitrates requests. One example of a request Suzuki discloses is for a braking system actuators, which is similar to the braking system actuators disclosed in the specification. Suzuki, page 14, line 14, the information to be set to the braking system support level may be generated in the request arbitration unit 5 based on the information on the failure state output from the actuator 13c constituting the brake device or the brake control unit 11 for controlling the same.) and the one or more constraints(Constraints, as disclosed in the specification, can be jerk limit or acceleration limit. Suzuki similarly teaches an arbitrating of speed limit based on the status of an actuator. Suzuki, page 14, line 7, the vehicle speed limit is a data item for setting an upper limit value of the vehicle speed when a vehicle speed limit is required. As the vehicle speed limit, a value calculated based on the information regarding the failed state output from the failed actuator or the control unit (ECU) that controls the failed actuator is set. The vehicle limit vehicle speed may be calculated by the request arbitration unit 5 based on the information on the failure state, or may be determined in advance corresponding to the assumed failure state.) received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(As disclosed above, Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki, page 14, line 19, the request arbitration unit 5 may generate the information based on information indicating a temporary state abnormality or a failure. )). Suzuki, page 3, line 13,the information processing device according to the present invention arbitrates requests output from each of the plurality of driving support applications to the actuator.).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein:
the vehicle motion control module is configured to monitor at least one state of the vehicle and generate an achieved behavior signal indicative of the at least one state(The specification discloses one of the state of vehicle that can be detected is its acceleration state. Suzuki, page 8, line 18, the information acquisition unit 23 acquires various information related to the current motion control state of the vehicle and the operation state of the vehicle by the driver. For example, the information acquisition unit 23 can acquire, from the accelerator 2, the brake 3, and the steering 4, the presence or absence of an operation, the acceleration requested by the driver, the steering amount requested by the driver, and the like); and
the arbitration module is configured, based on the achieved behavior signal, to arbitrate the request and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Suzuki discloses arbitrating requests based on the state of vehicle detected by the information acquisition unit. As disclosed above, Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki, page 21, line 3, the arbitration result output unit 24, based on the various types of information acquired by the information acquisition unit 23, “information representing the current vehicle motion control state” and “currently achievable motion control” in the data set shown in FIG. Information "and" information indicating the operation state of the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal by the driver).
Regarding claim 12, Suzuki teaches a motion request and control method for a vehicle(Suzuki, page 2 line 35, device that controls the motion of a vehicle), the method comprising:
arbitrating a request(Feature requesting modules such as different driving assistant systems are similar to Suzuki’s driving assistance application (hereinafter, simply referred to as “application”). Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit 5 arbitrates the request received from the application) and one or more constraints received from each of a plurality of feature requesting modules(Constraints are disclosed in the specifications as limits that are not to be exceeded or must be reached (upper limit or lower limit) such as acceleration limit. Suzuki has a similar mechanism of selecting(arbitrating) the upper limit of an acceleration(acceleration constraint).Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki, page 19 , line 14, the arbitration unit 22 performs each of the vertical IF package (lower limit), the vertical IF package (upper limit)). Suzuki, page 15 , line 24, the target acceleration (upper limit) is a data item for designating the required acceleration (upper limit) of the application. The requested acceleration (upper limit) selected by the arbitration of the request arbitration unit 5 is set as the target acceleration (upper limit)). Suzuki, page 3, line 13,the information processing device according to the present invention arbitrates requests output from each of the plurality of driving support applications to the actuator. Suzuki, page 21, line 24, long broken lines parallel to the horizontal axis represent the upper and lower limits of the required driving force set based on the required acceleration from a driving support application such as automatic driving or cruise control) to generate a resultant request(Suzuki, page 4, line 50, the request arbitration unit 5 generates result information including the arbitration result, and transmits the generated result information to the execution units 1a to 1c) and one or more resultant constraints(Suzuki, page 19, line 38, the arbitration unit 22 of the request arbitration unit 5 outputs the vertical IF packages (lower limit side) and (upper limit side) selected as the arbitration result to the request generation units 6 and 7, and is selected as the arbitration result);
While Suzuki teaches about arbitrating request from driving support applications (feature requestors), and sending resultant request to actuators, it fails to disclose determining at a profile generation module whether to modify at least one of the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints, and output i) the resultant request or a modified version of the resultant request as a first profile request, and ii) the one or more resultant constraints or a modified version of the one or more resultant constraints as one or more profile constraints; and
based on the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints, controlling one or more actuators of the vehicle.
However, Lee, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about a vehicle travel control system, discloses determining at a profile generation module whether to modify at least one of the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Lee discloses determining whether a target speed profile/request is within predetermined range, and updating the profile if it exceeds the predefined range. Lee, paragraph 16, a speed profile of the host vehicle until the host vehicle makes another stop; comparing, by the launch profile generator, the recorded speed profile with the target speed profile of the host vehicle; and revising the target speed profile when a deviation between the recorded speed profile and target speed profile is greater than a predetermined range), and output i) the resultant request or a modified version of the resultant request as a first profile request(Lee, paragraph 79, the controller 2 controls the launch driving of the host vehicle based on the profile which is a speed or torque profile provided by the launch profile generator 10 at S108). Lee, paragraph 127, the launch profile generator 10 revises the previously defined speed profile (or the previously defined torque profile) at S127 so that the revised speed or torque profile is stored and used for next launch driving of the host vehicle), and ii) the one or more resultant constraints or a modified version of the one or more resultant constraints as one or more profile constraints(Lee discloses limiting the values for speeds to a predefined value which corresponds to speed profile constraint. Lee, paragraph 69, the values to update the profile (e.g., the speed profile) may be limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit)); and
based on the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints, controlling one or more actuators of the vehicle(Lee, paragraph 14, controlling, by the controller, at least one of the speed or acceleration of the host vehicle based on at least one of the revised target torque profile or target speed profile. Lee, paragraph 83, The controller 2 controls the host vehicle based on the generated or selected speed or braking pressure profile (collectively, “braking profile”) at S212).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Suzuki with Lee profile generator to generate a motion profile and modify the resultant request of Suzuki when modification is required. Lee teaches generating and revising/modifying motion profile based on deviation between target speed profile(request) and recorded speed profile. By incorporating Lee’s profile generator, it is possible to generate a horizon/motion profile with values limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), further comprising, based on one or more feature requirements, arbitrating the request(The specification discloses an example of feature requirement can include an acceleration rate as a function of acceleration pedal and speed. Suzuki, page 12, line 45, the arbitration result longitudinal ID is a data item for setting an identifier of an acceleration request source adopted in the power train control unit 10. The power train control unit 10 receives instruction information including the required acceleration in the vertical direction selected by the arbitration in the request arbitration unit 5 and the driver request acceleration based on the accelerator pedal operation. Suzuki, page 14 , line 45, the accelerator pedal driver required acceleration is a data item for setting a required acceleration calculated based on the amount of depression of the accelerator pedal by the driver. The accelerator pedal driver request acceleration can be set based on information notified from the power train control unit 10 to the request arbitration unit 5. Suzuki, page 21 , line 26, the instruction information generated by the request generation unit 6 based on the arbitration result by the request arbitration unit 5 and the driver request acceleration corresponding to the operation of the accelerator pedal are simultaneously input to the power train control unit 10.) and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules(The specification discloses that constraints are limits that are not to be exceeded such as acceleration limit. Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki has a similar mechanism of arbitrating the upper limit request which is similar to an acceleration constraint. Suzuki, page 15 , line 24, the target acceleration (upper limit) is a data item for designating the required acceleration (upper limit) of the application. The requested acceleration (upper limit) selected by the arbitration of the request arbitration unit 5 is set as the target acceleration (upper limit). Suzuki, page 3, line 13,the information processing device according to the present invention arbitrates requests output from each of the plurality of driving support applications to the actuator.) to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Suzuki, page 4, line 1, the request arbitration unit 5 generates result information including the arbitration result, and transmits the generated result information to the execution units 1a to 1c. Suzuki, page 19, line 38, the arbitration unit 22 of the request arbitration unit 5 outputs the vertical IF packages (lower limit side) and (upper limit side) selected as the arbitration result to the request generation units 6 and 7, and is selected as the arbitration result).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), further comprising, based on a detected hardware failure, arbitrating the request(The specification discloses hardware failure can be motor or sensor failure. Suzuki discloses an actuator similar to a motor, with failure state that the arbitration unit can use to arbitrates requests. One example of a request Suzuki discloses is for a braking system actuators, which is similar to the braking system actuators disclosed in the specification. Suzuki, page 14, line 14, the information to be set to the braking system support level may be generated in the request arbitration unit 5 based on the information on the failure state output from the actuator 13c constituting the brake device or the brake control unit 11 for controlling the same.) and the one or more constraints(Constraints, as disclosed in the specification, can be jerk limit or acceleration limit. Suzuki similarly teaches an arbitrating of speed limit based on the status of an actuator. Suzuki, page 14, line 7, the vehicle speed limit is a data item for setting an upper limit value of the vehicle speed when a vehicle speed limit is required. As the vehicle speed limit, a value calculated based on the information regarding the failed state output from the failed actuator or the control unit (ECU) that controls the failed actuator is set. The vehicle limit vehicle speed may be calculated by the request arbitration unit 5 based on the information on the failure state, or may be determined in advance corresponding to the assumed failure state.) received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(As disclosed above, Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki, page 14, line 19, the request arbitration unit 5 may generate the information based on information indicating a temporary state abnormality or a failure. )). Suzuki, page 3, line 13,the information processing device according to the present invention arbitrates requests output from each of the plurality of driving support applications to the actuator).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), further comprising: monitoring at least one state of the vehicle and generate an achieved behavior signal indicative of the at least one state(The specification discloses one of the state of vehicle that can be detected is its acceleration state. Suzuki, page 8, line 18, the information acquisition unit 23 acquires various information related to the current motion control state of the vehicle and the operation state of the vehicle by the driver. For example, the information acquisition unit 23 can acquire, from the accelerator 2, the brake 3, and the steering 4, the presence or absence of an operation, the acceleration requested by the driver, the steering amount requested by the driver, and the like); and based on the achieved behavior signal, arbitrating the request and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Suzuki discloses arbitrating requests based on the state of vehicle detected by the information acquisition unit. As disclosed above, Suzuki also discloses arbitrating requests from plurality of applications(feature requesting modules) such as automatic driving, automatic parking, and adaptive cruise control. Suzuki, page 21, line 3, the arbitration result output unit 24, based on the various types of information acquired by the information acquisition unit 23, “information representing the current vehicle motion control state” and “currently achievable motion control” in the data set shown in FIG. Information "and" information indicating the operation state of the accelerator pedal and the brake pedal by the driver).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the profile generation module is configured to modify the resultant request(Lee, paragraph 127, the launch profile generator 10 revises the previously defined speed profile (or the previously defined torque profile) at S127 so that the revised speed or torque profile is stored and used for next launch driving of the host vehicle.) and the one or more resultant constraints subsequent to receiving the resultant request (It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to revise/modify the resultant request using Lee’s profile generator after receiving the resultant requests and constraints from Suzuki. Lee, paragraph 69, the values to update the profile (e.g., the speed profile) may be limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit). Suzuki, page 4, line 50, the request arbitration unit 5 generates result information including the arbitration result, and transmits the generated result information to the execution units 1a to 1c. Suzuki, page 19, line 38, the arbitration unit 22 of the request arbitration unit 5 outputs the vertical IF packages (lower limit side) and (upper limit side) selected as the arbitration result to the request generation units 6 and 7, and is selected as the arbitration result) and the one or more resultant constraints and independent of changes in the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Lee discloses it's profile generator revising/modifying speed profile based on comparison with target speed profile indicating an independent modification of request. Lee, paragraph 16, a speed profile of the host vehicle until the host vehicle makes another stop; comparing, by the launch profile generator, the recorded speed profile with the target speed profile of the host vehicle; and revising the target speed profile when a deviation between the recorded speed profile and target speed profile is greater than a predetermined range. Lee, paragraph 72, the profile select/calculator 110 revises at least one of the generated target torque profile or target speed profile based on the received pedal inputs ).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the profile generation module is configured to(Lee, paragraph 8, launch profile generator) modify the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints based on an output of one or more other modules( Lee discloses the generation of profile based on different drive situation such as drive modes which corresponds to driving modules. Lee, paragraph 127, the launch profile generator 10 revises the previously defined speed profile (or the previously defined torque profile) at S127 so that the revised speed or torque profile is stored and used for next launch driving of the host vehicle. Lee, paragraph 69, the values to update the profile (e.g., the speed profile) may be limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit). Lee, paragraph 73, the profile generator (i.e., the launch and braking profile generators 10, 20) may include a drive situation analyzer 100 to provide the profile selector/calculator 110 with a plurality of pre-stored speed profiles, a plurality of pre-stored braking pressure profiles, or a plurality of pre-stored torque profiles (collectively, “sub-profiles”), which are selected based on various driving conditions such as drive modes (e.g., normal drive mode ).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the profile generation module is configured to(Lee, paragraph 8, launch profile generator) i) in response to determining to modify the resultant request, output a modified version of the resultant request(Lee, paragraph 16, a speed profile of the host vehicle until the host vehicle makes another stop; comparing, by the launch profile generator, the recorded speed profile with the target speed profile of the host vehicle; and revising the target speed profile when a deviation between the recorded speed profile and target speed profile is greater than a predetermined range. Lee, paragraph 79, the controller 2 controls the launch driving of the host vehicle based on the profile which is a speed or torque profile provided by the launch profile generator 10 at S108). Lee, paragraph 127, the launch profile generator 10 revises the previously defined speed profile (or the previously defined torque profile) at S127 so that the revised speed or torque profile is stored and used for next launch driving of the host vehicle.), and ii) in response to determining to modify the one or more resultant constraints, output a modified version of the one or more resultant constraints(Lee discloses limiting the values for speeds to a predefined value which corresponds to speed profile constraint. Lee, paragraph 69, the values to update the profile (e.g., the speed profile) may be limited to predefined values for safety concerns (e.g., a speed limit)).
Claims 6,9,10,17,19,20, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Suzuki (JP 2020032894 A) (hereinafter Suzuki) in view of Lee (US 20210171030 A1) (hereinafter Lee) in further view of Tian (US 20130307459 A1) (hereinafter Tian).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein:
the profile generation module is configured to generate a plurality of profile requests based on the resultant request or a modified version of the resultant request(As disclosed above Suzuki’s arbitration module produces resultant request and Lee discloses generating multiple target profile/requests such as speed, torque, and brake profile. Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator (e.g., the launch profile generator 10, the braking profile generator 20) can generate a speed profile, namely a set of speed values pertaining to a moment in time (e.g., a time index) and then the controller 2 of the host vehicle 3 issues acceleration pedal commands for acceleration to an acceleration pedal commander 12 or brake pedal commands to decelerate the host vehicle to a brake pedal commander 22 in order to have the host vehicle to follow the speeds as set in the speed profile), wherein the plurality of profile requests comprises the first profile request(The specification discloses that the desired motion profiles can be output as first profile requests. Lee similarly discloses a desired speed profile to generate motion profiles. Lee, paragraph 48, in order to generate a desired speed profile (i.e., the target speed profile), a nominal launch speed profile is first defined based on following factors: i) vehicle acceleration characteristics considering available engine torques, gear ratios, and acceleration capacity; and b) an acceptable level of acceleration and jerk.); and
the vehicle motion control module is configured, based on the plurality of profile requests, to control one or more actuators of the vehicle(As described in the specification, the actuators can control the engine, motors, or the brake system, etc. Similarly, Lee controls the speed and acceleration of a vehicle indicating actuator control. Lee, paragraph 14, controlling, by the controller, at least one of the speed or acceleration of the host vehicle based on at least one of the revised target torque profile or target speed profile. Lee, paragraph 83, The controller 2 controls the host vehicle based on the generated or selected speed or braking pressure profile (collectively, “braking profile”) at S212), and the plurality of profile requests comprise a speed request, an acceleration request(Lee, paragraph 8, a controller configured to: receive at least one of the generated target torque profile or target speed profile of the host vehicle from the launch profile generator, and control at least one of a speed or an acceleration of the host vehicle based on at least one of the generated target torque profile or target speed profile. Lee, paragraph 54, the controller 2 may output, based on the profiles from the launch profile generator 10, a virtual accelerator pedal position that mimics a human driver's accelerator pedal action when the host vehicles launches, or a throttle opening command in case of a gasoline engine based on the calculation of required torque for launch).
While the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches about arbitration and request and a profile generation module to modify a request, it fails to disclose a system wherein the plurality of profile requests comprise a jerk request.
However, Tian, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about motion profile generator discloses a system wherein the plurality of profile requests comprise a jerk request (According to the specification, the profile generation module outputs profile requests, similarly Tian outputs motion profile with similar references. Tian has motion profile that defines a horizon to follow based on velocity, acceleration, and/or jerk reference. Tian, paragraph 37, The motion profile 312 defines a trajectory for transitioning the motion device from a current position or velocity to a target position or velocity, where the trajectory is defined in terms of one or more of a position reference, a velocity reference, an acceleration reference, and/or a jerk reference).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Suzuki and Lee with Tian to incorporate jerk request for smoother vehicle motion. Calculating motion profiles that include a time-varying jerk reference can yield a smoother and more stable motion compared to traditional trapezoidal or S-curve profiles, while avoiding sudden transitions between acceleration/deceleration and constant velocity that can introduce undesirable mechanical turbulence in the system.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein:
the vehicle motion control module is configured to output at least one hardware constraint(Lee discloses constrains to engine torque and gear ratio which correspond to hardware constraints. In addition, Tian discloses mechanical constraints which are similar to Hardware constraints. Lee, paragraph 48, in order to generate a desired speed profile (i.e., the target speed profile), a nominal launch speed profile is first defined based on following factors: i) vehicle acceleration characteristics considering available engine torques, gear ratios, and acceleration capacity; Tian, paragraph 42, As shown in FIG. 4, position profile generator 402 receives as inputs a set of constraints 404, which can represent mechanical constraints of the controlled system or user preferences regarding behavior of the motion system.); and
the profile generation module is configured to output the first profile request based on the at least one hardware constraint(Lee, paragraph 48, in order to generate a desired speed profile (i.e., the target speed profile), a nominal launch speed profile is first defined based on following factors: i) vehicle acceleration characteristics considering available engine torques, gear ratios, and acceleration capacity Tian, paragraph 38, Profile generator 306 calculates the motion profile 312 as a function of one or more motion constraints 304, which can represent mechanical constraints of the motion system or user preferences regarding operation of the motion device.).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the plurality of feature requesting modules are configured to i) receive from the profile generation module, the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints(The specification discloses the feature requesting modules (requestors) can be different motion requesting systems (automatic driving, automatic parking, adaptive cruise control). Tian discloses its motion control system and profile generator can be used for different automation apparatuses that can receive the generated profile. Tian, paragraph 42 Many automation applications employ motion control systems to control position and speed motion devices. Such motion control systems typically include one or more motors or similar actuating devices operating under the guidance of a controller, which sends position and/or speed control instructions to the motor in accordance with a user-defined control algorithm or program. Tian, paragraph 36, Master controller 302 can be, for example, a programmable logic controller (PLC) or other such controller that monitors and controls a system (e.g., an industrial process, an automation system, a batch process, etc.) that includes one or more motion devices. Tian, paragraph 42, profile generator 402 receives as inputs a set of constraints 404, which can represent mechanical constraints of the controlled system or user preferences regarding behavior of the motion system. These constraints can include upper limits on the velocity, acceleration, deceleration, and jerk, as well as a sample time representing an update period of the controller's control signal (typically measured in milliseconds)),and ii) based on at least one of the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints, to generate the request and the one or more constraints generated by each of the plurality of feature requesting modules(Tian, paragraph 43, the position profile generator 402 will receive a position step command 408 specifying a new target position for the motion system. Position step command 408 may be generated by the control program executing on the controller (e.g., control program 310 of FIG. 302), or may be a move instruction manually input by a user. In response to the position step command 408, position profile generator calculates a constraint-based, time-optimal motion profile 406 defining a trajectory for moving the load from its current position to the target position defined by the position step command 408. Tian, paragraph 38, Profile generator 306 calculates the motion profile 312 as a function of one or more motion constraints 304, which can represent mechanical constraints of the motion system or user preferences regarding operation of the motion device);
the first profile request is a speed request(Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator (e.g., the launch profile generator 10, the braking profile generator 20) can generate a speed profile, namely a set of speed values pertaining to a moment in time (e.g., a time index) and then the controller 2 of the host vehicle 3 issues acceleration pedal commands for acceleration to an acceleration pedal commander 12 or brake pedal commands to decelerate the host vehicle to a brake pedal commander 22 in order to have the host vehicle to follow the speeds as set in the speed profile.); and
the one or more profile constraints comprises an acceleration constraint(Constraints are disclosed in the specifications as limits that are not to be exceeded or must be reached (upper limit or lower limit) such as acceleration limit. Similarly, Lee discloses maximum allowable acceleration which corresponds to acceleration constraint. Tian further discloses upper and lower acceleration limit. Lee, paragraph 49, a minimum adjustment boundary and a maximum adjustment boundary can be determined by following factors: i) a road speed limit (if can be known or detected); and ii) a maximum allowable acceleration and a maximum allowable deceleration in order to avoid driver's discomfort—this limitation can also consider fuel efficiency. Tian, paragraph 42, These two types of profile generators are illustrated in FIGS. 4 and 5, respectively. As shown in FIG. 4, position profile generator 402 receives as inputs a set of constraints 404, which can represent mechanical constraints of the controlled system or user preferences regarding behavior of the motion system. These constraints can include upper limits on the velocity, acceleration, deceleration, and jerk) and a jerk request(Tian, paragraph 29, The jerk reference refers to a function calculated by the profile generator that defines the jerk control output as a function of time for a given point-to-point trajectory. Tian, paragraph).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), further comprising: generating a plurality of profile requests based on the resultant request or a modified version of the resultant request(As disclosed above Suzuki’s arbitration module produces resultant request and Lee discloses generating multiple target profile/requests such as speed, torque, and brake profile. Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator (e.g., the launch profile generator 10, the braking profile generator 20) can generate a speed profile, namely a set of speed values pertaining to a moment in time (e.g., a time index) and then the controller 2 of the host vehicle 3 issues acceleration pedal commands for acceleration to an acceleration pedal commander 12 or brake pedal commands to decelerate the host vehicle to a brake pedal commander 22 in order to have the host vehicle to follow the speeds as set in the speed profile), wherein the plurality of profile requests comprises the first profile request(The specification discloses that the desired motion profiles can be output as first profile requests. Lee, paragraph 48, Lee similarly discloses a desired speed profile to generate motion profiles. in order to generate a desired speed profile (i.e., the target speed profile), a nominal launch speed profile is first defined based on following factors: i) vehicle acceleration characteristics considering available engine torques, gear ratios, and acceleration capacity; and b) an acceptable level of acceleration and jerk); and based on the plurality of profile requests, controlling the one or more actuators of the vehicle(As described in the specification, the actuators can control the engine, motors, or the brake system, etc, Lee similarly controls speed and acceleration indicating actuator control. Lee, paragraph 14, controlling, by the controller, at least one of the speed or acceleration of the host vehicle based on at least one of the revised target torque profile or target speed profile. Lee, paragraph 83, The controller 2 controls the host vehicle based on the generated or selected speed or braking pressure profile (collectively, “braking profile”) at S212), wherein the plurality of profile requests comprise a speed request, an acceleration request (Lee, paragraph 8, a controller configured to: receive at least one of the generated target torque profile or target speed profile of the host vehicle from the launch profile generator, and control at least one of a speed or an acceleration of the host vehicle based on at least one of the generated target torque profile or target speed profile. Lee, paragraph 54, the controller 2 may output, based on the profiles from the launch profile generator 10, a virtual accelerator pedal position that mimics a human driver's accelerator pedal action when the host vehicles launches, or a throttle opening command in case of a gasoline engine based on the calculation of required torque for launch).
While the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches about arbitration and request and a profile generation module to modify a request, it fails to disclose a method wherein the plurality of profile requests comprise a jerk request.
However, Tian, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about motion profile generator discloses a method wherein the plurality of profile requests comprise a jerk request(According to the specification, the profile generation module outputs profile requests, similarly Tian outputs motion profile with similar references. Tian has motion profile that defines a horizon to follow based on velocity, acceleration, and/or jerk reference. Tian, paragraph 37, The motion profile 312 defines a trajectory for transitioning the motion device from a current position or velocity to a target position or velocity, where the trajectory is defined in terms of one or more of a position reference, a velocity reference, an acceleration reference, and/or a jerk reference).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Suzuki and Lee with Tian to incorporate jerk request for smoother vehicle motion. Calculating motion profiles that include a time-varying jerk reference can yield a smoother and more stable motion compared to traditional trapezoidal or S-curve profiles, while avoiding sudden transitions between acceleration/deceleration and constant velocity that can introduce undesirable mechanical turbulence in the system.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein: the vehicle motion control module is configured to output at least one hardware constraint(Lee discloses constrains to engine torque and gear ratio which correspond to hardware constraints. In addition, Tian discloses mechanical constraints which are similar to Hardware constraints. Lee, paragraph 48, in order to generate a desired speed profile (i.e., the target speed profile), a nominal launch speed profile is first defined based on following factors: i) vehicle acceleration characteristics considering available engine torques, gear ratios, and acceleration capacity; Tian, paragraph 42, As shown in FIG. 4, position profile generator 402 receives as inputs a set of constraints 404, which can represent mechanical constraints of the controlled system or user preferences regarding behavior of the motion system.); and the profile generation module is configured to output the first profile request based on the at least one hardware constraint(Lee, paragraph 48, in order to generate a desired speed profile (i.e., the target speed profile), a nominal launch speed profile is first defined based on following factors: i) vehicle acceleration characteristics considering available engine torques, gear ratios, and acceleration capacity Tian, paragraph 38, Profile generator 306 calculates the motion profile 312 as a function of one or more motion constraints 304, which can represent mechanical constraints of the motion system or user preferences regarding operation of the motion device.).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the plurality of feature requesting modules are configured to i) receive from the profile generation module, the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints(The specification discloses the feature requesting modules (requestors) can be different motion requesting systems (automatic driving, automatic parking, adaptive cruise control). Tian discloses its motion control system and profile generator can be used for different automation apparatuses that can receive the generated profile. Tian, paragraph 42 Many automation applications employ motion control systems to control position and speed motion devices. Such motion control systems typically include one or more motors or similar actuating devices operating under the guidance of a controller, which sends position and/or speed control instructions to the motor in accordance with a user-defined control algorithm or program. Tian, paragraph 36, Master controller 302 can be, for example, a programmable logic controller (PLC) or other such controller that monitors and controls a system (e.g., an industrial process, an automation system, a batch process, etc.) that includes one or more motion devices. Tian, paragraph 42, profile generator 402 receives as inputs a set of constraints 404, which can represent mechanical constraints of the controlled system or user preferences regarding behavior of the motion system. These constraints can include upper limits on the velocity, acceleration, deceleration, and jerk, as well as a sample time representing an update period of the controller's control signal (typically measured in milliseconds)), and ii) based on at least one of the first profile request and the one or more profile constraints, to generate the request and the one or more constraints generated by each of the plurality of feature requesting modules(Tian, paragraph 43, the position profile generator 402 will receive a position step command 408 specifying a new target position for the motion system. Position step command 408 may be generated by the control program executing on the controller (e.g., control program 310 of FIG. 302), or may be a move instruction manually input by a user. In response to the position step command 408, position profile generator calculates a constraint-based, time-optimal motion profile 406 defining a trajectory for moving the load from its current position to the target position defined by the position step command 408. Tian, paragraph 38, Profile generator 306 calculates the motion profile 312 as a function of one or more motion constraints 304, which can represent mechanical constraints of the motion system or user preferences regarding operation of the motion device).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein:
the profile generation module(Tian, paragraph 69, profile generator)
in response to a horizon t, which is equal to i times a roster rate, being less than t1(Tian calculates of acceleration, velocity, and jerk request at different durations (t1, t2, t3, t4, and t5). The calculated values are compared to a preset value. And based on the comparison, an adjustment is performed based on the constraints. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Tian to compare the horizon t with different segments (t1, t2, t3, t4, and t5) to adjust the speed, acceleration, and jerk request outputs with different constraints. Tian, paragraph 69, the profile generator can calculate a suitable ST-curve motion profile for a given point-to-point move. It is recognized, however, that the values initially calculated for t1, t2, t3, t4, and t5 may not be multiples of the controller's sample time, and consequently may not align with the sample points of the motion controller), update speed, acceleration and jerk request outputs received from the arbitration module based on a first set of constraints(Tian, paragraph 69, When a profile segment duration falls between two controller sample points, it may be necessary for the controller to compensate for small differences between the desired control signal output and the actual control signal output. To address this issue, one or more embodiments of the profile generator described herein can perform an additional computation. Tian, paragraph 94, At 1208, it is determined whether all profile segment durations calculated at step 1206 are multiples of the sample time of the controller. Tian, paragraph 83, Solving inequalities (40)-(43) yields appropriate values for V, A, D, J, and I (the maximum values for velocity, acceleration, deceleration, acceleration jerk, and deceleration jerk, respectively) for the S-curve profile),
in response to horizon t being less than t2, update the speed, acceleration and jerk request outputs based on a second set of constraints(Tian, paragraph 69, When a profile segment duration falls between two controller sample points, it may be necessary for the controller to compensate for small differences between the desired control signal output and the actual control signal output. To address this issue, one or more embodiments of the profile generator described herein can perform an additional computation. Tian, paragraph 70, after the profile generator has calculated t1, t2, t3, t4, and t5 according to the above derivations, each of these duration values can be upper-rounded to the nearest sample time to yield t1 new, t2 new, t3 new, t4 new, and t5 new. This rounding step can be based on the sample time provided to the profile generator as one of the constraints 404 or 504. The profile generator can then calculate new values for V, A, D, J, and I using the rounded duration values t1 new, t2 new, t3 new, t4 new, and t5 new. Tian, paragraph 94, At 1208, it is determined whether all profile segment durations calculated at step 1206 are multiples of the sample time of the controller. Tian, paragraph 83, Solving inequalities (40)-(43) yields appropriate values for V, A, D, J, and I (the maximum values for velocity, acceleration, deceleration, acceleration jerk, and deceleration jerk, respectively) for the S-curve profile),
in response to horizon t being less than t3, update the speed, acceleration and jerk request outputs based on a third set of constraints (Tian, paragraph 69, When a profile segment duration falls between two controller sample points, it may be necessary for the controller to compensate for small differences between the desired control signal output and the actual control signal output. To address this issue, one or more embodiments of the profile generator described herein can perform an additional computation. Tian, paragraph 70, after the profile generator has calculated t1, t2, t3, t4, and t5 according to the above derivations, each of these duration values can be upper-rounded to the nearest sample time to yield t1 new, t2 new, t3 new, t4 new, and t5 new. This rounding step can be based on the sample time provided to the profile generator as one of the constraints 404 or 504. The profile generator can then calculate new values for V, A, D, J, and I using the rounded duration values t1 new, t2 new, t3 new, t4 new, and t5 new. Tian, paragraph 94, At 1208, it is determined whether all profile segment durations calculated at step 1206 are multiples of the sample time of the controller. Tian, paragraph 83, Solving inequalities (40)-(43) yields appropriate values for V, A, D, J, and I (the maximum values for velocity, acceleration, deceleration, acceleration jerk, and deceleration jerk, respectively) for the S-curve profile), and
in response to horizon t being greater than or equal to t3, update the speed, acceleration and jerk request outputs based on a fourth set of constraints(Tian, paragraph 69, When a profile segment duration falls between two controller sample points, it may be necessary for the controller to compensate for small differences between the desired control signal output and the actual control signal output. To address this issue, one or more embodiments of the profile generator described herein can perform an additional computation. Tian, paragraph 70, after the profile generator has calculated t1, t2, t3, t4, and t5 according to the above derivations, each of these duration values can be upper-rounded to the nearest sample time to yield t1 new, t2 new, t3 new, t4 new, and t5 new. This rounding step can be based on the sample time provided to the profile generator as one of the constraints 404 or 504. The profile generator can then calculate new values for V, A, D, J, and I using the rounded duration values t1 new, t2 new, t3 new, t4 new, and t5 new. Tian, paragraph 94, At 1208, it is determined whether all profile segment durations calculated at step 1206 are multiples of the sample time of the controller. Tian, paragraph 83, Solving inequalities (40)-(43) yields appropriate values for V, A, D, J, and I (the maximum values for velocity, acceleration, deceleration, acceleration jerk, and deceleration jerk, respectively) for the S-curve profile) and
the first set of constraints, second set of constraints, third set of constraints, and fourth set of constraints are different sets of constraints(Tian discloses the limit/constrains can be asymmetrical indicating they can be different constraints for each adjustment. Tian, paragraph 38, Profile generator 306 calculates the motion profile 312 as a function of one or more motion constraints 304, which can represent mechanical constraints of the motion system or user preferences regarding operation of the motion device. Tian, paragraph 42, Position profile generator 402 allows the acceleration and deceleration limits to be configured individually to accommodate profiles having asymmetrical acceleration and deceleration).
Claims 4,8,15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Suzuki (JP 2020032894 A) (hereinafter Suzuki) in view of Lee (US 20210171030 A1) (hereinafter Lee) in further view of Otanez (US 20220194377 A1) (hereinafter Otanez).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator),
While the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches about arbitrating a request and generating a profile request, it fails to disclose as system wherein the arbitration module is configured, based on an acceleration response map, to arbitrate the request ) and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints.
However, Otanez, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about calculation of desired future longitudinal horizons related to torque or acceleration, discloses a system and method wherein the arbitration module is configured, based on an acceleration response map, to arbitrate the request(Otanez, paragraph 40, The driver torque request may be shaped using the transient response map 314, which may be a vehicle-calibrated transient acceleration map. The transient response map 314 may include a memory-stored, controller-accessible transient acceleration response map file. The transient response map 314 may be a lookup table that defines the powertrain torque in transient regions between adjacent powertrain torque output values in the acceleration map file.) and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Otanez discusses determination of vehicle constraints in a vehicle motion control in different driving mode. Otanez , paragraph 98, The concepts described herein include providing for determination and use of the desired future longitudinal torque horizon, desired future yaw rate horizon, desired future lateral speed horizon, and vehicle constraints in a vehicle motion controller to deliver vehicle behavior consistent with and expected driver mode response, managing competing objectives in longitudinal acceleration and lateral acceleration).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Suzuki and Lee with Otanez’s shaping of request based on transient map that includes transient acceleration map. By using mapped out acceleration response, it is possible to ensure consistent vehicle response across similar request types. Furthermore, mapped out acceleration response helps in efficient way of arbitrating a request, as response map may contain data that maps a succession of vehicle acceleration values with a corresponding succession of commanded or desired outputs.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the motion system of claim 1(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the profile generation module is configured to output the first profile request based on an acceleration response map(According to the specification, first profile request can be the desired motion profile(trajectory).The profile generation module is configured to construct motion horizons (i.e., velocity reference profiles of the motions to follow). Otanez uses acceleration response map to determine longitudinal acceleration horizon(motion to follow). Otanez, paragraph 97, determination of the desired future longitudinal acceleration horizon using a pedal acceleration response map as well as a transient response map).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator),
While the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches about arbitrating a request and generating a profile request based on the result request, it fails to disclose a method further comprising, based on an acceleration response map, arbitrating the request and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints.
However, Otanez, which is in the same analogous art and that teaches about calculation of desired future longitudinal horizons related to torque or acceleration, discloses a system and method further comprising, based on an acceleration response map, arbitrating the request(Otanez , paragraph 40, The driver torque request may be shaped using the transient response map 314, which may be a vehicle-calibrated transient acceleration map. The transient response map 314 may include a memory-stored, controller-accessible transient acceleration response map file. The transient response map 314 may be a lookup table that defines the powertrain torque in transient regions between adjacent powertrain torque output values in the acceleration map file.) and the one or more constraints received from each of the plurality of feature requesting modules to generate the resultant request and the one or more resultant constraints(Otanez discusses determination of vehicle constraints in a vehicle motion control in different driving mode. Otanez , paragraph 98, The concepts described herein include providing for determination and use of the desired future longitudinal torque horizon, desired future yaw rate horizon, desired future lateral speed horizon, and vehicle constraints in a vehicle motion controller to deliver vehicle behavior consistent with and expected driver mode response, managing competing objectives in longitudinal acceleration and lateral acceleration).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Suzuki and Lee with Otanez’s shaping of request based on transient map that includes transient acceleration map. By using mapped out acceleration response, it is possible to ensure consistent vehicle response across similar request types. Furthermore, mapped out acceleration response helps in efficient way of arbitrating a request, as response map may contain data that maps a succession of vehicle acceleration values with a corresponding succession of commanded or desired outputs.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Suzuki and Lee teaches the method of claim 12(Suzuki, page 19, line 11, the request arbitration unit; Lee, paragraph 53, the profile generator), wherein the profile generation module is configured to output the first profile request based on an acceleration response map(According to the specification, first profile request can be the desired motion profile(trajectory).The profile generation module is configured to construct motion horizons (i.e., velocity reference profiles of the motions to follow). Otanez uses acceleration response map to determine longitudinal acceleration horizon(motion to follow). Otanez, paragraph 97, determination of the desired future longitudinal acceleration horizon using a pedal acceleration response map as well as a transient response map).
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s
disclosure.
Kanda(EP 4275980 A1) teaches processing of selecting (arbitrating) requested acceleration that satisfies a predetermined selection criterion (for example, the minimum value) from the plurality of requested accelerations is performed.
Yamada(JP 2022171664 A) discloses a request arbitration unit that receives request signals output from the plurality of application request units to arbitrates the received request.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA whose telephone number is (571)272-6850. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached at 5712727298. 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.
/BESUFEKAD LEMMA TESSEMA/Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/HUNTER B LONSBERRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665