mobile-menu-icon
GM Authority

GM Files Patent For an In-Vehicle Violence Detection System

GM has filed a patent for a new system capable of detecting violence in the cabin of a vehicle. The new GM patent application has been assigned patent number US 2023/0419690 with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and as published on December 28th, 2023. The patent was originally filed on June 22nd, 2022, and lists Wei Tong from Troy, Michigan; Alaa M. Khamis from Courtice, Canada; and Sai Vishnu Aluru from Commerce Township, Michigan as the inventors.

Patent image for a recent GM filing for an in-vehicle violence detection system.

The patent describes a camera-based system for detecting violence inside the cabin of a vehicle, with a standard vehicle camera positioned within the cabin to capture motion images of at least one vehicle occupant. The camera system provides an output of a standard vehicle region-of-interest (ROI) signal and event ROI signal, which are received and fused by an ROI fusion module, generating a fused ROI signal. The fused ROI signal is then sent to a threat evaluation module, which augments the ROI signal with saved data, differentiating normal events from threat events. Finally, a camera-based violence indicator is used to identify potential threat events.

As the patent points out, shared vehicle technology, including car sharing, ridesharing, and ride-hailing services, as well as shared autonomous vehicles like Cruise Origin, are quickly maturing. As such, these services could potentially present a risk to riders’ physical and emotional safety when sharing the vehicle with other riders.

“This, while current shared and pooled shared autonomous vehicles achieve their intended purpose, there is a need or a new and improved in-vehicle violence detection and fusion system,” the patent points out.

The exact method by which the system will distinguish a violent event from a non-violent event remains unclear, although the patent does mention the detection of threatening objects, such as knives, guns, or other weapons. The patent also mentions a “cloud-based system” that provides a priori information, including an area of travel where violence has occurred in the past, and a record of  “normal” behavior as differentiated from threat behavioral events, with potential contextual information received from outside sources as well.

Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM patent filing news, GM technology news, GM business news, and around-the-clock GM news coverage.

Jonathan is an automotive journalist based out of Southern California. He loves anything and everything on four wheels.

Subscribe to GM Authority

For around-the-clock GM news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest GM news. It's totally free.

Comments

  1. big brother.

    Reply
  2. Wow. GM really is becoming “Government Motors”.

    Reply
  3. Lol! Finally we acknowledge that shared autonomous vehicles offer all the unpleasant risks of public mass transit without the tiny mitigation offered by the presence of a human driver! As if things like Uber (basically an unlicensed taxi driven by a stranger using a vehicle of unknown condition) weren’t already sketchy, now we are supposed to just jump into a rolling phonebooth with several strangers and hope their motives are pure and their communicable diseases are under control. We are to ride this communistic contraption through hi-crime areas and feel better with the knowledge that our mugging, rape, and murder are being recorded for an ai to eventually notify an authority after the fact.
    There are reasons Americans work their tails off to afford personal transportation, and avoiding public transit is very high on the list.
    Wonder who will be the modern day Bernie Goetz in one of these rolling victim chambers? Will we get to sue GM for the criminal victimization that occurs while in the care of their autonomous ride share fleet? After all they patented a system to keep us safe, should we not expect it to work?

    Reply
    1. You should maybe read this again. They didn’t file a patent for the vehicle or ride share service. This is a patent to help detect violence in those vehicles. You’re blaming GM for problems created by the ride share industry.

      Reply
  4. They need a disinfectant system for things like TB and China virus etc.etc.etc.

    Reply
    1. 3 people so far that want TB?

      Reply
  5. No more shaking your hands at other drivers. No more fist pumps to your favorite classic rock songs while driving.

    Reply
    1. So true, plus no more fighting in the backseat with your siblings or poking the driver while asking, “Are we there yet?” Oh, how I will miss these joys.

      Reply
  6. If they can design this, why haven’t they designed a system to prevent driving while impaired or driving while using a cell phone? Think of the lives that could be saved.

    Reply
    1. WRT the former, they are. There was a news post about it on here on Dec 13 (“GM Working With Regulators On Drunk Driving Prevention Tech”).

      Reply
    2. Ok. All I see is reasons for invasion of privacy. The lie is save lives while we watch you unlawfully. I’m a car enthusiast. It is stupid to have all this computer bs in a vehicle al because “Simon says”. Ev’s is just a bad idea, cars that drive self or have auto pilot basically. Did people forget that eventually everything breaks or malfunctions eventually. In my experience with cars and working on them. Is 9x out of 10, working on a vehicle .. it’s a computer related issue o sensor or electrical issue always. Besides a damaged part here and there. So yes this bs they putting in cars these days is stupid. And people are gonna get hurt or the government is gonna take control and that’s wrong!

      Reply
    3. Those systems already exist bro. They’re just not considered constitutional. Hell, 20 years ago I worked on a car that had an alcohol breathalyzer installed by the courts in Ohio which prevented the car from starting unless the driver blew in it and passed the alcohol content test. Evidently it was a DUI offense with special circumstances to allow the offender to retain his license.

      Reply
  7. Once “violence” is detected, then what? Cyanide is deployed? A net falls from the ceiling? A lightning strike hits the perceived perpetrator?

    Why not reduce the possibility of a violent incident in the first place by going back to prosecuting and incarcerating violent people, closing our borders, permitting potential victims to arm themselves for protection, etc.

    Montana Bob

    Reply
  8. This is an unconstitutional violation of our privacy of fourth amendment in the fourteenth amendmenthumbs down on your communistic view and agenda

    Reply
  9. “ The exact method by which the system will distinguish a violent event from a non-violent event remains unclear…”

    Would think dialing that in is a key requirement in getting a Patent.

    Reply
  10. “Now look here you children! There will be no speeding! None! If you do speed I will nag you, and if you refuse to obey, I will force the car to slow down, regardless of the driving situation.
    And don’t even think that I’ll let you drive after a beer! Ha, ha, ha! That’s even more naughty you silly boys – and you know it. Will I allow you to start you car? NEIN! NEIN! Nein!
    My newest idea is to watch your every move. Don’t you dare swipe your dog as he tries to get in the driver’s footwell or wants to knock the transmission selector. You foul pig of a man! I’m working on a system to report you to the STASI!”
    —————–
    Welcome to the new GM. And 1984.

    Reply
  11. My little daughters would have lit that thing up like a pinball machine forty years ago.

    Reply
    1. Actually I’m okay with this system if once the violence starts it plays the music and makes announcements like in Mortal Kombat. “Flawless victory. Passenger 2 wins!”

      Reply
  12. Yet another of tens of thousands of useless patients issued this year that will never see production or even a proving stage. Many are “just in case someone else tries this” and are ambiguous, and many others are just so an engineer can claim that they have numerous patents. When you look through the patents of the modern era, there are so many useless and pointless patents that it makes finding anything useful or brilliant next to impossible.

    Reply
  13. It’ll never work.
    Parent: “Don’t make me come back there!”
    Child: “I dare you!”

    Reply
  14. Okay so why in the world is GM doing crap like this when they could be focusing on making way better motors and transmissions than the already crap ones they have now? These people are stupid and way overpaid.

    Reply
  15. US 2023/0419690 is NOT a “patent number!” This is a published application number. One does not “file a patent,” rather you file an application for a patent, which is subject to examination by the patent office. The subject of this application has not yet been patented.

    Reply
  16. This isn’t good ….. at all… what else will the computer system be monitoring and recording??
    All our rights and privacy down the drain in the name of ” safety ” ….. sound familiar anyone ??? 2020 wasn’t that long ago …..

    Reply
  17. Violence in vehicles is rare. Big companies pandering to Big Brother violating the privacy of the public is not. GM already tracks the location of OnStar equipped vehicles without the permission of the vehicle owner or even a subscription. I won’t buy any GM vehicle until they stop violating the privacy of motorists.

    Reply
  18. Buy the stand alone, non networked ecu for the car and . Lock them out of vehicles on a large scale and they will change their position once they see most folks do not want that type of invasion of their privacy. I already see multiple lawsuits happening once a impaired driver detection system shuts down someone’s vehicle. What ever happened to private property, nowadays everything seems to be moving towards public property.

    Reply
  19. It’s to protect Mary from her family. 🤪

    Reply
  20. HAL: “Look Dave, I can see you’re really upset about this. I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over….”

    Reply
  21. This is a bad and intrusive idea, under the guise of safety. Hopefully most people see it for what it is, and refuse to buy.

    Reply
  22. Find the sensor/camera and put a piece of black electrical tape over it. Have already done that with my computer monitors.

    Reply
  23. After I disable will I still be able to operate the vehicle?

    Reply
  24. before the company concentrates on high technology they should concentrate on basic technology on how to manufacture reliable engines and transmissons first…. and is if there is issues take care of the customer…

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel