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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/13/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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, 3-10, and 12-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed toward an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding Step 1:
Claims 1 and 3-9 are directed towards a method and claims 10 and 12-19 are directed towards a product. Therefore, all claims fall into statutory categories.
Regarding Step 2A Prong 1:
Claims 1, 10, and 19 recite:
receiving an indication of a test environment;
accessing a configuration catalog to obtain configuration information for the test environment;
configuring a test node based on the configuration information; wherein the configuration information includes at least one of a hardware configuration, software configuration, and signal configuration; wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle.
obtaining test signals for the test environment; and
performing testing on the configured test node using the test signals;
Steps (a), (b), and (e) are mental processes that can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using pen and paper.
Regarding Step 2A Prong 2:
Claims 1, 10, and 19 recite additional elements, i.e. steps (c) and (d), a computing device, a processor, a communication subsystem, computer readable medium, hardware configuration, software configuration, signal configuration, vehicle data, synthetic sensors, and test signals. However, step (c) is merely instructions to apply the judicial exception and step (d) is nothing more than an insignificant extra-solution activity. Furthermore, a computing device, a processor, a communication subsystem, computer readable medium, hardware configuration, software configuration, signal configuration, vehicle data, synthetic sensors, and test signals are recited at a high level of generality. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not integrate the exception into a practical application.
Regarding Step 2B
The additional elements, considering them both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Regarding claims 3 and 12, the additional element “vehicle configuration” is recited at a high level of generality.
Regarding claims 4 and 13, the limitation “selecting” is a function that can be reasonably performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, the limitation “selecting” is a function that can be reasonably performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper.
Regarding claims 6 and 15, the additional element “selection of a vehicle make and model” is a function that can be reasonably performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper. Furthermore, the additional element “development node” is recited at a high level of generality.
Regarding claims 7 and 16, the additional element “real world signals” is recited at a high level of generality.
Regarding claims 8 and 17, the additional elements “installing a synthetic sensor”, “applying the test signals”, and “providing logs and metrics”, are nothing more than insignificant extra-solution activities.
Regarding claims 9 and 18, the claims recite: the additional elements “emulator” and “hardware” are recited at a high level of generality. Furthermore, the additional element “setting a signal configuration” is nothing more than an insignificant extra-solution activity.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 10, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (US20200167436, Xiao hereinafter), in view of Francis et al. (US20210302941, Francis hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Xiao discloses: A method at a computing device comprising:
receiving an indication of a test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0031], “When the user launches the client environment, the client device will connect to one of the initialization servers 121. The initialization server 121 is configured to direct users to the right environment. For example, the users will need to select which test environment with structure models they want to test their virtual vehicle on. It will create the new test environment and place them on the servers or create new servers in cloud environments.”);
accessing a configuration catalog to obtain configuration information for the test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0039], “The database 104 for the system stores user data 130, vehicle physics model data 131, structure model data 132, various map data 133 and other metadata, according to the desired implementation. The 3D map data is rendered by the simulation server based on user selection”), (see Xiao, paragraph [0048], “At 604, the experiment server 123 manages the simulation session by transmitting the simulation session to the DB server 125 to be stored in the DB 104 and made available for subsequent users to simulate another vehicle through simulating their model data.”);
configuring a test node based on the configuration information (see Xiao, paragraph [0031], “When the user launches the client environment, the client device will connect to one of the initialization servers 121. The initialization server 121 is configured to direct users to the right environment. For example, the users will need to select which test environment with structure models they want to test their virtual vehicle on. It will create the new test environment and place them on the servers or create new servers in cloud environments.”);
obtaining test signals for the test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0047], “At 603, the experiment server 123 provides virtual sensor data output for the simulation session. The virtual sensor data can be any type of desired sensor data (e.g., brake response, proximity to objects, speed, etc.) that the user desires to have fed back to the front end GUI 110.”); and
performing testing on the configured test node using the test signals (see Xiao, paragraph [0046], “At 602, the communication server 120 instructs the experiment server 123 to execute a simulation session to simulate the vehicle on the 3D environment based on the model data. In an example implementation, the experiment server 123 will model the physics of the vehicle based on the vehicle model information such as vehicle physics model 131, along with map information 133 to determine the interactions between the vehicle and objects in the map…”), (see Xiao, paragraph [0047], “At 603, the experiment server 123 provides virtual sensor data output for the simulation session. The virtual sensor data can be any type of desired sensor data (e.g., brake response, proximity to objects, speed, etc.) that the user desires to have fed back to the front end GUI 110.”);
wherein the configuration information includes at least one of
a hardware configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0040], “The vehicle physics model data 131 contains information to model the vehicle physics, such as acceleration information, turning radius, vehicle features and others in accordance with the desired implementation…”),
software configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “…At 502, an interface is provided to configure the vehicle model, to facilitate the selection of the preconfigured vehicle type and input customized sensor data or upload a complete new vehicle mode based on own needs…”), and
signal configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “…At 503, a virtual test run configuration is provided in an interface. The interface can facilitate configurations as to the desired output (e.g., camera images, radar or lidar data, vehicle dynamic data), that can then be downloaded after the virtual test run…”).
Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle.
However, Francis discloses:
wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle (see Francis, paragraph [0036], “…The developer of the synthetic sensor (e.g. OEM manufacturer, OEM parts manufacturer, or third-party) may select sensor data to use as inputs for the synthetic sensor from a list of sensor data types available from existing sensors… The developer may further determine mappings between the inputs, the logic elements (e.g. the rules and/or the models), to an output of the new synthetic sensor. In some embodiments, the mappings may be represented as JSON objects or XML code, wherein a synthetic sensor orchestration environment in a vehicle to which a package for the new synthetic sensor is deployed parses the JSON objects or XML code to determine relationships between inputs, logic elements (e.g. rules and/or models), and outputs…”), (see Francis, paragraph [0103], “At 1212, the synthetic sensor orchestration environment performs one or more configuration operations in accordance with the determined communication mappings to enable respective ones of the given synthetic sensors to have access input data from one or more existing physical sensors available in the particular operating system or operating system domain or to have access to input data from another synthetic sensor implemented in the synthetic sensor orchestration environment… The synthetic sensor orchestration environment also performs one or more configuration operations to enable output data from the respective ones of the given synthetic sensors to flow to output destinations in the vehicle domains…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include a signal configuration indicating data to synthetic sensors as taught by Francis for the result of establishing which vehicle data the synthetic sensors are able to read, and obtaining relevant test data.
Regarding claim 3, Xiao discloses:
wherein the test environment is a vehicle configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “At 502, an interface is provided to configure the vehicle model, to facilitate the selection of the preconfigured vehicle type and input customized sensor data or upload a complete new vehicle model based on own needs.”).
Regarding claim 10, Xiao discloses: A computing device comprising:
a processor (see Xiao, paragraph [0024]); and
a communications subsystem (see Xiao, paragraph [0024, 0030]), wherein the computing device is configured to:
receive an indication of a test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0031], “When the user launches the client environment, the client device will connect to one of the initialization servers 121. The initialization server 121 is configured to direct users to the right environment. For example, the users will need to select which test environment with structure models they want to test their virtual vehicle on. It will create the new test environment and place them on the servers or create new servers in cloud environments.”);
access a configuration catalog to obtain configuration information for the test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0039], “The database 104 for the system stores user data 130, vehicle physics model data 131, structure model data 132, various map data 133 and other metadata, according to the desired implementation. The 3D map data is rendered by the simulation server based on user selection”), (see Xiao, paragraph [0048], “At 604, the experiment server 123 manages the simulation session by transmitting the simulation session to the DB server 125 to be stored in the DB 104 and made available for subsequent users to simulate another vehicle through simulating their model data.”);
configure a test node based on the configuration information (see Xiao, paragraph [0031], “When the user launches the client environment, the client device will connect to one of the initialization servers 121. The initialization server 121 is configured to direct users to the right environment. For example, the users will need to select which test environment with structure models they want to test their virtual vehicle on. It will create the new test environment and place them on the servers or create new servers in cloud environments.”);
obtain test signals for the test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0047], “At 603, the experiment server 123 provides virtual sensor data output for the simulation session. The virtual sensor data can be any type of desired sensor data (e.g., brake response, proximity to objects, speed, etc.) that the user desires to have fed back to the front end GUI 110.”); and
perform testing on the configured test node using the test signals (see Xiao, paragraph [0046], “At 602, the communication server 120 instructs the experiment server 123 to execute a simulation session to simulate the vehicle on the 3D environment based on the model data. In an example implementation, the experiment server 123 will model the physics of the vehicle based on the vehicle model information such as vehicle physics model 131, along with map information 133 to determine the interactions between the vehicle and objects in the map…”), (see Xiao, paragraph [0047], “At 603, the experiment server 123 provides virtual sensor data output for the simulation session. The virtual sensor data can be any type of desired sensor data (e.g., brake response, proximity to objects, speed, etc.) that the user desires to have fed back to the front end GUI 110.”);
wherein the configuration information includes at least one of
a hardware configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0040], “The vehicle physics model data 131 contains information to model the vehicle physics, such as acceleration information, turning radius, vehicle features and others in accordance with the desired implementation…”),
software configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “…At 502, an interface is provided to configure the vehicle model, to facilitate the selection of the preconfigured vehicle type and input customized sensor data or upload a complete new vehicle mode based on own needs…”), and
signal configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “…At 503, a virtual test run configuration is provided in an interface. The interface can facilitate configurations as to the desired output (e.g., camera images, radar or lidar data, vehicle dynamic data), that can then be downloaded after the virtual test run…”).
Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle.
However, Francis discloses:
wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle (see Francis, paragraph [0036], “…The developer of the synthetic sensor (e.g. OEM manufacturer, OEM parts manufacturer, or third-party) may select sensor data to use as inputs for the synthetic sensor from a list of sensor data types available from existing sensors… The developer may further determine mappings between the inputs, the logic elements (e.g. the rules and/or the models), to an output of the new synthetic sensor. In some embodiments, the mappings may be represented as JSON objects or XML code, wherein a synthetic sensor orchestration environment in a vehicle to which a package for the new synthetic sensor is deployed parses the JSON objects or XML code to determine relationships between inputs, logic elements (e.g. rules and/or models), and outputs…”), (see Francis, paragraph [0103], “At 1212, the synthetic sensor orchestration environment performs one or more configuration operations in accordance with the determined communication mappings to enable respective ones of the given synthetic sensors to have access input data from one or more existing physical sensors available in the particular operating system or operating system domain or to have access to input data from another synthetic sensor implemented in the synthetic sensor orchestration environment… The synthetic sensor orchestration environment also performs one or more configuration operations to enable output data from the respective ones of the given synthetic sensors to flow to output destinations in the vehicle domains…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include a signal configuration indicating data to synthetic sensors as taught by Francis for the result of establishing which vehicle data the synthetic sensors are able to read, and obtaining relevant test data.
Regarding claim 12, Xiao discloses:
wherein the test environment is a vehicle configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “At 502, an interface is provided to configure the vehicle model, to facilitate the selection of the preconfigured vehicle type and input customized sensor data or upload a complete new vehicle model based on own needs.”);
Regarding claim 19, Xiao discloses: A non-transitory computer readable medium storing instruction code (see Xiao, paragraph [0011]), which, when executed by a processor of a computing device cause the computing device to:
receive an indication of a test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0031], “When the user launches the client environment, the client device will connect to one of the initialization servers 121. The initialization server 121 is configured to direct users to the right environment. For example, the users will need to select which test environment with structure models they want to test their virtual vehicle on. It will create the new test environment and place them on the servers or create new servers in cloud environments.”);
access a configuration catalog to obtain configuration information for the test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0039], “The database 104 for the system stores user data 130, vehicle physics model data 131, structure model data 132, various map data 133 and other metadata, according to the desired implementation. The 3D map data is rendered by the simulation server based on user selection”), (see Xiao, paragraph [0048], “At 604, the experiment server 123 manages the simulation session by transmitting the simulation session to the DB server 125 to be stored in the DB 104 and made available for subsequent users to simulate another vehicle through simulating their model data.”);
configure a test node based on the configuration information (see Xiao, paragraph [0031], “When the user launches the client environment, the client device will connect to one of the initialization servers 121. The initialization server 121 is configured to direct users to the right environment. For example, the users will need to select which test environment with structure models they want to test their virtual vehicle on. It will create the new test environment and place them on the servers or create new servers in cloud environments.”);
obtain test signals for the test environment (see Xiao, paragraph [0047], “At 603, the experiment server 123 provides virtual sensor data output for the simulation session. The virtual sensor data can be any type of desired sensor data (e.g., brake response, proximity to objects, speed, etc.) that the user desires to have fed back to the front end GUI 110.”); and
perform testing on the configured test node using the test signals (see Xiao, paragraph [0046], “At 602, the communication server 120 instructs the experiment server 123 to execute a simulation session to simulate the vehicle on the 3D environment based on the model data. In an example implementation, the experiment server 123 will model the physics of the vehicle based on the vehicle model information such as vehicle physics model 131, along with map information 133 to determine the interactions between the vehicle and objects in the map…”), (see Xiao, paragraph [0047], “At 603, the experiment server 123 provides virtual sensor data output for the simulation session. The virtual sensor data can be any type of desired sensor data (e.g., brake response, proximity to objects, speed, etc.) that the user desires to have fed back to the front end GUI 110.”);
wherein the configuration information includes at least one of
a hardware configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0040], “The vehicle physics model data 131 contains information to model the vehicle physics, such as acceleration information, turning radius, vehicle features and others in accordance with the desired implementation…”),
software configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “…At 502, an interface is provided to configure the vehicle model, to facilitate the selection of the preconfigured vehicle type and input customized sensor data or upload a complete new vehicle mode based on own needs…”), and
signal configuration (see Xiao, paragraph [0041], “…At 503, a virtual test run configuration is provided in an interface. The interface can facilitate configurations as to the desired output (e.g., camera images, radar or lidar data, vehicle dynamic data), that can then be downloaded after the virtual test run…”).
Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle.
However, Francis discloses:
wherein the signal configuration indicates vehicle data available to synthetic sensors of a vehicle (see Francis, paragraph [0036], “…The developer of the synthetic sensor (e.g. OEM manufacturer, OEM parts manufacturer, or third-party) may select sensor data to use as inputs for the synthetic sensor from a list of sensor data types available from existing sensors… The developer may further determine mappings between the inputs, the logic elements (e.g. the rules and/or the models), to an output of the new synthetic sensor. In some embodiments, the mappings may be represented as JSON objects or XML code, wherein a synthetic sensor orchestration environment in a vehicle to which a package for the new synthetic sensor is deployed parses the JSON objects or XML code to determine relationships between inputs, logic elements (e.g. rules and/or models), and outputs…”), (see Francis, paragraph [0103], “At 1212, the synthetic sensor orchestration environment performs one or more configuration operations in accordance with the determined communication mappings to enable respective ones of the given synthetic sensors to have access input data from one or more existing physical sensors available in the particular operating system or operating system domain or to have access to input data from another synthetic sensor implemented in the synthetic sensor orchestration environment… The synthetic sensor orchestration environment also performs one or more configuration operations to enable output data from the respective ones of the given synthetic sensors to flow to output destinations in the vehicle domains…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include a signal configuration indicating data to synthetic sensors as taught by Francis for the result of establishing which vehicle data the synthetic sensors are able to read, and obtaining relevant test data.
Claims 4, 6, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao and Francis as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Konrardy et al. (US20210116256, Konrardy hereinafter).
Regarding claim 4, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the configuring the test node comprises selecting an operating system on the test node to match an operating system for the test environment.
However, Konrardy discloses:
wherein the configuring the test node comprises selecting an operating system on the test node to match an operating system for the test environment (see Konrardy, paragraph [0252], “In some embodiments the selection of test conditions may include selection of a make and/or model of an autonomous vehicle, an on-board computer, a smart home controller, or an autonomous environment operating system…”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the selection of an operating system taught by Konrardy for the result of more accurately emulating a vehicle.
Regarding claim 6, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the receiving the indication is based on a selection of a vehicle make and model at a development node.
However, Konrardy discloses:
wherein the receiving the indication is based on a selection of a vehicle make and model at a development node (see Konrardy, paragraph [0252], “In some embodiments the selection of test conditions may include selection of a make and/or model of an autonomous vehicle, an on-board computer, a smart home controller, or an autonomous environment operating system…”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the selection of a vehicle’s make and model taught by Konrardy for the result of obtaining more accurate and/or relevant test data.
Regarding claim 13, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the computing device is configured to configure the test node by selecting an operating system on the test node to match an operating system for the test environment.
However, Konrardy discloses:
wherein the computing device is configured to configure the test node by selecting an operating system on the test node to match an operating system for the test environment (see Konrardy, paragraph [0252], “In some embodiments the selection of test conditions may include selection of a make and/or model of an autonomous vehicle, an on-board computer, a smart home controller, or an autonomous environment operating system…”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the selection of an operating system taught by Konrardy for the result of more accurately emulating a vehicle.
Regarding claim 15, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the computing device is configured to receive the indication based on a selection of a vehicle make and model at a development node.
However, Konrardy discloses:
wherein the computing device is configured to receive the indication based on a selection of a vehicle make and model at a development node (see Konrardy, paragraph [0252], “In some embodiments the selection of test conditions may include selection of a make and/or model of an autonomous vehicle, an on-board computer, a smart home controller, or an autonomous environment operating system…”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the selection of a vehicle’s make and model taught by Konrardy for the result of obtaining more accurate and/or relevant test data.
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao and Francis as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Zhao et al. (US20220136930, Zhao hereinafter).
Regarding claim 5, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the configuring the test node comprises selecting hardware on the test node to match hardware for the test environment.
However, Zhao discloses:
wherein the configuring the test node comprises selecting hardware on the test node to match hardware for the test environment (see Zhao, paragraph [0017], “The hardware-in-the-loop sub-system is configured to construct a specific test environment for hardware of the intelligent vehicle, and send data of a test scenario to the hardware of the intelligent vehicle via the specific test environment to test response of the intelligent vehicle in the test scenario”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the selection of hardware taught by Zhao for the result of more accurately emulating a vehicle.
Regarding claim 14, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the computing device is configured to configure the test node by selecting hardware on the test node to match hardware for the test environment.
However, Zhao discloses:
wherein the computing device is configured to configure the test node by selecting hardware on the test node to match hardware for the test environment (see Zhao, paragraph [0017], “The hardware-in-the-loop sub-system is configured to construct a specific test environment for hardware of the intelligent vehicle, and send data of a test scenario to the hardware of the intelligent vehicle via the specific test environment to test response of the intelligent vehicle in the test scenario”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the selection of hardware taught by Zhao for the result of more accurately emulating a vehicle.
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao and Francis as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Hong et al. (US20200339109, Hong hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 7, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the test signals are real world signals for a vehicle performing tasks.
However, Hong discloses:
wherein the test signals are real world signals for a vehicle performing tasks (see Hong, paragraph [0006], “Embodiments of the present disclosure relate to simulating realistic test data from transformed real-world sensor data for autonomous machine applications. Systems and methods are disclosed that leverage real-world sensor data captured from sensors on a vehicle to generate transformed or updated test data corresponding to desired vehicle states in order to test a function of the vehicle—such as a function of an automatic emergency braking (AEB) system, a collision mitigation warning (CMW) system, an automatic lane departure warning (ALDW or LDW) system, an automatic lane change (ALC) system, and/or an adaptive cruise control (ACC) system.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include real world signals taught by Hong for the result of obtaining more realistic test data.
Regarding Claim 16, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the test signals are real world signals for a vehicle performing tasks.
However, Hong discloses:
wherein the test signals are real world signals for a vehicle performing tasks (see Hong, paragraph [0006], “Embodiments of the present disclosure relate to simulating realistic test data from transformed real-world sensor data for autonomous machine applications. Systems and methods are disclosed that leverage real-world sensor data captured from sensors on a vehicle to generate transformed or updated test data corresponding to desired vehicle states in order to test a function of the vehicle—such as a function of an automatic emergency braking (AEB) system, a collision mitigation warning (CMW) system, an automatic lane departure warning (ALDW or LDW) system, an automatic lane change (ALC) system, and/or an adaptive cruise control (ACC) system.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include real world signals taught by Hong for the result of obtaining more realistic test data.
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao and Francis as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of McCool et al. (US6466888, McCool hereinafter) and Gabrovski et al. (US11126763, Gabrovski hereinafter).
Regarding claim 8, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
installing a synthetic sensor at the test node, the synthetic sensor providing insights on an operation of the test node;
applying the test signals; and
providing logs and metrics to a developer node.
However, McCool discloses:
installing a synthetic sensor at the test node, the synthetic sensor providing insights on the operation of the test node, and applying the test signals (see McCool, column [2] line [40], “FIG. 3 symbolically depicts installation of the virtual sensor 14 (hereinbefore referred to) onboard aircraft 10. Such virtual sensor 14 includes: means 16 for: (a) determining the input parameters during flight; (b) generating successive signals representing such input parameters and at least one equation representing a nonlinear input-output relationship between the input parameters and a desired output in terms of airspeed, sideslip angle and angle of attack”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the installation of a synthetic sensor and application of test signals taught by McCool for the result of recording data and using data.
Xiao as modified does not appear to distinctly disclose:
providing logs and metrics to a developer node.
However, Gabrovski discloses:
providing logs and metrics to a developer node (see Gabrovski, column [11] line [59], “The results of each version of a simulation may correspond to the event data of log data, and may therefore include information such as collisions or near collisions with other objects, planned trajectories describing a planned geometry and/or speed for a potential path of the simulated vehicle, locations of the simulated vehicle at different times, orientations/headings of the simulated vehicle at different times, speeds, accelerations and decelerations of the simulated vehicle at different times in the simulation, classifications of and responses to perceived objects, behavior predictions of perceived objects, status of various simulated systems (such as acceleration, deceleration, perception, steering, signaling, routing, power, etc.) of the simulated vehicle at different times including logged errors, inputs to and outputs of the various systems of the simulated vehicle at different times in the simulation, etc.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include logs and metrics taught by Gabrovski for the result of being able to analyze and draw conclusions from data.
Regarding claim 17, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
installing a synthetic sensor at the test node, the synthetic sensor providing insights on an operation of the test node; applying the test signals; and providing logs and metrics to a developer node.
However, McCool discloses:
installing a synthetic sensor at the test node, the synthetic sensor providing insights on the operation of the test node, and applying the test signals (see McCool, column [2] line [40], “FIG. 3 symbolically depicts installation of the virtual sensor 14 (hereinbefore referred to) onboard aircraft 10. Such virtual sensor 14 includes: means 16 for: (a) determining the input parameters during flight; (b) generating successive signals representing such input parameters and at least one equation representing a nonlinear input-output relationship between the input parameters and a desired output in terms of airspeed, sideslip angle and angle of attack”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include the installation of a synthetic sensor and application of test signals taught by McCool for the result of recording data and using data.
Xiao as modified does not appear to distinctly disclose:
providing logs and metrics to a developer node.
However, Gabrovski discloses:
providing logs and metrics to a developer node (see Gabrovski, column [11] line [59], “The results of each version of a simulation may correspond to the event data of log data, and may therefore include information such as collisions or near collisions with other objects, planned trajectories describing a planned geometry and/or speed for a potential path of the simulated vehicle, locations of the simulated vehicle at different times, orientations/headings of the simulated vehicle at different times, speeds, accelerations and decelerations of the simulated vehicle at different times in the simulation, classifications of and responses to perceived objects, behavior predictions of perceived objects, status of various simulated systems (such as acceleration, deceleration, perception, steering, signaling, routing, power, etc.) of the simulated vehicle at different times including logged errors, inputs to and outputs of the various systems of the simulated vehicle at different times in the simulation, etc.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include logs and metrics taught by Gabrovski for the result of being able to analyze and draw conclusions from data.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao and Francis as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Holzinger et al. (US20210406562, Holzinger hereinafter) and Wang et al. (US11768975, Wang hereinafter).
Regarding claim 9, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the test node is an emulator interacting with hardware, and wherein the configuring comprises setting a signal configuration for interacting with the hardware.
However, Holzinger discloses:
wherein the test node is an emulator interacting with hardware (see Holzinger, paragraph [0006], “According to an aspect of the inventive concepts, a hardware-in-loop (HiL) test system for testing sensor fusion of an advance driver assistance system (ADAS) is provided. The ADAS includes a plurality of sensors and an electronic control unit (ECU) processing outputs of the sensors. The HiL test system includes a three-dimensional (3D) scenario simulator for generating drive scenarios including objects in a surrounding environment of a simulated vehicle, and a sensor target emulator for generating emulated sensors inputs to the plurality of sensors corresponding to the drive scenarios generated by the 3D scenario simulator.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include an emulator taught by Holzinger for the result of more accurately testing a virtual vehicle.
Xiao as modified does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the configuring comprises setting a signal configuration for interacting with the hardware.
However, Wang discloses:
wherein the configuring comprises setting a signal configuration for interacting with the hardware (see Wang, column [7] line [9], “As shown in FIG. 2, in step S8, the input signal configuration of the user-defined vehicle controller is checked before each overall vehicle simulation covering all components. B1. Current input signals of the user-defined vehicle controller are summarized. B3. Based on step B1, it is determined whether current input signal configuration of the user-defined vehicle controller is consistent with previous configuration.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include a signal configuration taught by Wang for the result of more accurately testing a virtual vehicle.
Regarding claim 18, Xiao does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the test node is an emulator interacting with hardware, and wherein the computing device is configured to configure by setting a signal configuration for interacting with the hardware.
However, Holzinger discloses:
wherein the test node is an emulator interacting with hardware (see Holzinger, paragraph [0006], “According to an aspect of the inventive concepts, a hardware-in-loop (HiL) test system for testing sensor fusion of an advance driver assistance system (ADAS) is provided. The ADAS includes a plurality of sensors and an electronic control unit (ECU) processing outputs of the sensors. The HiL test system includes a three-dimensional (3D) scenario simulator for generating drive scenarios including objects in a surrounding environment of a simulated vehicle, and a sensor target emulator for generating emulated sensors inputs to the plurality of sensors corresponding to the drive scenarios generated by the 3D scenario simulator.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include an emulator taught by Holzinger for the result of more accurately testing a virtual vehicle.
Xiao as modified does not appear to distinctly disclose:
wherein the computing device is configured to configure by setting a signal configuration for interacting with the hardware.
However, Wang discloses:
wherein the computing device is configured to configure by setting a signal configuration for interacting with the hardware (see Wang, column [7] line [9], “As shown in FIG. 2, in step S8, the input signal configuration of the user-defined vehicle controller is checked before each overall vehicle simulation covering all components. B1. Current input signals of the user-defined vehicle controller are summarized. B3. Based on step B1, it is determined whether current input signal configuration of the user-defined vehicle controller is consistent with previous configuration.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a system for virtually testing vehicles as taught by Xiao to include a signal configuration taught by Wang for the result of more accurately testing a virtual vehicle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s argument: The claims recite significantly more.
Examiner’s response:
The applicant’s argument is considered but is not persuasive. The limitation “configuring a test node based on the configuration information” is merely instructions to apply the judicial exception. The limitation “performing testing on the configured test node” is a mental process that can be reasonably performed in the human mind or by a human using pen and paper and the additional element “test signals” is recited at a high level of generality. The additional elements “hardware configuration”, “software configuration”, and “signal configuration” are also recited at a high level of generality. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not integrate into a practical application or recite significantly more.
Applicant’s argument: The newly amended claims overcome the 102 rejection.
Examiner’s response:
The applicant’s argument is considered and is persuasive. However, the applicant’s argument is moot as additional art is used to reject the newly amended claims and the newly amended claims are responded to in the above rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Joshua Tran whose telephone number is (571)272-5460.
The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
supervisor, Hyung Sough can be reached on (571)272-6799. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSHUA TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2192
/S. Sough/SPE, Art Unit 2192
Prosecution Insights