IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,397,828
Granted Patent B2
US 12,397,828 · App. 18/453,489 · Granted Aug 26, 2025

Weather-informed path planning for a vehicle

Inventors: Michael Cui (Winnetka, CA); Hyukseong Kwon (Thousand Oaks, CA); Rodolfo Valiente Romero (Calabasas, CA); Andrew Howe (Malibu, CA); Alexander Waagen (Malibu, CA); Alexei Kopylov (Malibu, CA); Marcus James Huber (Saline, MI); Alireza Esna Ashari Esfahani (Daly City, CA)
Assignee: GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC
B60W60/0016B60W30/09B60W30/0956B60W60/00182B60W60/00272B60W60/00274B60W60/00276
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 12,397,828
App. No.
18/453,489
Granted
Aug 26, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

According to several aspects, a method for path planning for a vehicle includes determining a predicted trajectory of a remote vehicle. The predicted trajectory of the remote vehicle includes a plurality of predicted trajectory nodes. The method further includes determining a plurality of possible trajectories for the vehicle. The plurality of possible trajectories includes a plurality of possible trajectory nodes. The method further includes determining one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on a weather condition in an environment surrounding the vehicle. The method further includes selecting an optimal trajectory for the vehicle from the plurality of possible trajectories based at least in part on the one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes. The method further includes performing a first action based at least in part on the optimal trajectory.

Claims (194)

1. A method for path planning for a vehicle, the method comprising:

determining a predicted trajectory of a remote vehicle, wherein the predicted trajectory of the remote vehicle includes a plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determining a plurality of possible trajectories for the vehicle, wherein the plurality of possible trajectories includes a plurality of possible trajectory nodes;

performing a closeness check of the plurality of possible trajectories, wherein the closeness check includes removing a first trajectory from the plurality of possible trajectories in response to determining that the first trajectory includes one or more of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes which are within a predetermined minimum stopping distance of one or more of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determining one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on a weather condition in an environment surrounding the vehicle, wherein the one or more evaluation metrics includes a collision potential score, a maneuverability score, and a traffic violation score;

selecting an optimal trajectory for the vehicle from the plurality of possible trajectories based at least in part on the one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes; and

performing a first action based at least in part on the optimal trajectory.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes further comprises:

determining a plurality of uncertainties, wherein the plurality of uncertainties includes a plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties, wherein each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties corresponds to one of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, and wherein each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties corresponds to one of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes;

determining a plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties by applying a bias to each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties and each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties, wherein the bias is based at least in part on the weather condition in the environment surrounding the vehicle; and

determining the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and the plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties.

3. The method of claim 2 , wherein determining the plurality of uncertainties further comprises:

determining the plurality of uncertainties based on at least one of: the weather condition in the environment surrounding the vehicle and a localization error of one or more of a plurality of vehicle sensors.

4. The method of claim 2 , wherein determining the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and the plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties further comprises:

determining a longitudinal bias for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and each of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determining a lateral bias for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and each of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, wherein the lateral bias is determined based at least in part on a dynamics-based model and the weather condition in the environment surrounding the vehicle;

applying the longitudinal bias and the lateral bias to each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties; and

applying the longitudinal bias and the lateral bias to each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties.

5. The method of claim 2 , wherein determining the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes further comprises:

determining the collision potential score using a formula:

p

i

=

r

i

⋂

e

i

r

i

⋃

e

i

wherein p i is the collision potential score for an ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, r i is one of the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties corresponding to an ith node of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, et is one of the plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties corresponding to the ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, ∩ is an intersection operator, and ∪ is a union operator.

6. The method of claim 2 , wherein determining the maneuverability score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes further comprises:

determining an estimated propulsion system torque required to reach each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes; and

determining the maneuverability score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on the estimated propulsion system torque using a formula:

m

i

=

T

i

T

M

⁢

A

⁢

X

wherein m i is the maneuverability score for an ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, T i is the estimated propulsion system torque required to reach the ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, and T MAX is a maximum torque available from a propulsion system of the vehicle.

7. The method of claim 6 , wherein the traffic violation score quantifies a legality of maneuvering the vehicle to each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes.

8. The method of claim 7 , wherein selecting the optimal trajectory further comprises:

selecting a subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes to be the optimal trajectory, wherein the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is selected to minimize a sum of each of the one or more evaluation metrics of each of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes.

9. The method of claim 7 , wherein selecting the optimal trajectory further comprises:

selecting a subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes to be the optimal trajectory, wherein the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is selected to minimize an objective function:

c

=

∑

i

=

0

N

N

-

i

N

*

(

p

i

+

v

i

+

m

i

)

wherein c is the objective function, N is a quantity of nodes in the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, p i is the collision potential score of an ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, v i is the traffic violation score of the ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, and m i is the maneuverability score of the ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, wherein each of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is from a same one of the plurality of possible trajectories, and wherein the collision potential score of a first node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and a second node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is less than one.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein performing the first action further comprises:

adjusting an operation of an automated driving system of the vehicle based at least in part on the optimal trajectory.

11. A system for path planning for a vehicle, the system comprising:

a plurality of vehicle sensors;

an automated driving system; and

a controller in electrical communication with the plurality of vehicle sensors and the automated driving system, wherein the controller is programmed to:

determine a predicted trajectory of a remote vehicle using the plurality of vehicle sensors, wherein the predicted trajectory of the remote vehicle includes a plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determine a plurality of possible trajectories for the vehicle using the plurality of vehicle sensors, wherein the plurality of possible trajectories includes a plurality of possible trajectory nodes;

perform a closeness check of the plurality of possible trajectories, wherein the closeness check includes removing a first trajectory from the plurality of possible trajectories in response to determining that the first trajectory includes one or more of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes which are within a predetermined minimum stopping distance of one or more of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determine one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on a weather condition in an environment surrounding the vehicle, wherein the weather condition is determined using the plurality of vehicle sensors, and wherein the one or more evaluation metrics includes a collision potential score, a maneuverability score, and a traffic violation score;

select an optimal trajectory for the vehicle from the plurality of possible trajectories based at least in part on the one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes; and

adjust an operation of the automated driving system based at least in part on the optimal trajectory.

12. The system of claim 11 , wherein to determine the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, the controller is further programmed to:

determine a plurality of uncertainties, wherein the plurality of uncertainties includes a plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties, wherein each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties corresponds to one of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, and wherein each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties corresponds to one of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes;

determine a plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties by applying a bias to each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties and each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties, wherein the bias is based at least in part on the weather condition in the environment surrounding the vehicle; and

determine the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and the plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties.

13. The system of claim 12 , wherein to determine the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and the plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties, the controller is further programmed to:

determine a longitudinal bias for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and each of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determine a lateral bias for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and each of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, wherein the lateral bias is determined based at least in part on a dynamics-based model and the weather condition in the environment surrounding the vehicle;

apply the longitudinal bias and the lateral bias to each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties; and

apply the longitudinal bias and the lateral bias to each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties.

14. The system of claim 12 , wherein to determine the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, the controller is further programmed to:

determine the collision potential score using a formula:

p

i

=

r

i

⋂

e

i

r

i

⋃

e

i

wherein p i is the collision potential score for an ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, r i is one of the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties corresponding to an ith node of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, e i is one of the plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties corresponding to the ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, ∩ is an intersection operator, and ∪ is a union operator.

15. The system of claim 12 , wherein to determine the maneuverability score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, the controller is further programmed to:

determine an estimated propulsion system torque required to reach each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes; and

determine the maneuverability score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on the estimated propulsion system torque using a formula:

m

i

=

T

i

T

M

⁢

A

⁢

X

wherein m i is the maneuverability score for an ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, T i is the estimated propulsion system torque required to reach the ith node of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, and T MAX is a maximum torque available from a propulsion system of the vehicle.

16. The system of claim 15 , wherein the traffic violation score quantifies a legality of maneuvering the vehicle to each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes.

17. The system of claim 16 , wherein to select the optimal trajectory, the controller is further programmed to:

select a subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes to be the optimal trajectory, wherein the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is selected to minimize an objective function:

c

=

∑

i

=

0

N

N

-

i

N

*

(

p

i

+

v

i

+

m

i

)

wherein c is the objective function, N is a quantity of nodes in the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, p i is the collision potential score of an ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, v i is the traffic violation score of the ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, and m i is the maneuverability score of the ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, wherein each of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is from a same one of the plurality of possible trajectories, and wherein the collision potential score of a first node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and a second node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is of less than one.

18. A system for path planning for a vehicle, the system comprising:

a plurality of vehicle sensors;

an automated driving system; and

a controller in electrical communication with the plurality of vehicle sensors and the automated driving system, wherein the controller is programmed to:

determine a predicted trajectory of a remote vehicle using the plurality of vehicle sensors, wherein the predicted trajectory of the remote vehicle includes a plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determine a plurality of possible trajectories for the vehicle using the plurality of vehicle sensors, wherein the plurality of possible trajectories includes a plurality of possible trajectory nodes;

perform a closeness check of the plurality of possible trajectories, wherein the closeness check includes removing a first trajectory from the plurality of possible trajectories in response to determining that the first trajectory includes one or more of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes which are within a predetermined minimum stopping distance of one or more of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes;

determine one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on a weather condition in an environment surrounding the vehicle, wherein the one or more evaluation metrics includes a collision potential score, a maneuverability score, and a traffic violation score;

select an optimal trajectory for the vehicle from the plurality of possible trajectories based at least in part on the one or more evaluation metrics of each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes; and

adjust an operation of the automated driving system, wherein the operation of the automated driving system is adjusted such that the vehicle exits a lane boundary based at least in part on the optimal trajectory.

19. The system of claim 18 , wherein to determine the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, the controller is further programmed to:

determine a plurality of uncertainties, wherein the plurality of uncertainties includes a plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties, wherein each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties corresponds to one of the plurality of predicted trajectory nodes, and wherein each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties corresponds to one of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes;

determine a plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties by applying a bias to each of the plurality of predicted trajectory uncertainties and each of the plurality of possible trajectory uncertainties, wherein the bias is based at least in part on the weather condition in the environment surrounding the vehicle; and

determine the collision potential score for each of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes based at least in part on the plurality of biased predicted trajectory uncertainties and a plurality of biased possible trajectory uncertainties.

20. The system of claim 19 , wherein to select the optimal trajectory, the controller is further programmed to:

select a subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes to be the optimal trajectory, wherein the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is selected to minimize an objective function:

c

=

∑

i

=

0

N

N

-

i

N

*

(

p

i

+

v

i

+

m

i

)

wherein c is the objective function, N is a quantity of nodes in the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, p i is the collision potential score of an ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, v i is the traffic violation score of the ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, and m i is the maneuverability score of the ith node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes, wherein each of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes is from a same one of the plurality of possible trajectories, and wherein a first node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes and a second node of the subset of the plurality of possible trajectory nodes have a collision potential score of less than one.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 22, 2023
From: CUI, MICHAEL; KWON, HYUKSEONG; ROMERO, RODOLFO VALIENTE; HOWE, ANDREW; WAAGEN, ALEXANDER; KOPYLOV, ALEXEI; HUBER, MARCUS JAMES; ESNA ASHARI ESFAHANI, ALIREZA
To: GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC
Reel/Frame 064663/0631 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20250065917A1 · Feb 27, 2025
References Cited (42)
US 6445308B1 · Koike · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 11851089B1 · Hinojosa · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20020067289A1 · Smith · 2002 [cited by examiner]
US 20210009163A1 · Urtasun · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220153258A1 · Arechiga-Gonzalez · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220177001A1 · Kulkarni et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
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 applicant]
DE 102017112300A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
DE 102021206694A1 · 2022 [cited by applicant]
DE 102022124517A1 · 2023 [cited by applicant]
“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., … [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]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/335,758, filed Jul. 3, 2023. [cited by applicant]
U.S. Appl. No. 18/340,249, filed Jun. 23, 2023. [cited by applicant]
Cited By (1)
US 12,583,456