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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action on the merits. Claims 1-14 and 17-22 are currently pending and addressed below.
Preliminary amendments filed and received on 12/04/2024 and have been accepted and approved.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/30/2025 has been received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 4-9, 13-14, 17-19, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laws et al. (US 20200057453 A1), hereinafter Laws in view of Devasia et al. (US 20200192370 A1), hereinafter Devasia.
Regarding claim 1, Laws teaches:
1. (Original) A control system for a vehicle platoon, the control system comprising:
a lead vehicle controller installed in a lead vehicle; and
one or more follower vehicle controllers; (Paragraphs 0051-0052, "In some embodiments, the computerized FTL system 100 takes the various inputs from the GNSS receiver 810, the sensor system(s) 210, and the V2V communication system 410, as well as data stored within the FTL system 100, and, using software stored on non-transient memory within the computerized FTL system 100, computes a desired position for V2, an actual position for V2, and the vehicle commands that will be needed to bring V2 from its actual position to its ideal position. In some cases, these positions and commands may be sequences, comprising past and/or present and/or future desired and actual positions. This computation may be done on one or more vehicles, or done remotely (e.g., at a NOC (which can be a distributed computing system)) and communicated to the one or more trucks through communication.
In some embodiments, FTL software may be connected to the various control and communication busses of the second vehicle (e.g. the Controller Area Network, or CAN bus, ethernet, BroadR-Reach, RS-485, FlexRay, or other specific connection to the relevant ECU) to send commands that direct actuators that control and/or command (note, that the control and command may be different in various scenarios) second vehicle speed, acceleration (e.g. throttle, current, or torque to one or more electric motors, internal combustion engines, or hydrogen fuel cells), deceleration (e.g. torque or pressure to one or more braking actuators), steering (e.g. torque, pressure, or angle to one or more steering actuators), and other controls (e.g. suspension pressure and damper setting, turn and hazard signals, windshield wipers, horn, transmission gear, or clutch position) for the second vehicle. The vehicle commands may be sent to various electronic control units (ECUs) that are positioned to command the engine or other drivetrain equipment including transmissions or electric motors (using one or more engine ECUs (EECUs) 510, commanding, for example, engine torque or throttle), the brakes (using one or more brake ECUs (BECUs) 520, to apply the brakes or a retarder), and the vehicle steering (using one or more steering ECUs 530, commanding, for example, the torque of the steering column, or other commands directly to the front wheels of the vehicle).")
wherein the lead vehicle controller is configured to:
determine centralized control information; and
transmit the centralized control information to the one or more follower vehicle controllers; and wherein each of the one or more follower vehicle controllers is installed in a corresponding follower vehicle and is configured to:
receive the centralized control information from the lead vehicle controller;
determine a centralized control command based on the centralized control information; (Paragraph 0071, "The lead vehicle V1 may also transmit other path information, such as information on V1's acceleration (including negative acceleration, such as braking), V1's internal commands to its engine and brakes or other drivetrain elements, V1's radar environment, and other information deemed relevant to coordinate operations over the V2V link. In some embodiments, this may also include data related to sensor systems on V1 as measured at the corresponding coordinates. The FTL system on V2 may both detect the changing V1 coordinates and path information through the V2V system, and also detect the lead vehicle motion using its own sensor system or systems.")
receive local sensing information from a distance sensor of the corresponding follower vehicle; (Paragraph 0133, "The following vehicle may also be equipped with adaptive cruise control (ACC) equipment, which may have one or more front-mounted distance sensors, such as a radar or LIDAR system, to detect a distance to objects and other vehicles. When an algorithm in the ACC system predicts that a collision with an object is likely if the vehicle continues at its current speed, the ACC system can actuate braking to avoid a collision.")
determine a local control command based on the local sensing information (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.") …
apply weights to the centralized control command and the local control command;
combine the weighted centralized control command and the weighted local control command to create a combined control command; (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") and
use the combined control command to control a speed of the corresponding follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0052, "In some embodiments, FTL software may be connected to the various control and communication busses of the second vehicle (e.g. the Controller Area Network, or CAN bus, ethernet, BroadR-Reach, RS-485, FlexRay, or other specific connection to the relevant ECU) to send commands that direct actuators that control and/or command (note, that the control and command may be different in various scenarios) second vehicle speed, acceleration (e.g. throttle, current, or torque to one or more electric motors, internal combustion engines, or hydrogen fuel cells), deceleration (e.g. torque or pressure to one or more braking actuators), steering (e.g. torque, pressure, or angle to one or more steering actuators), and other controls (e.g. suspension pressure and damper setting, turn and hazard signals, windshield wipers, horn, transmission gear, or clutch position) for the second vehicle. The vehicle commands may be sent to various electronic control units (ECUs) that are positioned to command the engine or other drivetrain equipment including transmissions or electric motors (using one or more engine ECUs (EECUs) 510, commanding, for example, engine torque or throttle), the brakes (using one or more brake ECUs (BECUs) 520, to apply the brakes or a retarder), and the vehicle steering (using one or more steering ECUs 530, commanding, for example, the torque of the steering column, or other commands directly to the front wheels of the vehicle).")
Laws does not specifically discuss using delayed self reinforcement. However, Devasia, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous control, teaches:
… using a delayed self reinforcement (DSR) technique; … (Paragraph 0019, " According to various embodiments disclosed herein, improved control systems for automated or semi-automated agents, such as automated vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, and unmanned aerial vehicles), swarm robots, and other computer-controlled agents, are achieved in the context of agents traveling in formation, such as vehicles in a platoon or unmanned aerial vehicles in an aerial formation, by the application of alignment information between the agents in the formation in conjunction with delayed self-reinforcement. In summary, the control system of a vehicle in formation can use information about the trajectories and speed of other vehicles in formation that it can “sense,” which can include multiple vehicles simultaneously, in order to generate an update to that vehicle's steering, acceleration, or breaking in order to follow the other vehicles and remain in formation. This information alone, however, is insufficient for vehicle to follow an appropriate path during rapid maneuvers, or for the formation to remain cohesive. In addition to causing the vehicle to align with its neighbors, the control system can use delayed self-reinforcement (DSR) to modulate how the vehicle changes speed and trajectory, resulting in improvements in the ability of each vehicle using delayed self-reinforcement to retain formation and to follow an appropriate path, even or especially during complex or rapid maneuvers, when compared with vehicles that do not utilize delayed self-reinforcement.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle control methods as taught by Laws with the use of delayed self reinforcement as taught by Devasia. This would improve the control of the system when attempting to enact complex movements or to navigate rapidly changing environments while maintaining safety and cooperation with other systems.
Regarding claim 4, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
4. (Original) The control system of claim 1, wherein the local sensing information represents a distance between the corresponding follower vehicle and a predecessor vehicle. (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.")
Regarding claim 5, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
5. (Original) The control system of claim 1, wherein the combined control command represents a desired location of the corresponding follower vehicle; (Paragraph 0051, "In some embodiments, the computerized FTL system 100 takes the various inputs from the GNSS receiver 810, the sensor system(s) 210, and the V2V communication system 410, as well as data stored within the FTL system 100, and, using software stored on non-transient memory within the computerized FTL system 100, computes a desired position for V2, an actual position for V2, and the vehicle commands that will be needed to bring V2 from its actual position to its ideal position. In some cases, these positions and commands may be sequences, comprising past and/or present and/or future desired and actual positions. This computation may be done on one or more vehicles, or done remotely (e.g., at a NOC (which can be a distributed computing system)) and communicated to the one or more trucks through communication.") and
wherein using the combined control command to control the speed of the corresponding follower vehicle (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") includes providing the desired location to a speed controller of the corresponding follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0158, "Commonly the steering systems can be commanded by a torque input or a position input. If torque, the command is to apply torque to the steering, and the steering torque can be monitored for control. If position, the commands set a target for a control loop around position, which then can apply a torque for steering to achieve the desired position. In some embodiments they could also have different inputs, for example desired curvature or desired lateral acceleration.")
Regarding claim 6, Laws further teaches:
6. (Original) A method of controlling a follower vehicle in a vehicle platoon, the method comprising:
determining, by a follower vehicle controller in the follower vehicle, (Paragraphs 0051-0052, "In some embodiments, the computerized FTL system 100 takes the various inputs from the GNSS receiver 810, the sensor system(s) 210, and the V2V communication system 410, as well as data stored within the FTL system 100, and, using software stored on non-transient memory within the computerized FTL system 100, computes a desired position for V2, an actual position for V2, and the vehicle commands that will be needed to bring V2 from its actual position to its ideal position. In some cases, these positions and commands may be sequences, comprising past and/or present and/or future desired and actual positions. This computation may be done on one or more vehicles, or done remotely (e.g., at a NOC (which can be a distributed computing system)) and communicated to the one or more trucks through communication.
In some embodiments, FTL software may be connected to the various control and communication busses of the second vehicle (e.g. the Controller Area Network, or CAN bus, ethernet, BroadR-Reach, RS-485, FlexRay, or other specific connection to the relevant ECU) to send commands that direct actuators that control and/or command (note, that the control and command may be different in various scenarios) second vehicle speed, acceleration (e.g. throttle, current, or torque to one or more electric motors, internal combustion engines, or hydrogen fuel cells), deceleration (e.g. torque or pressure to one or more braking actuators), steering (e.g. torque, pressure, or angle to one or more steering actuators), and other controls (e.g. suspension pressure and damper setting, turn and hazard signals, windshield wipers, horn, transmission gear, or clutch position) for the second vehicle. The vehicle commands may be sent to various electronic control units (ECUs) that are positioned to command the engine or other drivetrain equipment including transmissions or electric motors (using one or more engine ECUs (EECUs) 510, commanding, for example, engine torque or throttle), the brakes (using one or more brake ECUs (BECUs) 520, to apply the brakes or a retarder), and the vehicle steering (using one or more steering ECUs 530, commanding, for example, the torque of the steering column, or other commands directly to the front wheels of the vehicle).") a centralized control command based on centralized control information; (Paragraph 0071, "The lead vehicle V1 may also transmit other path information, such as information on V1's acceleration (including negative acceleration, such as braking), V1's internal commands to its engine and brakes or other drivetrain elements, V1's radar environment, and other information deemed relevant to coordinate operations over the V2V link. In some embodiments, this may also include data related to sensor systems on V1 as measured at the corresponding coordinates. The FTL system on V2 may both detect the changing V1 coordinates and path information through the V2V system, and also detect the lead vehicle motion using its own sensor system or systems.")
determining, by the follower vehicle controller, a local control command (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.") based on local sensing information (Paragraph 0133, "The following vehicle may also be equipped with adaptive cruise control (ACC) equipment, which may have one or more front-mounted distance sensors, such as a radar or LIDAR system, to detect a distance to objects and other vehicles. When an algorithm in the ACC system predicts that a collision with an object is likely if the vehicle continues at its current speed, the ACC system can actuate braking to avoid a collision.") …
applying, by the follower vehicle controller, weights to the centralized control command and the local control command;
combining, by the follower vehicle controller, the weighted centralized control command and the weighted local control command to create a combined control command; (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") and
using, by the follower vehicle controller, the combined control command to control a speed of the corresponding follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0052, "In some embodiments, FTL software may be connected to the various control and communication busses of the second vehicle (e.g. the Controller Area Network, or CAN bus, ethernet, BroadR-Reach, RS-485, FlexRay, or other specific connection to the relevant ECU) to send commands that direct actuators that control and/or command (note, that the control and command may be different in various scenarios) second vehicle speed, acceleration (e.g. throttle, current, or torque to one or more electric motors, internal combustion engines, or hydrogen fuel cells), deceleration (e.g. torque or pressure to one or more braking actuators), steering (e.g. torque, pressure, or angle to one or more steering actuators), and other controls (e.g. suspension pressure and damper setting, turn and hazard signals, windshield wipers, horn, transmission gear, or clutch position) for the second vehicle. The vehicle commands may be sent to various electronic control units (ECUs) that are positioned to command the engine or other drivetrain equipment including transmissions or electric motors (using one or more engine ECUs (EECUs) 510, commanding, for example, engine torque or throttle), the brakes (using one or more brake ECUs (BECUs) 520, to apply the brakes or a retarder), and the vehicle steering (using one or more steering ECUs 530, commanding, for example, the torque of the steering column, or other commands directly to the front wheels of the vehicle).")
Laws does not specifically discuss using delayed self reinforcement. However, Devasia, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous control, teaches:
… using a delayed self reinforcement (DSR) technique; … (Paragraph 0019, " According to various embodiments disclosed herein, improved control systems for automated or semi-automated agents, such as automated vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, and unmanned aerial vehicles), swarm robots, and other computer-controlled agents, are achieved in the context of agents traveling in formation, such as vehicles in a platoon or unmanned aerial vehicles in an aerial formation, by the application of alignment information between the agents in the formation in conjunction with delayed self-reinforcement. In summary, the control system of a vehicle in formation can use information about the trajectories and speed of other vehicles in formation that it can “sense,” which can include multiple vehicles simultaneously, in order to generate an update to that vehicle's steering, acceleration, or breaking in order to follow the other vehicles and remain in formation. This information alone, however, is insufficient for vehicle to follow an appropriate path during rapid maneuvers, or for the formation to remain cohesive. In addition to causing the vehicle to align with its neighbors, the control system can use delayed self-reinforcement (DSR) to modulate how the vehicle changes speed and trajectory, resulting in improvements in the ability of each vehicle using delayed self-reinforcement to retain formation and to follow an appropriate path, even or especially during complex or rapid maneuvers, when compared with vehicles that do not utilize delayed self-reinforcement.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle control methods as taught by Laws with the use of delayed self reinforcement as taught by Devasia. This would improve the control of the system when attempting to enact complex movements or to navigate rapidly changing environments while maintaining safety and cooperation with other systems.
Regarding claim 7, where all the limitations of claim 6 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
7. (Original) The method of claim 6, further comprising receiving the centralized control information from a lead vehicle controller in a lead vehicle. (Paragraph 0071, "The lead vehicle V1 may also transmit other path information, such as information on V1's acceleration (including negative acceleration, such as braking), V1's internal commands to its engine and brakes or other drivetrain elements, V1's radar environment, and other information deemed relevant to coordinate operations over the V2V link. In some embodiments, this may also include data related to sensor systems on V1 as measured at the corresponding coordinates. The FTL system on V2 may both detect the changing V1 coordinates and path information through the V2V system, and also detect the lead vehicle motion using its own sensor system or systems.")
Regarding claim 8, where all the limitations of claim 6 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
8. (Original) The method of claim 6, wherein the local sensing information represents a distance between the follower vehicle and a predecessor vehicle. (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.")
Regarding claim 9, where all the limitations of claim 8 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
9. (Original) The method of claim 8, further comprising receiving the local sensing information from a distance sensor of the follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.")
Regarding claim 13, where all the limitations of claim 6 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
13. (Original) The method of claim 6, wherein the combined control command represents a desired location of the follower vehicle; (Paragraph 0051, "In some embodiments, the computerized FTL system 100 takes the various inputs from the GNSS receiver 810, the sensor system(s) 210, and the V2V communication system 410, as well as data stored within the FTL system 100, and, using software stored on non-transient memory within the computerized FTL system 100, computes a desired position for V2, an actual position for V2, and the vehicle commands that will be needed to bring V2 from its actual position to its ideal position. In some cases, these positions and commands may be sequences, comprising past and/or present and/or future desired and actual positions. This computation may be done on one or more vehicles, or done remotely (e.g., at a NOC (which can be a distributed computing system)) and communicated to the one or more trucks through communication.") and
wherein using the combined control command to control the speed of the follower vehicle (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") includes providing the desired location to a speed controller of the follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0158, "Commonly the steering systems can be commanded by a torque input or a position input. If torque, the command is to apply torque to the steering, and the steering torque can be monitored for control. If position, the commands set a target for a control loop around position, which then can apply a torque for steering to achieve the desired position. In some embodiments they could also have different inputs, for example desired curvature or desired lateral acceleration.")
Regarding claim 14, Laws further teaches:
14. (Currently amended) A non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions stored thereon that, in response to execution by one or more processors of a follower vehicle controller in a follower vehicle in a vehicle platoon, cause the follower vehicle controller to perform actions for controlling the follower vehicle, (Paragraphs 0051-0052, "In some embodiments, the computerized FTL system 100 takes the various inputs from the GNSS receiver 810, the sensor system(s) 210, and the V2V communication system 410, as well as data stored within the FTL system 100, and, using software stored on non-transient memory within the computerized FTL system 100, computes a desired position for V2, an actual position for V2, and the vehicle commands that will be needed to bring V2 from its actual position to its ideal position. In some cases, these positions and commands may be sequences, comprising past and/or present and/or future desired and actual positions. This computation may be done on one or more vehicles, or done remotely (e.g., at a NOC (which can be a distributed computing system)) and communicated to the one or more trucks through communication.
In some embodiments, FTL software may be connected to the various control and communication busses of the second vehicle (e.g. the Controller Area Network, or CAN bus, ethernet, BroadR-Reach, RS-485, FlexRay, or other specific connection to the relevant ECU) to send commands that direct actuators that control and/or command (note, that the control and command may be different in various scenarios) second vehicle speed, acceleration (e.g. throttle, current, or torque to one or more electric motors, internal combustion engines, or hydrogen fuel cells), deceleration (e.g. torque or pressure to one or more braking actuators), steering (e.g. torque, pressure, or angle to one or more steering actuators), and other controls (e.g. suspension pressure and damper setting, turn and hazard signals, windshield wipers, horn, transmission gear, or clutch position) for the second vehicle. The vehicle commands may be sent to various electronic control units (ECUs) that are positioned to command the engine or other drivetrain equipment including transmissions or electric motors (using one or more engine ECUs (EECUs) 510, commanding, for example, engine torque or throttle), the brakes (using one or more brake ECUs (BECUs) 520, to apply the brakes or a retarder), and the vehicle steering (using one or more steering ECUs 530, commanding, for example, the torque of the steering column, or other commands directly to the front wheels of the vehicle).") the actions comprising:
determining, by the follower vehicle controller, a centralized control command based on centralized control information; (Paragraph 0071, "The lead vehicle V1 may also transmit other path information, such as information on V1's acceleration (including negative acceleration, such as braking), V1's internal commands to its engine and brakes or other drivetrain elements, V1's radar environment, and other information deemed relevant to coordinate operations over the V2V link. In some embodiments, this may also include data related to sensor systems on V1 as measured at the corresponding coordinates. The FTL system on V2 may both detect the changing V1 coordinates and path information through the V2V system, and also detect the lead vehicle motion using its own sensor system or systems.")
determining, by the follower vehicle controller, a local control command (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.") based on local sensing information (Paragraph 0133, "The following vehicle may also be equipped with adaptive cruise control (ACC) equipment, which may have one or more front-mounted distance sensors, such as a radar or LIDAR system, to detect a distance to objects and other vehicles. When an algorithm in the ACC system predicts that a collision with an object is likely if the vehicle continues at its current speed, the ACC system can actuate braking to avoid a collision.") …
applying, by the follower vehicle controller, weights to the centralized control command and the local control command; combining, by the follower vehicle controller, the weighted centralized control command and the weighted local control command to create a combined control command; (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") and
using, by the follower vehicle controller, the combined control command to control a speed of the follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0052, "In some embodiments, FTL software may be connected to the various control and communication busses of the second vehicle (e.g. the Controller Area Network, or CAN bus, ethernet, BroadR-Reach, RS-485, FlexRay, or other specific connection to the relevant ECU) to send commands that direct actuators that control and/or command (note, that the control and command may be different in various scenarios) second vehicle speed, acceleration (e.g. throttle, current, or torque to one or more electric motors, internal combustion engines, or hydrogen fuel cells), deceleration (e.g. torque or pressure to one or more braking actuators), steering (e.g. torque, pressure, or angle to one or more steering actuators), and other controls (e.g. suspension pressure and damper setting, turn and hazard signals, windshield wipers, horn, transmission gear, or clutch position) for the second vehicle. The vehicle commands may be sent to various electronic control units (ECUs) that are positioned to command the engine or other drivetrain equipment including transmissions or electric motors (using one or more engine ECUs (EECUs) 510, commanding, for example, engine torque or throttle), the brakes (using one or more brake ECUs (BECUs) 520, to apply the brakes or a retarder), and the vehicle steering (using one or more steering ECUs 530, commanding, for example, the torque of the steering column, or other commands directly to the front wheels of the vehicle).")
Laws does not specifically discuss using delayed self reinforcement. However, Devasia, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous control, teaches:
… using a delayed self reinforcement (DSR) technique; … (Paragraph 0019, " According to various embodiments disclosed herein, improved control systems for automated or semi-automated agents, such as automated vehicles (e.g., cars, trucks, and unmanned aerial vehicles), swarm robots, and other computer-controlled agents, are achieved in the context of agents traveling in formation, such as vehicles in a platoon or unmanned aerial vehicles in an aerial formation, by the application of alignment information between the agents in the formation in conjunction with delayed self-reinforcement. In summary, the control system of a vehicle in formation can use information about the trajectories and speed of other vehicles in formation that it can “sense,” which can include multiple vehicles simultaneously, in order to generate an update to that vehicle's steering, acceleration, or breaking in order to follow the other vehicles and remain in formation. This information alone, however, is insufficient for vehicle to follow an appropriate path during rapid maneuvers, or for the formation to remain cohesive. In addition to causing the vehicle to align with its neighbors, the control system can use delayed self-reinforcement (DSR) to modulate how the vehicle changes speed and trajectory, resulting in improvements in the ability of each vehicle using delayed self-reinforcement to retain formation and to follow an appropriate path, even or especially during complex or rapid maneuvers, when compared with vehicles that do not utilize delayed self-reinforcement.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle control methods as taught by Laws with the use of delayed self reinforcement as taught by Devasia. This would improve the control of the system when attempting to enact complex movements or to navigate rapidly changing environments while maintaining safety and cooperation with other systems.
Regarding claim 17, where all the limitations of claim 14 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
17. (New) The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 14, wherein the actions further comprise receiving the centralized control information from a lead vehicle controller in a lead vehicle. (Paragraph 0071, "The lead vehicle V1 may also transmit other path information, such as information on V1's acceleration (including negative acceleration, such as braking), V1's internal commands to its engine and brakes or other drivetrain elements, V1's radar environment, and other information deemed relevant to coordinate operations over the V2V link. In some embodiments, this may also include data related to sensor systems on V1 as measured at the corresponding coordinates. The FTL system on V2 may both detect the changing V1 coordinates and path information through the V2V system, and also detect the lead vehicle motion using its own sensor system or systems.")
Regarding claim 18, where all the limitations of claim 14 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
18. (New) The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 14, wherein the local sensing information represents a distance between the follower vehicle and a predecessor vehicle. (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.")
Regarding claim 19, where all the limitations of claim 18 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
19. (New) The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 18, further comprising receiving the local sensing information from a distance sensor of the follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0134, "In one or more embodiments, the ACC system may allow the following vehicle to operate more safely by slowing or stopping the following vehicle when unexpected objects are detected as it follows the path transmitted by the lead vehicle. This allows for some traffic variation as, for example, additional cars, bicycles, or pedestrians cut in between the vehicles. The ACC may override the instructions to follow, so the following vehicle will not blindly continue to follow the lead vehicle's path if it entails crashing into another vehicle or person. Once the danger has passed, the following vehicle may then pass control again to the FTL system, and resume automatic navigation along the path previously transmitted by the lead vehicle.")
Regarding claim 22, where all the limitations of claim 14 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
22. (New) The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 14, wherein the combined control command represents a desired location of the follower vehicle; (Paragraph 0051, "In some embodiments, the computerized FTL system 100 takes the various inputs from the GNSS receiver 810, the sensor system(s) 210, and the V2V communication system 410, as well as data stored within the FTL system 100, and, using software stored on non-transient memory within the computerized FTL system 100, computes a desired position for V2, an actual position for V2, and the vehicle commands that will be needed to bring V2 from its actual position to its ideal position. In some cases, these positions and commands may be sequences, comprising past and/or present and/or future desired and actual positions. This computation may be done on one or more vehicles, or done remotely (e.g., at a NOC (which can be a distributed computing system)) and communicated to the one or more trucks through communication.") and
wherein using the combined control command to control the speed of the follower vehicle (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") includes providing the desired location to a speed controller of the follower vehicle. (Paragraph 0158, "Commonly the steering systems can be commanded by a torque input or a position input. If torque, the command is to apply torque to the steering, and the steering torque can be monitored for control. If position, the commands set a target for a control loop around position, which then can apply a torque for steering to achieve the desired position. In some embodiments they could also have different inputs, for example desired curvature or desired lateral acceleration.")
Claim(s) 2-3, 10-11, and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laws in view of Devasia and in further view of Kim et al. (US 20190262992 A1), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 2, where all the limitations of claim 1 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
2. (Original) The control system of claim 1, wherein applying weights to the centralized control command and the local control command includes: (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") …
Laws does not specifically teach a gamma value used for weighting control inputs where the gamma value sums to one. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous system control, teaches:
… adjusting the centralized control command using a gamma value; and adjusting the local control command using a difference between one and the gamma value. (Paragraph 0096, "As shown in FIG. 9, a weight 41 for a remote control value (hereinafter referred to as a “remote weight”) and a weight 43 for an autonomous control value (hereinafter referred to as an “autonomous weight”) may be determined as values that are inversely proportional to each other. In detail, as the communication delay increases, the remote weight 41 may be determined as a larger value, and the autonomous weight 43 may be determined as a smaller value. This is to improve the safety of the mobile robot 30 by increasing the proportion in which the autonomous control value is reflected in the target control value as the communication delay increases.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle and methods of control as taught by Laws with the weighting methods as taught by Kim. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Regarding claim 3, where all the limitations of claim 2 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
3. (Original) The control system of claim 2, wherein … a value representing a responsiveness of the follower vehicle to speed adjustment commands (Paragraph 0203, "In some embodiments, steering verification may be performed by one or more of the vehicles. For example, two vehicles may be capable of traveling in FTL mode. In some embodiments, a first vehicle (e.g., a front vehicle) may command speed, braking, steering, torque, gear selection, and or other actions in a second vehicle (e.g., a rear vehicle). In order to operate in platooning mode and/or FTL mode, in some embodiments, the first vehicle must receive information obtained by sensors on the rear vehicle indicating the commands are correctly being implemented on the rear vehicle. In some embodiments, such verification may be sent to the first vehicle from the rear vehicle, which may perform verifications of data in the form of: data gathered from a sensor remote from the controlled part of the rear vehicle (e.g., a wheel speed sensor on the rear vehicle to determine whether speed commands transmitted from the front vehicle are causing the wheels on a rear vehicle to travel at the speed commanded by the front vehicle), data gathered from a signal sent from an ECU on a rear vehicle to a controlled part of the rear vehicle (e.g., data traveling from a VECU to an engine or other part, data from a BECU to a brake, data from a TECU to a transmission, etc.), and/or data received at the rear vehicle from the front vehicle (e.g., before it is distributed to one or more ECUs). In one or more embodiments, in response to the steering and braking (or other commands) not passing verification (not operating correctly), two vehicles may not platoon and/or travel in FTL mode.") …
Laws does not specifically discuss weighting the control inputs via a gamma value which is representative of a delay in communication. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous system control, teaches:
… the gamma value is determined based on (Paragraph 0017, "According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method of controlling a mobile robot. The method being performed by a control apparatus comprises acquiring a first control value for the mobile robot, which is input through a remote control apparatus, acquiring a second control value for the mobile robot, which is generated by an autonomous driving module, determining a weight for each control value based on a delay between the mobile robot and the remote control apparatus and generating a target control value of the mobile robot in combination of the first control value and the second control value based on the determined weights, wherein a first weight for the first control value and a second weight for the second control value are inversely proportional to each other.") … and a value representing a delay in obtaining the local sensing information. (Paragraphs 0004-0005, "In a system for controlling a mobile robot at a remote location through the remote control system, the most problematic is a communication delay that may occur during a wireless communication process. As shown in FIG. 1, the communication delay includes a control delay 5 that occurs while a mobile robot 3 receives a control signal of a remote control system 1 and a monitoring delay 7 that occurs while the remote control system 1 receives images of the surroundings of the mobile robot 3 from the mobile robot 3.
The two delays 5 and 7 are main factors that increase a risk of accident of the mobile robot. This is because a user may later recognize an obstacle near the mobile robot 3 because of the monitoring delay 7 and a control signal of an operator may later reach the mobile robot 3 because of the control delay 5.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle and methods of control as taught by Laws with the weighting methods as taught by Kim. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Regarding claim 10, where all the limitations of claim 6 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
10. (Original) The method of claim 6, wherein applying weights to the centralized control command and the local control command includes: (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") …
Laws does not specifically teach a gamma value used for weighting control inputs where the gamma value sums to one. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous system control, teaches:
… adjusting the centralized control command using a gamma value; and adjusting the local control command using a difference between one and the gamma value. (Paragraph 0096, "As shown in FIG. 9, a weight 41 for a remote control value (hereinafter referred to as a “remote weight”) and a weight 43 for an autonomous control value (hereinafter referred to as an “autonomous weight”) may be determined as values that are inversely proportional to each other. In detail, as the communication delay increases, the remote weight 41 may be determined as a larger value, and the autonomous weight 43 may be determined as a smaller value. This is to improve the safety of the mobile robot 30 by increasing the proportion in which the autonomous control value is reflected in the target control value as the communication delay increases.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle and methods of control as taught by Laws with the weighting methods as taught by Kim. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Regarding claim 11, where all the limitations of claim 10 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
11. (Original) The method of claim 10, wherein … a value representing a responsiveness of the follower vehicle to speed adjustment commands (Paragraph 0203, "In some embodiments, steering verification may be performed by one or more of the vehicles. For example, two vehicles may be capable of traveling in FTL mode. In some embodiments, a first vehicle (e.g., a front vehicle) may command speed, braking, steering, torque, gear selection, and or other actions in a second vehicle (e.g., a rear vehicle). In order to operate in platooning mode and/or FTL mode, in some embodiments, the first vehicle must receive information obtained by sensors on the rear vehicle indicating the commands are correctly being implemented on the rear vehicle. In some embodiments, such verification may be sent to the first vehicle from the rear vehicle, which may perform verifications of data in the form of: data gathered from a sensor remote from the controlled part of the rear vehicle (e.g., a wheel speed sensor on the rear vehicle to determine whether speed commands transmitted from the front vehicle are causing the wheels on a rear vehicle to travel at the speed commanded by the front vehicle), data gathered from a signal sent from an ECU on a rear vehicle to a controlled part of the rear vehicle (e.g., data traveling from a VECU to an engine or other part, data from a BECU to a brake, data from a TECU to a transmission, etc.), and/or data received at the rear vehicle from the front vehicle (e.g., before it is distributed to one or more ECUs). In one or more embodiments, in response to the steering and braking (or other commands) not passing verification (not operating correctly), two vehicles may not platoon and/or travel in FTL mode.") …
Laws does not specifically discuss weighting the control inputs via a gamma value which is representative of a delay in communication. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous system control, teaches:
… the gamma value is determined based on (Paragraph 0017, "According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method of controlling a mobile robot. The method being performed by a control apparatus comprises acquiring a first control value for the mobile robot, which is input through a remote control apparatus, acquiring a second control value for the mobile robot, which is generated by an autonomous driving module, determining a weight for each control value based on a delay between the mobile robot and the remote control apparatus and generating a target control value of the mobile robot in combination of the first control value and the second control value based on the determined weights, wherein a first weight for the first control value and a second weight for the second control value are inversely proportional to each other.") … and a value representing a delay in obtaining the local sensing information. (Paragraphs 0004-0005, "In a system for controlling a mobile robot at a remote location through the remote control system, the most problematic is a communication delay that may occur during a wireless communication process. As shown in FIG. 1, the communication delay includes a control delay 5 that occurs while a mobile robot 3 receives a control signal of a remote control system 1 and a monitoring delay 7 that occurs while the remote control system 1 receives images of the surroundings of the mobile robot 3 from the mobile robot 3.
The two delays 5 and 7 are main factors that increase a risk of accident of the mobile robot. This is because a user may later recognize an obstacle near the mobile robot 3 because of the monitoring delay 7 and a control signal of an operator may later reach the mobile robot 3 because of the control delay 5.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle and methods of control as taught by Laws with the weighting methods as taught by Kim. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Regarding claim 20, where all the limitations of claim 14 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
20. (New) The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 14, wherein applying weights to the centralized control command and the local control command includes: (Paragraph 0211, "In some examples, information received at a portion of a vehicle (e.g., a platooning ECU/FTL ECU, a brake ECU, an engine ECU, etc.) may be based on information received from one or more of: a self-driving module, a platooning/FTL receiver, and sensors on a front and/or rear vehicle. Information received from these three sources may have an associated score (or weight). A front or rear vehicle may accordingly perform operations based on those three scores. Of course, more, or fewer inputs (and thus scores) may be used by a vehicle. As an example, a rear vehicle may receive input that causes it to perform actions from a self-driving module, another vehicle, a satellite, NOC, or other distributed computing system, etc. If the score of the input received from a first source (e.g., from the data sent by another vehicle), and is above a threshold and/or a certain amount greater than the score of second source (e.g., its sensors or a self-driving module), then the rear vehicle may perform an operation based only on the input of the first source, or based at least partially on the input of the first source. How much emphasis each source has on the operations may vary between systems, and various combinations of information from multiple sources may be used in combination (and they may be used differently/apply different amounts of commands based on their score).") …
Laws does not specifically teach a gamma value used for weighting control inputs where the gamma value sums to one. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous system control, teaches:
… adjusting the centralized control command using a gamma value; and adjusting the local control command using a difference between one and the gamma value. (Paragraph 0096, "As shown in FIG. 9, a weight 41 for a remote control value (hereinafter referred to as a “remote weight”) and a weight 43 for an autonomous control value (hereinafter referred to as an “autonomous weight”) may be determined as values that are inversely proportional to each other. In detail, as the communication delay increases, the remote weight 41 may be determined as a larger value, and the autonomous weight 43 may be determined as a smaller value. This is to improve the safety of the mobile robot 30 by increasing the proportion in which the autonomous control value is reflected in the target control value as the communication delay increases.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle and methods of control as taught by Laws with the weighting methods as taught by Kim. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Regarding claim 21, where all the limitations of claim 20 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
21. (New) The non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 20, wherein … a value representing a responsiveness of the follower vehicle to speed adjustment commands (Paragraph 0203, "In some embodiments, steering verification may be performed by one or more of the vehicles. For example, two vehicles may be capable of traveling in FTL mode. In some embodiments, a first vehicle (e.g., a front vehicle) may command speed, braking, steering, torque, gear selection, and or other actions in a second vehicle (e.g., a rear vehicle). In order to operate in platooning mode and/or FTL mode, in some embodiments, the first vehicle must receive information obtained by sensors on the rear vehicle indicating the commands are correctly being implemented on the rear vehicle. In some embodiments, such verification may be sent to the first vehicle from the rear vehicle, which may perform verifications of data in the form of: data gathered from a sensor remote from the controlled part of the rear vehicle (e.g., a wheel speed sensor on the rear vehicle to determine whether speed commands transmitted from the front vehicle are causing the wheels on a rear vehicle to travel at the speed commanded by the front vehicle), data gathered from a signal sent from an ECU on a rear vehicle to a controlled part of the rear vehicle (e.g., data traveling from a VECU to an engine or other part, data from a BECU to a brake, data from a TECU to a transmission, etc.), and/or data received at the rear vehicle from the front vehicle (e.g., before it is distributed to one or more ECUs). In one or more embodiments, in response to the steering and braking (or other commands) not passing verification (not operating correctly), two vehicles may not platoon and/or travel in FTL mode.") …
Laws does not specifically discuss weighting the control inputs via a gamma value which is representative of a delay in communication. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous system control, teaches:
… the gamma value is determined based on (Paragraph 0017, "According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method of controlling a mobile robot. The method being performed by a control apparatus comprises acquiring a first control value for the mobile robot, which is input through a remote control apparatus, acquiring a second control value for the mobile robot, which is generated by an autonomous driving module, determining a weight for each control value based on a delay between the mobile robot and the remote control apparatus and generating a target control value of the mobile robot in combination of the first control value and the second control value based on the determined weights, wherein a first weight for the first control value and a second weight for the second control value are inversely proportional to each other.") … and a value representing a delay in obtaining the local sensing information. (Paragraphs 0004-0005, "In a system for controlling a mobile robot at a remote location through the remote control system, the most problematic is a communication delay that may occur during a wireless communication process. As shown in FIG. 1, the communication delay includes a control delay 5 that occurs while a mobile robot 3 receives a control signal of a remote control system 1 and a monitoring delay 7 that occurs while the remote control system 1 receives images of the surroundings of the mobile robot 3 from the mobile robot 3.
The two delays 5 and 7 are main factors that increase a risk of accident of the mobile robot. This is because a user may later recognize an obstacle near the mobile robot 3 because of the monitoring delay 7 and a control signal of an operator may later reach the mobile robot 3 because of the control delay 5.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle and methods of control as taught by Laws with the weighting methods as taught by Kim. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laws in view of Devasia and Kim and in further view of Sabau et al. (US 20200166953 A1), hereinafter Sabau.
Regarding claim 12, where all the limitations of claim 11 are discussed above, Laws further teaches:
12. (Original) The method of claim 11, wherein … and eliminate steady tracking error. (Paragraph 0037, "In one or more embodiments, steering can be controlled and/or determined either by torque or by angle. In some embodiments, a human driver in a leading vehicle in an FTL system may turn the wheel, and a steer angle and/or torque applied to a steering wheel may be determined (e.g., via an angular sensor on the steering column). That information can be gathered by an ECU, and then sent via a link to a following vehicle. Based on that information, the following vehicle may determine a path, derived in part from the front vehicle's former location (e.g., over a specified time). Based on this path, derived from the front vehicle's trajectory and in some embodiments by other static information (e.g., parameters for each vehicle such as wheelbase or kingpin location, which may be dissimilar) or dynamic information (e.g., path tracking errors or locations of other vehicles), a controller can generate steer angle commands such that the rear vehicle can follow this path. Based on these desired steer angles, a lower-level controller may be used to control a specific hardware on the steering system (e.g., a brushless DC motor on the steering column). In some embodiments, information generated by the lead vehicle may be abstracted (e.g., encoded into a common format) such that a rear vehicle may receive the abstracted instructions (e.g., in the common format) and respond accordingly. Such an embodiment may assist vehicles that are different (e.g., made by different manufacturers) or would otherwise be incompatible.")
Laws does not specifically teach utilizing a gamma value for weighting to ensure string stability. However, Kim, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous control, teaches:
… the gamma value is determined … (Paragraph 0017, "According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method of controlling a mobile robot. The method being performed by a control apparatus comprises acquiring a first control value for the mobile robot, which is input through a remote control apparatus, acquiring a second control value for the mobile robot, which is generated by an autonomous driving module, determining a weight for each control value based on a delay between the mobile robot and the remote control apparatus and generating a target control value of the mobile robot in combination of the first control value and the second control value based on the determined weights, wherein a first weight for the first control value and a second weight for the second control value are inversely proportional to each other.")
However, Sabau, in the same field of endeavor of autonomous control, teaches:
… to ensure string stability … (Paragraphs 0040-0045, "Various embodiments of the present technology describe a distributed control architecture for platooning control of (semi)autonomous vehicles. The distributed implementation used in some embodiments allows for the controller on board each vehicle to use only locally available information. Some embodiments improve on existing methods in the following aspects:
guarantees string stability in the presence of time delays induced by the wireless communications;
eliminates the accordion effect from the behavior of the platoon;
achieves string stability, even for constant or distance headways inter-spacing policies;
the synchronization of the onboard measurements with the wirelessly received data induces fixed, commensurate and point-wise time delays in the control mechanism thus avoiding the difficulties caused by time-varying or stochastic or distributed time delays;
is amenable to optimal controller design via norm based costs, while accommodating heterogeneous strings of vehicles and heterogeneous controllers.")
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the autonomous vehicle as taught by Laws with the ability to weight the control inputs as taught by Kim and the ability to guarantee string stability as taught by Sabau. This would ensure that the appropriate control is utilized and safety is maintained in the event of communication delays or similar issues.
Conclusion
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the referencesapplied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations arerepresentative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed Invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HEATHER KENIRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5468. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30.
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, Adam Mott can be reached at (571) 270-5376. 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.
/H.J.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3657
/ADAM R MOTT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights