IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,583,456
Granted Patent B2
US 12,583,456 · App. 18/340,249 · Granted Mar 24, 2026

Probabilistic driving behavior modeling system for a vehicle

Inventors: Rodolfo Valiente Romero (Calabasas, CA); Hyukseong Kwon (Thousand Oaks, CA); Marcus James Huber (Saline, MI); Alireza Esna Ashari Esfahani (Novi, MI); Michael Cui (Winnetka, CA)
Assignee: GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC
B60W30/18163B60W40/02B60W60/001B60W2555/20
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,583,456
App. No.
18/340,249
Granted
Mar 24, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

A hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system conditioned on weather for a vehicle includes one or more controllers executing instructions to determine, by a longitudinal driving model stored by the one or more controllers, a probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to a current weather condition based on a car-following model, a semantic rule system, and a speed and visibility model. The current weather condition indicates an adverse weather condition impacting driving conditions for the vehicle. The one or more controllers determine, by a probabilistic lateral driving model by the one or more controllers, one or more lane choices for the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition based on a route plan of the vehicle and perception data indicative of an environment surrounding the vehicle and selects a final lane choice from the one or more lane choices.

Claims (56)

1 . A hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system for a vehicle conditioned on weather, the hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system comprising:

one or more controllers executing instructions to:

determine, by a longitudinal driving model stored by the one or more controllers, a probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to a current weather condition based on a car-following model, a semantic rule system, and a speed and visibility model, wherein the current weather condition indicates an adverse weather condition impacting driving conditions for the vehicle;

determine, by a probabilistic lateral driving model by the one or more controllers, one or more lane choices for the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition based on a route plan of the vehicle and perception data indicative of an environment surrounding the vehicle;

select a final lane choice from the one or more lane choices, wherein the final lane choice includes a maximum probability of being selected at the probabilistic longitudinal velocity when compared to remaining lane choices that are part of the one or more lane choices;

determine a next state of the vehicle based on the final lane choice and the probabilistic longitudinal velocity;

receive a road segment that is part of the route plan, wherein the road segment includes an intersection;

determine the vehicle is able to execute a maneuver at the intersection based on the perception data; and

in response to determining the vehicle is able to execute the maneuver, instruct the vehicle to execute the maneuver by assisting with steering, braking, and accelerating.

2 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 1 , wherein the probabilistic longitudinal velocity is determined by:

determining, by the car-following model, a velocity of the vehicle by calculating a first maximum velocity and a second maximum velocity; and

selecting a minimum value between the first maximum velocity and the second maximum velocity.

3 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 2 , wherein the first maximum velocity represents when the vehicle is driven to achieve a target speed and the second maximum velocity represents when the vehicle is driven to preserve a recommended distance from a leading vehicle.

4 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 2 , wherein the probabilistic longitudinal velocity is determined by:

determining, by the semantic rule system, a constrained velocity that limits the velocity of the vehicle determined by the car-following model based on a plurality of high-level rules.

5 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 4 , wherein the plurality of high-level rules limit the velocity of the vehicle determined by the car-following model based on one or more driving conditions that are created by a specific adverse weather condition indicated by the current weather condition.

6 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 5 , wherein the speed and visibility model represents a relationship between the constrained velocity and a visibility distance of a driver of the vehicle for a specific locality, wherein the constrained velocity is negatively correlated with an inverse of the visibility distance.

7 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 4 , wherein the probabilistic longitudinal velocity is determined by:

determining, by the speed and visibility model, the probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition by limiting the constrained velocity based on a visibility distance.

8 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 1 , wherein the probabilistic lateral driving model classifies a current road segment that is part of a road plan as including either a necessary lane change or a free lane change.

9 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 8 , wherein the current road segment is classified as including the necessary lane change in response to determining a lane change is necessary at the current road segment to reach the next road segment that is part of the route plan.

10 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 8 , wherein the current road segment is classified as including a free lane change in response to determining the vehicle is performing one or more of the following: changing lanes to increase a distance between either a leading or trailing vehicle, and to achieve a higher velocity.

11 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 1 , wherein the one or more controllers store a plurality of joint probability distribution models that indicate a probability that a specific lane choice is selected at a specified longitudinal speed of the vehicle at a specific adverse weather condition.

12 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 11 , wherein the joint probability distribution models are determined by defining a set of random variables and set of weather conditions, wherein a first random variable represents longitudinal behavior and second random variable represents lateral behavior.

13 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 1 , wherein the adverse weather condition is one of the following: rain, fog, snow, and reduced illumination.

14 . A method of determining a next state of a vehicle by a hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system for a vehicle, the method comprising:

determining, by a longitudinal driving model stored by one or more controllers, a probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to a current weather condition based on a car-following model, a semantic rule system, and a speed and visibility model, wherein the current weather condition indicates an adverse weather condition impacting driving conditions for the vehicle;

determining, by a probabilistic lateral driving model stored by the one or more controllers, one or more lane choices for the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition based on a route plan of the vehicle and perception data indicative of an environment surrounding the vehicle;

selecting, by the one or more controllers, a final lane choice from the one or more lane choices, wherein the final lane choice includes a maximum probability of being selected at the probabilistic longitudinal velocity when compared to remaining lane choices that are part of the one or more lane choices;

determining a next state of the vehicle based on the final lane choice and the probabilistic longitudinal velocity;

receiving a road segment that is part of the route plan, wherein the road segment includes an intersection;

determining the vehicle is able to execute a maneuver at the intersection based on the perception data; and

in response to determining the vehicle is able to execute the maneuver, instructing the vehicle to execute the maneuver by assisting with steering, braking, and accelerating.

15 . The method of claim 14 , wherein the method comprises:

determining, by the car-following model, a velocity of the vehicle by calculating a first maximum velocity and a second maximum velocity; and

selecting a minimum value between the first maximum velocity and the second maximum velocity.

16 . The method of claim 15 , wherein the method comprises:

determining, by the semantic rule system, a constrained velocity that limits the velocity of the vehicle determined by the car-following model based on a plurality of high-level rules.

17 . The method of claim 16 , wherein the method comprises:

determining, by the speed and visibility model, the probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition by limiting the constrained velocity based on a visibility distance.

18 . The method of claim 14 , wherein the method comprises:

classifying a current road segment that is part of a road plan as including either a necessary lane change or a free lane change.

19 . A hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system for a vehicle, the hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system comprising:

one or more controllers executing instructions to:

determine, by a longitudinal driving model stored by the one or more controllers, a probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to a current weather condition based on a car-following model, a semantic rule system, and a speed and visibility model, wherein the current weather condition indicates an adverse weather condition impacting driving conditions for the vehicle, and wherein the probabilistic longitudinal velocity is determined by:

determining, by the car-following model, a velocity of the vehicle by calculating a first maximum velocity and a second maximum velocity;

selecting a minimum value between the first maximum velocity and the second maximum velocity;

determining, by the semantic rule system, a constrained velocity that limits the velocity of the vehicle determined by the car-following model based on a plurality of high-level rules, wherein the plurality of high-level rules limit the velocity of the vehicle determined by the car-following model based on one or more driving conditions that are created by a specific adverse weather condition indicated by the current weather condition; and

determining, by the speed and visibility model of the one or more controllers, the probabilistic longitudinal velocity of the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition by limiting the constrained velocity based on a visibility distance;

determine, by a probabilistic lateral driving model stored by the one or more controllers, one or more lane choices for the vehicle with respect to the current weather condition based on a route plan of the vehicle and perception data indicative of an environment surrounding the vehicle;

select a final lane choice from the one or more lane choices, wherein the final lane choice includes a maximum probability of being selected at the probabilistic longitudinal velocity when compared to remaining lane choices that are part of the one or more lane choices;

determine a next state of the vehicle based on the final lane choice and the probabilistic longitudinal velocity;

receive a road segment that is part of the route plan, wherein the road segment includes an intersection;

determine the vehicle is able to execute a maneuver at the intersection based on the perception data; and

in response to determining the vehicle is able to execute the maneuver, instruct the vehicle to execute the maneuver by assisting with steering, braking, and accelerating.

20 . The hybrid probabilistic driving behavior modeling system of claim 19 , wherein the probabilistic lateral driving model classifies a current road segment that is part of a road plan as including either a necessary lane change or a free lane change.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 23, 2023
From: ROMERO, RODOLFO VALIENTE; KWON, HYUKSEONG; HUBER, MARCUS JAMES; ESNA ASHARI ESFAHANI, ALIREZA; CUI, MICHAEL
To: GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC
Reel/Frame 064042/0749 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240425050A1 · Dec 26, 2024
References Cited (132)
US 6445308B1 · Koike · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 6792803B2 · Bauer · 2004 [cited by examiner]
US 8095300B2 · Villaume · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 10328935B2 · O'Dea · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 11023749B2 · Garimella · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 11388548B2 · Wirola · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 11416943B2 · Shalev-Shwartz · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 11577722B1 · Packer · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11661109B2 · Dalzell · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11814070B1 · Prioletti · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11835956B2 · Matsubara · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 11851089B1 · Hinojosa et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 11884294B2 · Zhang · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 12065140B1 · Pronovost · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 12134403B2 · Wang · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 12291210B2 · Münning · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 12351183B2 · Foil · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 12397828B2 · Cui · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 12434710B2 · Nilsson · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 12448001B2 · Bagnell · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20020067289A1 · Smith · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20050134440A1 · Breed · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20090067675A1 · Tan · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20100256836A1 · Mudalige · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20110118967A1 · Tsuda · 2011 [cited by examiner]
US 20120046855A1 · Wey · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20130253797A1 · Mcnew · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20150046078A1 · Biess · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150151753A1 · Clarke · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20150151756A1 · Han · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160027300A1 · Raamot · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160129907A1 · Kim · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160357188A1 · Ansari · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160357262A1 · Ansari · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170015318A1 · Scofield · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170031017A1 · Jin · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170293299A1 · Matsushita · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170355368A1 · O'Dea · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180037221A1 · Myers · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180259967A1 · Frazzoli · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190092329A1 · Masui · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190184990A1 · Lee · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190276017A1 · Hardy · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190329772A1 · Graves · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190377340A1 · Ahiad · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200001867A1 · Mizutani · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200139971A1 · Bucht · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200209860A1 · Zhang · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200258380A1 · Wissing · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210009163A1 · Urtasun et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210016799A1 · Matsushita · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210078603A1 · Nakhaei Sarvedani · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210094577A1 · Shalev-Shwartz · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210101620A1 · Buerkle · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210129834A1 · Gier · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210133466A1 · Gier · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210148724A1 · Bang · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210165409A1 · Berntorp · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210271249A1 · Kobashi · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220009492A1 · Adwan · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220163973A1 · Zhang · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220169278A1 · Refaat · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220177001A1 · Kulkarni et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220204026A1 · Kim · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220227372A1 · Nilsson · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220274627A1 · Fairley · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220289238A1 · Wang · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220289248A1 · Niewiadomski · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220309801A1 · Oi · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220314968A1 · Horita · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220324482A1 · Guo · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220355825A1 · Deo · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220410902A1 · Münning · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20230005374A1 · Elimaleh · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230012853A1 · Tam · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230103248A1 · Abrash · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230125901A1 · Kurihashi · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230134068A1 · Willoughby · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230150542A1 · Foster · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230168095A1 · Lee · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20230322267A1 · Mei · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20240092398A1 · Caldwell · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240174223A1 · Park · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240182063A1 · Esna Ashari Esfahani · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240217548A1 · Pronovost · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240217558A1 · Choudhury · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240419902A1 · Wu · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20250002049A1 · Tam · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250042415A1 · Palmer · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250065917A1 · Cui · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250187598A1 · Clarke · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250214618A1 · Bagnell · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250289470A1 · Choi · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250333053A1 · Oishi · 2025 [cited by examiner]
US 20250360926A1 · Izumi · 2025 [cited by examiner]
CN 113291308B · 2022 [cited by examiner]
DE 102004009515A1 · 2004 [cited by applicant]
DE 60016815T2 · 2006 [cited by applicant]
DE 102013016488A1 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
DE 102016003026A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
DE 102016211208A1 · 2017 [cited by examiner]
DE 102017112300A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
DE 102021206694A1 · 2022 [cited by applicant]
DE 102022124517A1 · 2023 [cited by applicant]
DE-102016211208-A1 machine translation (Year: 2016). [cited by examiner]
CN-113291308-B machine translation (Year: 2022). [cited by examiner]
“Highway Capacity Manual, Chapter 22: Freeway Facilities”, Jun. 1999, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., USA. [cited by applicant]
“How Do Weather Events Impact Roads: FHWA Road Weather Management Program”, Federal Highway Administration, 2023, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington D.C., USA. [cited by applicant]
“PTV VISSIM 11 Manual”, 2022, PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG, Karlsruhe, Germany. [cited by applicant]
Ahmed, M. et al., “Driver Performance and Behavior in Adverse Weather Conditions: An Investigation Using the SHRP2 Naturalistic Driving Study Data—Phase 2”, SHRP2SOLUTIONS, Dec. 2015, U.S. Department of Transportation, … [cited by applicant]
Ahmed, M. et al., “Global lessons learned from naturalistic driving studies to advance traffic safety and operation research: A systematic review”, Accident Analysis & Prevention, Mar. 2022, vol. 167, Elsevier, Amsterda… [cited by applicant]
Ahmed, M. et al., “Implementation of SHRP2 Results within the Wyoming Connected Vehicle Variable Speed Limit System: Phase 2 Early Findings Report and Phase 3 Proposal”, 2017, Department of Civil and Architectural Engin… [cited by applicant]
Andreescu, M., et al., “Weather and Traffic Accidents in Montreal”, Canada, Climate Research, Feb. 27, 1998, vol. 9: 225-230, Inter-Research, Luhe, Germany. [cited by applicant]
Andrey, J. et al., “Relationships Between Weather and Road Safety: Past and Future Research Directions”, Climatological Bulletin vol. 24, No. 3, 123-137, Jan. 5, 1990, Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, … [cited by applicant]
Antin, J. et al, “Design of the In-Vehicle Driving Behavior and Crash Risk Study”, Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, 2011, National Academy of Sciences, Washington D.C., USA. [cited by applicant]
Chen, C. et al., “Assessing the Influence of Adverse Weather on Traffic Flow Characteristics Using a Driving Simulator and VISSIM”, “Sustainability”, Dec. 12, 2018, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI),… [cited by applicant]
Ciuffo, B. et al., “Thirty Years of Gipps' Car-Following Model: Applications, Developments, and New Features”, Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2315, Dec. 2012, 89-99, SAGE Jou… [cited by applicant]
Das, A. et al., “Structural Equation Modeling Approach for Investigating Driver Behavior in Adverse Weather Conditions using Trajectory-level SHRP2 Naturalistic Driving Data”, Road Safety & Simulation Internation Confer… [cited by applicant]
Gao, Y., “Calibration and Comparison of the VISSIM and INTEGRATION Microscopic Traffic Simulation Models”, Virginia Tech Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Sep. 5, 2008, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, US… [cited by applicant]
Ghasemzadeh, A. et al., “Utilizing naturalistic driving data for in-depth analysis of driver lane-keeping behavior in rain: Non-parametric MARS and parametric logistic regression modeling approaches”, Transportation Res… [cited by applicant]
Ghasemzadeh, A., “Driver Speed and Lane Keeping Behaviors in Adverse Weather Conditions: An Investigation Using the Second Strategic Highway Research Program Naturalistic Driving Data”, Department of Civil and Architect… [cited by applicant]
Gipps, P., “A Behavioural Car-Following Model for Computer Simulation”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 15, No. 2 (1981), 105-111, Elsevier Ltd., Amsterdam, Netherlands. [cited by applicant]
Gipps, P., “A model for the structure of lane-changing decisions”, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Oct. 1986, pp. 403-414, vol. 20, Issue 5, Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands. [cited by applicant]
Hammit, B. et al., “Toward the Development of Weather-Dependent Microsimulation Models”, Transportation Research Record, Apr. 28, 2019, pp. 143-156, vol. 2673, Issue 7, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., U… [cited by applicant]
Hosseinlou, M. et al., “A study of the minimum safe stopping distance between vehicles in terms of braking systems, weather and pavement conditions”, Indian Journal of Science and Technology, Oct. 2012, 3422-3427, vol. … [cited by applicant]
Khan, M. et al., “Development of a Novel Convolutional Neural Network Architecture Named RoadweatherNet for Trajectory-Level Weather Detection using SHRP2 Naturalistic Driving Data”, Transportation Research Record, Apr.… [cited by applicant]
Mccann, K. et al., “Investigation of Driver Speed Choice and Crash Characteristics During Low Visibility Events”, Virginia Transporation Research Council, No. VTRC 17-R4. Virginia. Dept. of Transportation, 2016. [cited by applicant]
Pisano, P., et al., “Surface Transportation Weather Applications”, Federal Highway Administration in concert with Mitretek Systems, 2002, Institute of Transportation Engineers, USA. [cited by applicant]
Shabarek, A. et al., “Deep Learning Framework for Freeway Speed Prediction in Adverse Weather”, Transportation Research Record, Aug. 27, 2020, vol. 2674, Issue 10, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., US. [cited by applicant]
Tanner, J.C., “Effect of Weather on Traffic Flow”, Nature, Jan. 19, 1952, 107, vol. 169, Issue 4290, Nature Publishing Group, USA. [cited by applicant]
Winsor, M., “Influence of Connected and Cooperative Vehicles on Virtual Right of Way Performance in Mixed Traffic”, Jun. 4, 2020, pp. 1-77, Technical University of Munich, Germany. [cited by applicant]
Baffet, G., et al. “An Observer of Tire-Road Forces and Friction for Active Security Vehicle Systems,” IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 12, No. 6, 2007, pp. 651-663. [cited by applicant]