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 .
Status of the Claims
The claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined. Applicant amended claims 1, 8, 10, 12, and 20.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
The amendment filed January 2, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the Application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Rejection mailed October 2, 2025.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arikan (US 20130328861 A1) in view of PU (CN 113032876 B), Khan (US 20230066167 A1), and WAN (US 20220284615 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Arikan teaches A method for generating an intersection area, performed by a computer device, comprising: obtaining road information of a target intersection node, the road information being configured for indicating at least two roads related to the target intersection node (See at least paragraph [0236], “In addition, some embodiments recognize junctions at which a driver would likely have to stop at a stop sign or light. The mapping service of some embodiments receives this data from map providers (e.g., as information stored in the junction data). Thus, a particular junction might indicate a 4-way stop, a 2-way stop (picking out particular road segments as having the stop signs), a traffic light, etc. In some embodiments, the mapping service processing derives this information based on the road types at the junction. For instance, when a connector road intersects a major arterial road, some embodiments assume that the connector road has a stop sign with the major arterial road having the clear right of way. When two major arterial roads intersect, the mapping service processing assumes that the intersection will be controlled by a stoplight, and adds stop line markings to all of the road segments at the junction” and paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well.”); determining road surface width information of roads based on the road information (See at least paragraph [0235], “In addition to medians, some embodiments generate geometries for various types of road paint (e.g., lane dividers, stop lines, etc.). In some embodiments, this includes the lane markings shown in the rendered results described above. To generate the lane markings for a road segment, some embodiments use the lane count information stored in the road segment data structure (which may be derived from either the width data or the road type data). In addition, special lanes such as carpool lanes may be indicated in the road segment data and can have geometry generated.”); generating the intersection area of the target intersection node in an electronic map based on the road surface width information of the road and the offset distance of the road (See at least paragraph [0235], “In addition to medians, some embodiments generate geometries for various types of road paint (e.g., lane dividers, stop lines, etc.). In some embodiments, this includes the lane markings shown in the rendered results described above. To generate the lane markings for a road segment, some embodiments use the lane count information stored in the road segment data structure (which may be derived from either the width data or the road type data). In addition, special lanes such as carpool lanes may be indicated in the road segment data and can have geometry generated”, paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well”, and paragraph [0273], “The mapping service 4900 is a service to which the device 4905 connects (e.g., via a wired connection, wireless connection such as a cell network, Wi-Fi, etc.) in order to request and receive map data, route data, turn-by-turn navigation data, as well as additional information (e.g., information about places located on the map, etc.). As shown, the mapping service 4900 stores map data 4915 and intersection data 4925, and includes a map generator 4935 and route generator 4945, among other modules (not shown).”).
Arikan does not explicitly disclose, however, PU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches obtaining a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node (See at least paragraph [n0007], “Step S1: Construct an optimization model for the road and railway overpass route. The optimization module includes: decision variables, constraints, and optimization functions within the study area”, paragraph [n0013], “Step S4: Using the N paths, M paths, and H intersection segments from Step S3, several complete routes are spliced and integrated. The optimal route is determined using the optimization function as the objective function. Based on the optimal route, curve fitting is performed on the plane and longitudinal profile to obtain the final route scheme”, paragraph [n0055], “The constraints in the optimization model include: geometric linear constraints, intersection constraints, connection constraints, and existing structural constraints”, and paragraph [n0056]-[n0057], “Optionally, in step S2, during the process of dividing the study area into unit meshes, the formula for calculating the width of the unit mesh is as follows: width = 2T<sub>min</sub> + J<sub>min</sub>.” The system constructs an optimization model including constraints and an optimization function used as an objective function for a route including intersection segments, which corresponds to obtaining a constraint condition and a target function for a target intersection node. The constraints correspond to the constraint condition, and calculating the width of the unit mesh corresponds to the target function indicating a target area size.), the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size (See at least paragraph [n0007], “Step S1: Construct an optimization model for the road and railway overpass route. The optimization module includes: decision variables, constraints, and optimization functions within the study area”, paragraph [n0055], “The constraints in the optimization model include: geometric linear constraints, intersection constraints, connection constraints, and existing structural constraints”, and paragraph [n0056]-[n0057], “Optionally, in step S2, during the process of dividing the study area into unit meshes, the formula for calculating the width of the unit mesh is as follows: width = 2T<sub>min</sub> + J<sub>min</sub>.” The system includes constraints in the optimization model, which corresponds to the constraint condition, and the constraints include geometric, intersection, connection, and structural constraints, which correspond to the constraint condition indicating a limiting condition. The system further calculates the width of the unit mesh, which corresponds to the target area size.), the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads (See at least paragraph [n0013], “Step S4: Using the N paths, M paths, and H intersection segments from Step S3, several complete routes are spliced and integrated. The optimal route is determined using the optimization function as the objective function. Based on the optimal route, curve fitting is performed on the plane and longitudinal profile to obtain the final route scheme” and paragraph [n0055], “The constraints in the optimization model include: geometric linear constraints, intersection constraints, connection constraints, and existing structural constraints.” The system includes constraints in the optimization model, which corresponds to the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships. The system determines routes using intersecting and connecting segments, which corresponds to adjacent roads, and applies the constraints to the segments, which corresponds to constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads.); determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model (See at least paragraph [n0007], “Step S1: Construct an optimization model for the road and railway overpass route. The optimization module includes: decision variables, constraints, and optimization functions within the study area”, paragraph [n0013], “Step S4: Using the N paths, M paths, and H intersection segments from Step S3, several complete routes are spliced and integrated. The optimal route is determined using the optimization function as the objective function. Based on the optimal route, curve fitting is performed on the plane and longitudinal profile to obtain the final route scheme”, paragraph [n0014], “Optionally, in step S3, the path search process for the two non-intersecting segments based on the optimization model employs the DT algorithm, and the generalized distance value of the cell in the DT algorithm is defined by the optimization function”, paragraph [n0055], “The constraints in the optimization model include: geometric linear constraints, intersection constraints, connection constraints, and existing structural constraints”, and paragraph [n0056]-[n0057], “Optionally, in step S2, during the process of dividing the study area into unit meshes, the formula for calculating the width of the unit mesh is as follows: width = 2T<sub>min</sub> + J<sub>min</sub>.” The system constructs an optimization model including constraints and an optimization function used as an objective function, which corresponds to the constraint condition and the target function. The system calculates the width of the unit mesh, which corresponds to road surface width information, and determines an optimal route based on the optimization function subject to the constraints using an algorithm that defines distance values, which corresponds to determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information, the constraint condition, and the target function, and solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model.).
Arikan and PU do not explicitly disclose, however, Khan, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints (See at least Fig. 7, paragraph [0030], [00002], “FIG. 4 illustrates a nominal turn radius R in relation to the intersection 206. A line AB drawn perpendicular to the first road edge 208 and a line CB drawn perpendicular to the second road edge 210 will intersect to form a quadrilateral ABC(PI). From simple geometry, it can be shown that the angle ABC is the same as the intersection angle Δ. Therefore, the nominal turn radius R obtained via Eq. (1) and the intersection angle Δ can be used to determine a tangent distance T, as shown in Eq. (2): T=RtanΔ/2 (2) The tangent distance T is used to determine a location of a point of curvature PC and a location of a point of tangency PT”, paragraph [0031], “FIG. 5 shows the location of the point of curvature PC and of the point of tangency PT in the aerial image. The point of curvature PC is located along the first extension line 302 (or first road edge 208) and is separated from the point of intersection PI by the tangent distance T. The point of tangency PT is located along the second extension line 304 (or second road edge 210) and is separated from the point of intersection PI by the tangent distance T”, paragraph [0032], “FIG. 6 shows a turn center PO that is determined from the point of curvature PC and the point of tangency PT. Once the location of PC and of PT have been determined, a first radial line 602 is drawn perpendicular to the first extension line 302 (or first road edge 208) from the point of curvature PC, and a second radial line 604 is drawn perpendicular to the second extension line 304 (or second road edge 210) from the point of tangency PT. The first radial line 602 and the second radial line 604 intersect at turn center PO. A reference line 606 can be drawn from the point PO that can be used to determine angles for drawing in an intersection edge based on the first radial line 602 and the second radial line 604. The reference line 606 can be an east-west line within the aerial image 200”, and paragraph [0033], “FIG. 7 shows an intersection edge 702 drawn onto the aerial image 200. The aerial image 200 shows the respective angles of the first radial line 602 and second radial line 604 with respect to the reference line 606. A first angle θ.sub.0 is drawn between the reference line 606 and the first radial line 602. A second angle θ.sub.N is drawn between the reference line 606 and the second radial line 604. An intersection radial line 704 is rotated between the first angle θ.sub.0 to the second angle θ.sub.N to draw in the intersection edge 702. The length of the intersection radial line 704 changes with rotation angle θ.sub.n to meet boundary conditions. For example, when θ.sub.n=θ.sub.0, then R.sub.n=R.sub.0 and when θ.sub.n=θ.sub.N, then R.sub.n=R.sub.N. These boundary conditions are satisfied when the intersection edge 702 is parameterized by Eqs. (3) and (4).” The system determines a tangent distance for each road at an intersection and uses the tangent distance to determine points of tangency along each road, which corresponds to a respective offset variable corresponding to each road. The system determines distances between the intersection point and tangent lines of the roads using the tangent distance, which corresponds to the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and tangent line of a corresponding road, and constructs the intersection geometry such that the tangent lines meet at endpoints, which corresponds to the tangent lines not intersecting except at endpoints.).
Arikan, PU, and Khan do not explicitly disclose, however, WAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node (See at least paragraph [0382], “Further, a road constraint determining apparatus disclosed in an embodiment of this application may be applied to the intelligent driving field, and in particular, may be applied to an advanced driver assistant system ADAS or an autonomous driving system. For example, the road constraint determining apparatus may be disposed in a vehicle that supports an advanced driver assistance function or an autonomous driving function, and determine detection information based on a sensor (for example, radar and/or a photographing apparatus) in the vehicle, to determine a road constraint based on the detection information, and implement the advanced driver assistance function or the autonomous driving function” and paragraph [0384], “In addition, a road constraint determining apparatus disclosed in an embodiment of this application may be further disposed at a location, to track a target in a detection neighborhood region of the location. For example, the road constraint determining apparatus may be disposed at an intersection, and a road constraint corresponding to a target in a surrounding region of the intersection is determined according to the solution provided in this embodiment of this application, to track the target, and implement intersection detection.”); and autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal (See at least paragraph [0382], “Further, a road constraint determining apparatus disclosed in an embodiment of this application may be applied to the intelligent driving field, and in particular, may be applied to an advanced driver assistant system ADAS or an autonomous driving system. For example, the road constraint determining apparatus may be disposed in a vehicle that supports an advanced driver assistance function or an autonomous driving function, and determine detection information based on a sensor (for example, radar and/or a photographing apparatus) in the vehicle, to determine a road constraint based on the detection information, and implement the advanced driver assistance function or the autonomous driving function.” The system implements an autonomous driving function in a vehicle based on determined road information and determining road constraints at an intersection, which corresponds to generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node and autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Arikan with the teachings of PU, Khan, and WAN such that the map system of Arikan is further configured to obtain a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node, the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size, the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads; determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0007], [n0013], [n0014], [n0055], [n0056], [n0057].), the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [00002], [0030]-[0033].), and generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node; and autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0382], [0384].), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to optimize of highway and railway grade-separated roadways, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0005].). The motivation for doing so would be to reduce map expenses, noise issues, and data sparsity, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [0002].). The motivation for doing so would be to improve target tracking accuracy, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0005].).
With respect to claim 12, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 1, which is commensurate in scope to claim 12, with claim 1 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 12 being drawn to a corresponding system.
With respect to claim 20, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 1, which is commensurate in scope to claim 20, with claim 1 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 20 being drawn to a corresponding non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
Regarding Claim 2, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan teaches wherein obtaining the constraint condition comprises: determining included angle information between the every two adjacent roads based on road surface width information and corresponding offset variables of the every two adjacent roads, and the included angle information being configured for indicating an intersection status between corresponding tangent lines of the every two adjacent roads (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well.”); and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle information between the every two adjacent roads (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well.”).
With respect to claim 13, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 2, which is commensurate in scope to claim 13, with claim 2 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 13 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 3, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 2, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan teaches wherein a road surface of the road comprises a left side sub-road surface and a right side sub-road surface, and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle information between the every two adjacent roads comprises: obtaining an included angle between a first road and a second road, wherein the first road and the second road are adjacent roads among the at least two roads (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well.”).
Arikan, PU, and Khan do not explicitly disclose, however, WAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches obtaining a first included angle between the first road and a boundary line of a right side sub-road surface of the first road (See at least paragraph [0251], “For example, a width between two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on two sides of the target may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a largest value or a smallest value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target; or an average value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target.”), obtaining a second included angle between the second road and a boundary line of a left side sub-road surface of the second road (See at least paragraph [0253]-[0254], “first obtaining a straight line that passes through the target location of the target and that is perpendicular to a fourth target road geometry, where the fourth target road geometry is two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on the two sides of the target; and then determining that a distance between two points of intersection is the road width constraint of the target, where the two points of intersection are two points of intersection of the straight line and the fourth target road geometry.”), and obtaining a third included angle between the boundary line of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and the boundary line of the left side sub-road surface of the second road (See at least paragraph [0261], “determining at least one distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry, and determining that a largest value or a smallest value of the at least one distance is the road width constraint of the target.”); and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle between the first road and the second road, the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle (See at least paragraph [0013], “determining a road constraint of the target based on the at least one road geometry and the moving state of the target, where the road constraint includes at least one of a road direction constraint and a road width constraint”, paragraph [0024], “determining the road geometry as the target road geometry if an absolute value of a difference between the tangent direction angle at the first location and the tangent direction angle at the target location is less than a first threshold”, paragraph [0251], “For example, a width between two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on two sides of the target may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a largest value or a smallest value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target; or an average value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target”), and paragraph [0253]-[0254], “first obtaining a straight line that passes through the target location of the target and that is perpendicular to a fourth target road geometry, where the fourth target road geometry is two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on the two sides of the target; and then determining that a distance between two points of intersection is the road width constraint of the target, where the two points of intersection are two points of intersection of the straight line and the fourth target road geometry.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Arikan with the teachings of PU, Khan, and WAN such that the map system of Arikan is further configured to obtain a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node, the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size, the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads; determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0007], [n0013], [n0014], [n0055], [n0056], [n0057].), the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [00002], [0030]-[0033].), and generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node; autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal; obtaining a first included angle between the first road and a boundary line of a right side sub-road surface of the first road, obtaining a second included angle between the second road and a boundary line of a left side sub-road surface of the second road, and obtaining a third included angle between the boundary line of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and the boundary line of the left side sub-road surface of the second road; and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle between the first road and the second road, the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0013], [0024], [0251], [0253], [0254], [0261], [0382], [0384].), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to optimize of highway and railway grade-separated roadways, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0005].). The motivation for doing so would be to reduce map expenses, noise issues, and data sparsity, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [0002].). The motivation for doing so would be to improve target tracking accuracy, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0005].).
With respect to claim 14, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 3, which is commensurate in scope to claim 14, with claim 3 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 14 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 4, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 3, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan, PU, and Khan do not explicitly disclose, however, WAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein a sum of the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle is less than or equal to the included angle between the first road and the second road (See at least paragraph [0024], “determining the road geometry as the target road geometry if an absolute value of a difference between the tangent direction angle at the first location and the tangent direction angle at the target location is less than a first threshold”, paragraph [0194], “Step S123: Determine the road geometry as the target road geometry if an absolute value of a difference between the tangent direction angle at the first location and the tangent direction angle at the target location is less than a first threshold”, paragraph [0251], “For example, a width between two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on two sides of the target may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a largest value or a smallest value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target; or an average value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target”), and paragraph [0253]-[0254], “first obtaining a straight line that passes through the target location of the target and that is perpendicular to a fourth target road geometry, where the fourth target road geometry is two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on the two sides of the target; and then determining that a distance between two points of intersection is the road width constraint of the target, where the two points of intersection are two points of intersection of the straight line and the fourth target road geometry.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Arikan with the teachings of PU, Khan, and WAN such that the map system of Arikan is further configured to obtain a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node, the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size, the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads; determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0007], [n0013], [n0014], [n0055], [n0056], [n0057].), the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [00002], [0030]-[0033].), and generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node; autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal; obtaining a first included angle between the first road and a boundary line of a right side sub-road surface of the first road, obtaining a second included angle between the second road and a boundary line of a left side sub-road surface of the second road, and obtaining a third included angle between the boundary line of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and the boundary line of the left side sub-road surface of the second road; and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle between the first road and the second road, the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle; and wherein a sum of the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle is less than or equal to the included angle between the first road and the second road, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0013], [0024], [0251], [0253], [0254], [0261], [0382], [0384].), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to optimize of highway and railway grade-separated roadways, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0005].). The motivation for doing so would be to reduce map expenses, noise issues, and data sparsity, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [0002].). The motivation for doing so would be to improve target tracking accuracy, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0005].).
With respect to claim 15, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 4, which is commensurate in scope to claim 15, with claim 4 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 15 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 5, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 3, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan teaches wherein obtaining the included angle between the first road and the second road comprises: obtaining coordinates of a road shape point of the first road and coordinates of a road shape point of the second road (See at least paragraph [0150], “FIG. 8 illustrates the data structure 800 of some embodiments for a road segment as well as the data structure 815 for a junction. As shown, the road segment includes a segment ID (i.e., a unique identification), one or more names, geometry information, and attribute information. The geometry information (which is different than the road geometries created for defining vector data) defines the path and other geometric information about a road segment. As shown, the geometry information includes centerline path data (e.g., an ordered string of coordinates that define the center of the road), start and end junction information, parameters to indicate the width and offset with respect to the centerline, and functionality enabling evaluation of the sides of the road at any point along the road segment. In some embodiments, this is a function on the road segment class that utilizes the centerline, offset, and width information to calculate the location of the sides of the road. While this diagram shows the road drawing data including start and end junctions, some embodiments do not define one as the start and one as the end, but rather simply indicate two junction IDs as endpoints (or a single junction ID if the road segment dead-ends).”); and calculating the included angle between the first road and the second road based on the coordinates of the road shape point of the first road and the coordinates of the road shape point of the second road (See at least paragraph [0315], “When no potential match exists (e.g., the next identified dual carriageway in the traversal is also an entrance path, or the exit set is empty), the process stores (at 5450) the entrance path as a separate branch of the intersection and then returns to 5430 to find the next unpaired entrance path. On the other hand, when a potential match exists, some embodiments determine (at 5455) whether the potential pair satisfies a set of dual carriageway match criteria. These are criteria, in some embodiments, to determine whether a pair of dual carriageways are actually the two sides of the same road. Some embodiments determine whether the two paths (1) are within a threshold distance (e.g., 25 m, 50 m, etc.) where the paths enter/exit the intersection, and (2) whether the angles at which the paths hit their junctions within the intersection is within a threshold range of each other (e.g., 5.degree., 10.degree., etc.). To calculate the angle, some embodiments use the vertex closest to the edge of the intersection (or the location of the junction at which the path segment intersects the other segments within the intersection) and a vertex located a particular predefined distance (e.g., 50 m) away. The process then calculates the angle off of North for the line between the two vertices” and paragraph [0335], “In addition to generating road geometry for map tiles, some embodiments also generate land cover geometry. Much like road segment data is received from various sources, so may data describing land cover (e.g., as a series of vertices that indicate the boundary of a particular land cover body). The land cover may include bodies of water (e.g., rivers, oceans, lakes, swimming pools, etc.), administrative bodies (e.g., boundaries of states, countries, cities, parks, etc.), area designations (e.g., rural/urban/suburban, desert/mountains/forest, etc.), or other data describing the land between roads. Initially, some embodiments use these coordinates to grow geometries for the land cover items.”).
With respect to claim 16, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 5, which is commensurate in scope to claim 16, with claim 5 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 16 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 6, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 3, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan, PU, and Khan do not explicitly disclose, however, WAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first included angle is represented by road surface width information of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and an offset variable of the first road (See at least paragraph [0251], “For example, a width between two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on two sides of the target may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a largest value or a smallest value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target; or an average value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target”), and paragraph [0253]-[0254], “first obtaining a straight line that passes through the target location of the target and that is perpendicular to a fourth target road geometry, where the fourth target road geometry is two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on the two sides of the target; and then determining that a distance between two points of intersection is the road width constraint of the target, where the two points of intersection are two points of intersection of the straight line and the fourth target road geometry.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Arikan with the teachings of PU, Khan, and WAN such that the map system of Arikan is further configured to obtain a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node, the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size, the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads; determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0007], [n0013], [n0014], [n0055], [n0056], [n0057].), the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [00002], [0030]-[0033].), and generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node; autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal; obtaining a first included angle between the first road and a boundary line of a right side sub-road surface of the first road, obtaining a second included angle between the second road and a boundary line of a left side sub-road surface of the second road, and obtaining a third included angle between the boundary line of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and the boundary line of the left side sub-road surface of the second road; and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle between the first road and the second road, the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle; and wherein the first included angle is represented by road surface width information of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and an offset variable of the first road, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0013], [0024], [0251], [0253], [0254], [0261], [0382], [0384].), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to optimize of highway and railway grade-separated roadways, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0005].). The motivation for doing so would be to reduce map expenses, noise issues, and data sparsity, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [0002].). The motivation for doing so would be to improve target tracking accuracy, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0005].).
With respect to claim 17, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 6, which is commensurate in scope to claim 17, with claim 6 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 17 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 7, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 3, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan, PU, and Khan do not explicitly disclose, however, WAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the second included angle is represented by road surface width information of the left side sub-road surface of the second road and an offset variable of the second road (See at least paragraph [0251], “For example, a width between two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on two sides of the target may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry may be used as the road width constraint of the target; or a largest value or a smallest value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target; or an average value of a distance between the target and the at least one target road geometry is used as the road width constraint of the target”), and paragraph [0253]-[0254], “first obtaining a straight line that passes through the target location of the target and that is perpendicular to a fourth target road geometry, where the fourth target road geometry is two target road geometries closest to the target that are respectively located on the two sides of the target; and then determining that a distance between two points of intersection is the road width constraint of the target, where the two points of intersection are two points of intersection of the straight line and the fourth target road geometry.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Arikan with the teachings of PU, Khan, and WAN such that the map system of Arikan is further configured to obtain a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node, the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size, the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads; determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0007], [n0013], [n0014], [n0055], [n0056], [n0057].), the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [00002], [0030]-[0033].), and generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node; autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal; obtaining a first included angle between the first road and a boundary line of a right side sub-road surface of the first road, obtaining a second included angle between the second road and a boundary line of a left side sub-road surface of the second road, and obtaining a third included angle between the boundary line of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and the boundary line of the left side sub-road surface of the second road; and constructing the constraint condition based on the included angle between the first road and the second road, the first included angle, the second included angle, and the third included angle; and wherein the second included angle is represented by road surface width information of the left side sub-road surface of the second road and an offset variable of the second road, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0013], [0024], [0251], [0253], [0254], [0261], [0382], [0384].), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to optimize of highway and railway grade-separated roadways, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0005].). The motivation for doing so would be to reduce map expenses, noise issues, and data sparsity, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [0002].). The motivation for doing so would be to improve target tracking accuracy, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0005].).
With respect to claim 18, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 7, which is commensurate in scope to claim 18, with claim 7 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 18 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 8, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan teaches wherein determining the road surface width information of the road based on the road information comprises: determining a road level of the road based on the road information (See at least paragraph [0161], “In addition, at least some of the road attributes are compared to compute the comparison score in some embodiments. For instance, the mapping service processing of some embodiments compares the road type (i.e., highway, arterial road, minor road, etc.), number of lanes, speed limit, form of way (i.e., single carriageway, dual carriageway, etc.). Once the scores are computed, some embodiments select the segment with the highest score and determine whether it is above a threshold for continuing the road. In addition, some embodiments identify the selected best road segment, and perform a comparison between the selected road segment and each of the other segments. Only if a first segment is the best match for a second segment and the second segment is the best match for the first segment does the processing aggregate the roads. This prevents an incoming road segment that actually ends at a "T" intersection from being joined with one of the road segments that actually continues through the intersection.”); and determining the road surface width information of the road based on the road level of the road (See at least paragraph [0165], “Other embodiments only fill in data necessary for generating the road geometry, such as the number of lanes and road width information. For example, some embodiments may use neighboring road segments within an aggregated road to generate the number of lanes (e.g., if segments on either side of a particular segment have a particular number of lanes, that particular number of lanes may be assigned to the particular segment as well). For the road width, some embodiments use the number of lanes (if it exists) to assign a width to the road (e.g., assume that each lane is 4 meters wide). On the other hand, some embodiments assign road widths based on the road type (i.e., freeways have a first width, major arterials have a second width, etc.). In fact, some embodiments derive the number of lanes from the road type (e.g., freeways always assigned three lanes, etc.), then generate the width based on the number of lanes.”).
With respect to claim 19, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 8, which is commensurate in scope to claim 19, with claim 8 being drawn to a method for generating an intersection and claim 19 being drawn to a corresponding system.
Regarding Claim 9, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan teaches wherein generating the intersection area of the target intersection node in the map based on the road surface width information of the road and the offset distance of the road comprises: determining a position of an intersection shape point based on the road surface width information and a corresponding offset distance of a road, the intersection shape point being configured for indicating a regional contour feature of the intersection area (See at least paragraph [0235], “In addition to medians, some embodiments generate geometries for various types of road paint (e.g., lane dividers, stop lines, etc.). In some embodiments, this includes the lane markings shown in the rendered results described above. To generate the lane markings for a road segment, some embodiments use the lane count information stored in the road segment data structure (which may be derived from either the width data or the road type data). In addition, special lanes such as carpool lanes may be indicated in the road segment data and can have geometry generated” and paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well.”); and generating the intersection area of the target intersection node in the map based on the position of the intersection shape point (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well” and [0239], “FIG. 36 illustrates the result 3600 of junction 3500 as rendered by a client mapping application of some embodiments (e.g., on the display of a portable device). As shown, a thick white line is drawn halfway across each of the road segments at the location identified by the dashed lines of FIG. 35. The interior (to the intersection) edge of the stop line geometry is drawn at the indicated line, with the stop line extending a ways into the road segment (away from the intersection). Some embodiments push the stop line a fixed distance away from the intersection as well. In addition, lane markings are generated such that they stop at the stop line, or shortly before.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 9, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan teaches wherein the road surface width information of the road comprises road surface width information of the left side sub-road surface of the road and road surface width information of the right side sub-road surface of the road (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well”.); determining the position of an intersection shape point based on the road surface width information and the corresponding offset distance of the road comprises: calculating coordinates of a first intersection shape point based on the road surface width information of the right side sub-road surface of the first road and an offset distance of the first road, the first intersection shape point being an intersection point between a tangent line of the first road and the boundary line of the right side sub-road surface of the first road (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well.”); and calculating coordinates of a second intersection shape point based on the road surface width information of the left side sub-road surface of the second road and an offset distance of the second road, the second intersection shape point being an intersection point between a tangent line of the second road and the boundary line of the left side sub-road surface of the second road (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well”.); and the first road and the second road being adjacent roads among the at least two roads (See at least paragraph [0237], “FIG. 35 illustrates an example of geometries for such a junction 3500. When all of the road segment geometries at the intersection have the same width, and line up at 90.degree. angles, then generating the stop lines is easy (as shown below). However, the four road segments 3505-3520 are not so well aligned. Instead, the segments have different widths, and the segment 3510 intersects the junction at a different (non-right) angle. In such a situation, for each particular road segment, the mapping service processing identifies the line perpendicular to the particular road segment's centerline that is closest to the intersection and touches both sides of the particular road segment's geometry without also intersecting the other road segment geometries. While shown for a more complex junction, some embodiments also use this process to identify the stop line locations in the simpler cases as well”.); and generating the intersection area of the target intersection node based on the position of the intersection shape point comprises: connecting the coordinates of the first intersection shape point and the coordinates of the second intersection shape point to generate the intersection area of the target intersection node (See at least paragraph [0239], “FIG. 36 illustrates the result 3600 of junction 3500 as rendered by a client mapping application of some embodiments (e.g., on the display of a portable device). As shown, a thick white line is drawn halfway across each of the road segments at the location identified by the dashed lines of FIG. 35. The interior (to the intersection) edge of the stop line geometry is drawn at the indicated line, with the stop line extending a ways into the road segment (away from the intersection). Some embodiments push the stop line a fixed distance away from the intersection as well. In addition, lane markings are generated such that they stop at the stop line, or shortly before.”).
Regarding Claim 11, Arikan, PU, Khan, and WAN teach The method according to claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection above. Arikan does not explicitly disclose, however, PU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein determining the offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function comprises: determining the offset distance of the road based on a preset constraint optimization model and the target function when the constraint condition and the road surface width information of the road are known (See at least paragraph [n0007], “Step S1: Construct an optimization model for the road and railway overpass route. The optimization module includes: decision variables, constraints, and optimization functions within the study area”, paragraph [n0013], “Step S4: Using the N paths, M paths, and H intersection segments from Step S3, several complete routes are spliced and integrated. The optimal route is determined using the optimization function as the objective function. Based on the optimal route, curve fitting is performed on the plane and longitudinal profile to obtain the final route scheme”, paragraph [0014], “Optionally, in step S3, the path search process for the two non-intersecting segments based on the optimization model employs the DT algorithm, and the generalized distance value of the cell in the DT algorithm is defined by the optimization function”, paragraph [n0055], “The constraints in the optimization model include: geometric linear constraints, intersection constraints, connection constraints, and existing structural constraints”, and paragraph [n0056]-[n0057], “Optionally, in step S2, during the process of dividing the study area into unit meshes, the formula for calculating the width of the unit mesh is as follows: width = 2T<sub>min</sub> + J<sub>min</sub>.” The system constructs an optimization model including constraints and an optimization function used as an objective function, which corresponds to the constraint condition and the target function. The system calculates the width of the unit mesh, which corresponds to road surface width information, and determines an optimal route based on the optimization function subject to the constraints using an algorithm that defines distance values, which corresponds to determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information, the constraint condition, and the target function, and solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model.).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the invention of Arikan with the teachings of PU, Khan, and WAN such that the map system of Arikan is further configured to obtain a constraint condition and a target function, the target function being configured for indicating a target area size of an intersection area of the target intersection node, the constraint condition being configured for indicating a limiting condition of the target area size, the constraint condition comprising constraint relationships between corresponding offset variables of every two adjacent roads of the at least two roads; determining an offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function, the determining the offset distance of the road comprising solving the target function subject to the constraint condition using a preset constrained optimization model; and wherein determining the offset distance of the road based on the road surface width information of the road, the constraint condition, and the target function comprises: determining the offset distance of the road based on a preset constraint optimization model and the target function when the constraint condition and the road surface width information of the road are known, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0007], [n0013], [n0014], [n0055], [n0056], [n0057].), the target function comprising a respective offset variable corresponding to each road of the at least two roads, the offset variable being configured for indicating a distance between the target intersection node and a tangent line of a corresponding road, and the constraint condition specifying that the tangent lines corresponding to the at least two roads do not intersect except at endpoints, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [00002], [0030]-[0033].), and generating an autonomous driving signal based on the generated intersection area of the target intersection node; and autonomously driving a vehicle based on the autonomous driving signal, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0382], [0384].), with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to optimize of highway and railway grade-separated roadways, as taught by PU (See paragraph [n0005].). The motivation for doing so would be to reduce map expenses, noise issues, and data sparsity, as taught by Khan (See paragraph [0002].). The motivation for doing so would be to improve target tracking accuracy, as taught by WAN (See paragraph [0005].).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEWEL ASHLEY KUNTZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5542. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5:30pm.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. 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.
/JEWEL A KUNTZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights