ARIhas developed, and is expanding, a strong IP position in autonomous highway safety.  Currently, we have 7 issued Patents, and further intellectual property in progress, with a number of applications before the USPTO for life-saving harm avoidance strategies, including novel V2X strategies and algorithms.  

Issued U.S. Patents:

  • 9,701,307
    Systems and Methods for Hazard Mitigation - Jul. 11, 2017

  • 9,896,096
    Systems and Methods for Hazard Mitigation - Feb. 20, 2018

  • 10, 059,335
    Systems and Methods for Hazard Mitigation - Aug. 28, 2018

  • 10,507,829
    Systems and Methods for Hazard Mitigation - Dec. 17, 2019

  • 10,713,950
    Rapid Wireless Communication for Vehicle Collision Mitigation - Jul. 14, 2020

  • 10,816,635
    Autonomous Vehicle Localization System - Oct. 27, 2020

  • 10,816,636
    Autonomous Vehicle Localization System - Oct. 27, 2020

ARI Patents are focused on autonomous collision mitigation.  This entails systems and methods for determining whether an imminent collision is avoidable, planning a defensive strategy based on the vehicle's maximum braking, steering, and acceleration capabilities, and then carrying out that strategy.  The  mission is to avoid a collision if it is avoidable, manage the collision to minimize harm if it is unavoidable, and have the instant ability to know the difference. 

Featuring a constantly updated kinetic model of the surrounding traffic, surprises by anything that happens are eliminated.  Whenever a vehicle looks like a threat, ARI’s patented strategies extrapolate the model forward in time, exploring a wide range of actions to prevent the collision.  Usually this is sufficient.

The ARI Advanced Collision Mitigation strategies combine lightning-fast collision avoidance with precise harm minimization - autonomously.


Unfortunately, a collision is sometimes unavoidable.  In that case, the problem can be recognized early, and the overall harm can be evaluated – including major and minor injuries, and property damage likely from the collision if nothing is done.  Then, in milliseconds with ultra high-speed processors, the likely effect of different courses of action can be tested, such as braking, accelerating, or steering at critical moments, and then the best strategy to minimize harm is then selected.  The system then takes over and precisely guides the vehicle according to the least-harm trajectory.  It continues to control the action all the way through the collision, millisecond by millisecond, doing everything possible to keep people safe. 

A key feature of ARI Patents is a coherent post-collision strategy.  The processors automatically develop a plan for avoiding secondary threats even before the collision occurs.   During and after the collision, the sensors continuously keep a lookout for approaching traffic.  The system drives the vehicle to the side of the road quickly and safely, then stops, at which point control can be turned back over to the driver. It even sends a help-request message with location and injury details.  Because the collision has been properly managed, it is far more likely that everyone walks away.  The cars may be banged up, but serious injuries were minimized.  Implementation of ARI strategies can save lives one more time.

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.



Autonomous Partners
ARI's intellectual property can save lives otherwise tragically wasted on roadways throughout the world. We offer our expanding autonomous safety patent portfolio to serious automotive developers and/or manufacturers who share our deep commitment to roadway safety. The heartache associated with the death of a child, a loved one, or a friend is eliminated when people arrive safely at their destination.

1.35 Million Deaths Occur Every Year:
Even one death is one death too many.
Together, let's save lives!


Kemp Massengill, President
709 Via Del Monte
Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 USA
760.390.1410 (pacific time)


ARI Patents can save lives.
After every accident, our mission:

scroll up