The elimination of ALL accidents is not currently possible - especially as there continues to be irresponsible and/or inattentive human drivers on the roadways. Sadly, accidents - and even tragic fatalities - will still occur.

ARI'S AUTONOMOUS SAFETY PATENTS CAN SAVE LIVES - NOW!

Very few humans can react fast enough IN ONE SECOND to make a corrective decision to avoid disaster. But will this decision be the VERY BEST HUMAN DECISION, or, will it be a poor decision which could make a very dangerous and even life-threatening situation worse? To do nothing courts death. And to do something wrong also courts death. This is LOSE-LOSE!

Unfortunately, in many instances, the human decision will be a very poor one, as the likelihood of a truly excellent decision is low. This means that in only a few accidents requiring instantaneous decision-making and implementation in one second does a human driver make the VERY BEST DECISION.

The fact remains that human split-second decisions by drivers who have never driven Formula One race cars, or competed in the Indy 500, are often wrong – and far too often wrong, disastrously so. This is the reason that there is so much emphasis on autonomous driving systems to help eliminate the human factor. And the chance of death is astronomically higher at highway speeds of 65, 70, 80 mph (Montana), or 85 mph (Texas Highway 130). According to TECHNOLOGY ON FULL DISPLAY, "nearly 1 in every 20 miles driven occurs at speeds greater than 80 mph." The NHTSA estimated a 7.2 percent increase in traffic deaths from 2019 to 2020, the highest total in 13 years. "2021 looks to be worse."

Over 38,500 roadway deaths per year IN THE UNITED STATES ALONE should be sufficient testimony to the need for ARI harm-mitigation technology. Autonomous safety systems designed to prevent accidents will make a huge difference. We therefore commend the many talented engineers and scientists diligently pursuing autonomous systems to make roadways safer. THESE EFFORTS WILL SAVE LIVES!

 

OVERVIEW

• Our autonomous safety issued Patents and pending applications are innovative solutions for how to minimize harm in traffic accidents.
• Rather than simply slamming on the brakes when a collision is unavoidable, we ACTIVELY MANAGE it to minimize the harm.
• Advancing beyond current methods, we show explicitly how to calculate likely harm in an imminent collision, and how to minimize injury with instantaneous real-time intervention.
• We disclose new methods for localizing each vehicle in traffic more precisely than ever before.  Superior localization means superior collision management, and this means minimizing the potential harm - thereby greatly increasing the chances that everyone walks away.
• ARI has developed novel methodologies to localize vehicles in traffic, including unseen (obscured) vehicles in heavy traffic, with better-than-GPS spatial resolution, regardless of the speed of the vehicles.
• Using 5G/6G instantaneous-message capability with ARI's autonomous harm-minimization solutions, we believe that ARI provides superior collision-management options.

 

Following is a brief list of some of the ARI Patented strategies featuring: 

1. A system comprising processors configured to determine, from sensor data, one or more of a position, a velocity, and/or an acceleration of a subject vehicle; determine whether a collision between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle is imminent; calculate one or more sequences to avoid the imminent collision or to minimize harm of the collision, wherein each sequence comprises accelerations or decelerations or steering action; response to a determination that the collision is avoidable, select a sequence to avoid the collision; responsive to a determination that the collision is unavoidable, select a sequence to minimize the harm of the collision; and then implement the selected sequence by sending control signals to means for accelerating, decelerating, and steering the subject vehicle.
   
   
2. A processor configured to determine, from sensor data, the position, velocity, and acceleration of a second vehicle, then determine, from the sensor data, whether a collision is imminent.  The processor then determines whether a collision is avoidable by a particular sequence of accelerations, braking, or steering actions, and implements the particular sequence, when the collision is avoidable.
   
   
3. If the collision is unavoidable, the processor calculates the harm associated with the collision, using a formula to quantify different types of harm.  The processor then instantly selects a sequence of actions that minimizes the expected harm of the collision, and then implements that sequence.
   
   
4. The system includes internal sensors that measure a position, a velocity, an acceleration, a deceleration, a steering status, or a steering action, of the subject vehicle, and external sensors that measure an image, a position, a velocity, an acceleration, or a deceleration of a second vehicle.
   
   
5. A collision warning device comprising an acoustical signal generator, a light flasher, or a haptic vibrator, is activated when a collision is calculated to be imminent.  The collision warning device renders, when a collision is imminent, information about a direction from which a second vehicle is approaching a subject vehicle.  The collision warning device includes a voice-like speech generator configured to render the direction from which a second vehicle is approaching a subject vehicle.
   
   
6. An adjustment device configured to modify a processor operation based on an input by a user, wherein the adjustment device may be set to a particular setting, such that intervention is withheld, after a collision is calculated to be imminent, for a user-selected time period, and then is implemented if the collision remains imminent.
   
   
7. The intervention system includes user-selectable intervention threshold, wherein the system is configured to calculate a degree of hazard, and to implement a strategy if the degree of hazard exceeds the intervention threshold.
   
   
8. A data storage module coupled to a processor and configured to store and protect critical data, comprising data related to traffic in a time period prior to a collision, data related to a collision, data related to the subject vehicle in a time period prior to a collision, and data related to any sequence of actions implemented prior to a collision.
   
   
9. The system further including a data storage module which is hardened against damage caused by a collision, and against overwriting.
   
   
10. Determining: if the subject vehicle and the second vehicle will pass within a predetermined radius of each other in the absence of alterations in the direction or velocity of the subject vehicle.
    
    
11. Calculating: from the position and velocity and acceleration of the second vehicle, and from the  position and velocity and acceleration of the subject vehicle, future values of a separation distance between the subject vehicle and the second vehicle; calculating from the future values a collision time at which the separation distance is less than a predetermined separation distance; and determining, if the collision time is less than a predetermined time limit, that the collision is imminent.
    
    
12. While the particular sequence is being implemented, continuing to analyze further sensor data, thereby determining if the collision remains avoidable or unavoidable; if the continuing analysis indicates that an avoidable collision has become unavoidable, responsively implementing the particular sequence associated with the least harm; and if the continuing analysis indicates that an unavoidable collision has become avoidable, responsively implementing the particular sequence that avoids the collision.
    
    
13. Receiving: capability-data comprising the maximum acceleration or deceleration or steering that the subject vehicle is capable of; and analyzing, with the capability data, whether the imminent collision can be avoided by applying the maximum acceleration or deceleration or steering to the subject vehicle.
    
    
14. While the particular set of sequential actions are being implemented, preparing a feedback signal by comparing the measured position or velocity or acceleration of the subject vehicle to the particular set of sequential actions, and controlling the accelerator or brakes or steering of the subject vehicle according to the feedback signal in real time.
    
    
15. Calculating harm: comprising calculating how many fatalities would result from a collision; calculating how many injuries would result from the collision; calculating how much property damage would result from the collision; adding, for each of the analyzed collisions, the calculated number of fatalities times a predetermined fatality coefficient, plus the calculated number of injuries times a predetermined injury coefficient, plus the calculated property damage times a predetermined property damage coefficient, wherein a sum of the adding indicates how much harm would be caused by a collision according to each of the sequences.
    
    
16. Calculating harm including: predicting vehicle distortions that would occur during a possible collision; predicting peak accelerations that would occur during the possible collision; estimating, from the predicted vehicle distortions and peak accelerations, a number of fatalities, a number of injuries, and an amount of property damage that would result from the possible collision; and combining, according to a formula, the estimated number of fatalities, and the estimated number of injuries, and the estimated amount of property damage, thereby calculating the expected harm of the possible collision.
    
    
17. Preparing: before a collision occurs, a post-collision strategy to minimize post-collision harm; acquiring, during or after the collision, further sensor data; updating, according to the further sensor data, the post-collision strategy; and then implementing the updated post-collision strategy.
    
    
18. Implementing: a post-collision strategy comprising at least one of: turning off a fuel pump; unlocking doors; rolling down windows; driving to a side of a road; and transmitting a help-request message.
    
    
19. Determining: after a collision occurs, whether a driver of the subject vehicle is responsive or nonresponsive; while the driver is nonresponsive, implementing the post-collision strategy; and while the driver is responsive, halting the post-collision strategy.
    
    
20. During the implementation of an avoidance or harm-minimization strategy, redetermining whether the collision has changed from avoidable to unavoidable, or from unavoidable to avoidable.
    
    

Please click to visit ARI's sister company, UltraLogic 6G, LLC -
featuring advanced wireless messaging solutions.