[log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" width="44" height="44" border="0"> The SmartDrivingCars eLetter, Pod-Casts, Zoom-Casts and Zoom-inars are made possible in part by support from the Smart Transportation and Technology ETF, symbol MOTO. For more information: www.motoetf.com. Most funding is supplied by Princeton University's Department of Operations Research & Financial Engineering and Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering (PAVE) research laboratory as part of its research dissemination initiatives.
Staff, March 4, " Honda Motor Co Ltd on Thursday unveiled a partially self-driving Legend sedan in Japan, becoming the world’s first carmaker to sell a vehicle equipped with new, certified level 3 automation technology.
The launch
gives
Japan’s No.2
automaker bragging
rights for
being the
first to
market, but
lease sales of
the level 3
flagship
Legend would
be limited
to a batch of
100 in Japan,
at a retail
price of 11
million yen
($102,000).
Still, the new
automation
technology is
a big step
towards
eliminating
human
error-induced
accidents,
chief engineer
Yoichi
Sugimoto told
reporters.
The Legend’s
“Traffic Jam
Pilotâ€
system can
control
acceleration,
braking and
steering under
certain
conditions.
Once the
system is
activated, a
driver can
also watch
movies or use
the navigation
on the screen,
helping to
mitigate
fatigue and
stress when
driving in a
traffic jam,
Honda said in
a
statement...."
Read
more
Hmmmm... I added the
bold emphasis
and you must
read the fine
print, that
unfortunately
Reuters
glossed over.
Honda must
stop doing
things for
"...Bragging
Rights..."
and stop behaving
like Elon!
This isn't
really "Level
3" because,
rightly so, it
requires the
driver to have
his butt in
the driver's
seat. It is
also only for
low speed.
What MUST be
clearly stated
upfront is the
Operational
Design Domain
that will be
strictly
enforced and
driver mis-use
of this
functionality
will be not be
tolerated. So
at low speeds,
in acceptable
weather, on
certain
pre-determined
roads,..., and
if a
non-drowsy,
non-impaired
licensed
driver remains
in the
driver's seat,
then that
driver may
take his/her
"feet off the
brake &
throttle",
"hands off the
wheel" and
"eyes off the
road" but
remain
prepared to be
required to
use his/her
feet, hands
and eyes to
safely drive
the cars, if
so requested.
Should the
driver not
respond to
such request
in a timely
manner, Honda
assumes no
responsibility
for any
liabilities
incurred
should the
vehicle crash
and the"Level
3 flagship
Legend" will
either stop
dead in the
middle of the
street or pull
over to the
side of the
road and
stop. The
Level 3
functionality
will not be
re-enabled
until the
driver ...
(you fill in
the blank).
I agree that this is a start, but it has a very long way
to go. To me,
the most
important
message that
needs to be
conveyed to a
potential buy
of this kind
of car is: 1.
Mis-use or
mis-behavior
will not be
tolerated.
and 2. While
the driver may
be enabled to
take
"feet-off",
"hands-off"
and "eyes-off"
the driver's
butt MUST
remain in the
driver's seat
and the driver
may not be
drowsy or
intoxicated!
We can't have
Tesla-style
videos all
over the
intertubes
showing the
mis-use of
Honda's Level3
in Japan.
Alain
March 2,
"Austin
Russell is the
25-year-old
founder and
CEO of
Luminar, a
startup in
Silicon Valley
that makes
LIDAR sensors
for
self-driving
cars. LIDAR
technology had
been used for
short-distance
mapping, but
Luminar claims
to have a
functioning
LIDAR that
works at 250
meters, which
is a
breakthrough.
Luminar
recently went
public, making
Austin today's
youngest
self-made
billionaire.
And when it
comes to
self-driving
cars, youth is
definitely an
advantage.
Austin told me
we're still
years if not
decades away
from fully
self-driving
cars, and
there's a lot
of work to be
done to make
them safe,
effective, and
ubiquitous.
That work is
racing ahead.
” Luminar has
deals with
Volvo, Audi,
Toyota, and
others ” but
building a
complete
self-driving
car is still a
long-term
project.
Here we
go..." Read
more
Hmmmm... A good
interview well
worth
reading. My
issue with
Driverless
cars for the
consumer
market is that
the
development
cost for the
software are
non-trivial,
especially
relative to
any
incremental
value that
might be
envisioned
relative to
"Level3' or
"Level 2+". "
Consumer-grade
Level4"
software must
become
good/safe
enough to do
all of the
driving and
accept all of
the
safety-related
responsibility
throughout the
Driverless
Car's
Operational
Design Domain
(ODD). (The
ODD is the
strictly
regulated/controlled conditions under which such "Feet-off, Hands-off,
Eyes-off,
Butt-out
(can't
rely/fall-back
on there being
a licensed
& capable
driver in the
driver's seat;
car is empty
plus, maybe,
riders and
packages)
That ODD must be "larger enough" to encompass mobility
opportunities
that deliver
more
consumer value
than the,
appropriately
financed,
development
cost of that
software. I'll
claim that
there is
little
incremental
consumer value
in not having
the consumer
do any of the
driving
(Level4) over
even needing
to do most of
the driving
(Level 3).
The only real
incremental
value is
getting you
home if you
are drunk,
(Level3 can't
get you all
the way from
the watering
hole to your
home; else for
that trip it
is "Level 4"
There is also some real value in "giving" rides to
individuals
that aren't
properly
licensed to
drive (your
young
children) or
those that
can't drive
for whatever
reason.
There is also
value in being
able to
dispatch your
car with no
one in it to
go to someone
else and give
them a ride...
as long as all
of the
Driverless/Level4
car's
activities are
strictly
contained in
the ODD.
Having a capable licensed driver available as a backup
substantially
reduces
software
development
cost . Said
another way:
the
incremental
cost of going
from a
Consumer-viable
Level3 car
(where the
consumer
implicitly/explicitly
accepts to be
responsible
and "do the
heavy lifting"
when things
get tough) to
Level4 where
the "software"
has to do all
of the
lifting, light
through
heavy, and
accept all of
the
responsibility,
is likely ms
more a
sufficient
number of
"early
adopters' are
willing to
endure. Thus,
Level4 as a
consumer
product is
"Dead-on-Arrival"
(DoA)! (Very
high
incremental
cost for very
little
incremental
value. Alain
D.
Furchtgott-Roth,
March 1,
"Covid-19
caused a
tsunami of
changes to the
transportation
sector. In its
wake, Congress
shouldn't
design the
$1.9 trillion
stimulus
package as
though
Americans will
eventually
return to
their
pre-pandemic
behavior.
Instead,
legislators
should
determine what
changes in
behavior will
be permanent
and, until the
future is
clearer, focus
on maintaining
existing
infrastructure
rather than
building new
and ambitious
projects.
Some modes of
transportation
have fared
better than
others since
the pandemic
began. A
recent Department
of
Transportation
(DOT) report
by Steven
Polzin
finds that
passenger cars
have seen only
a 10 percent
decline in
mileage, while
Amtrak,
airlines,
public
transit, and
intercity
buses have
seen drop-offs
in excess of
60 percent.
The report
projects that
only air
travel will
return to its
pre-pandemic
level by 2024,
while travel
via other
modes,
including
cars, will
remain about 5
percent to 10
percent
lower....
To allocate
federal
infrastructure
dollars
wisely,
legislators
need to know
how many
people will
continue to
work from
home—and how
this share
will be
divided among
cities,
suburbs, and
rural areas.
As our
transportation
habits have
changed, so
have the
answers to
these
questions.
Congress
should take
note."
Read more Hmmmm... Wise
advice here.
Be sure to
read Steve
Polzin's
report: "COVID-19's
Effects on The
Future of
Transportation".
Alain
J. Ewing,
March 2,
"Volvo Cars
one-upped
larger rivals
like General
Motors and
added momentum
to the
movement
toward
electric
vehicles on
Tuesday by
saying it
would convert
its entire
lineup to
battery power
by 2030, no
longer selling
cars with
internal
combustion
engines.
The
declaration by
the Swedish
carmaker is
the latest
attempt by a
traditional
auto company
to break with
its fossil
fuels past. It
is also one of
the most
ambitious
proposals and
ratchets up
the pressure
on others to
follow suit.
The auto
industry has
been moving
toward
electrification
for years, but
the shift has
taken on new
urgency in
recent months.
President
Biden's
election,
along with his
commitment to
fight climate
change, has
raised
expectations
that the
United States
will offer the
kind of
incentives
that helped
make electric
cars the
fastest-growing
segment of the
European
market last
year...."
Read more Hmmmm... We'll
address this
topic in more
depth in the
14th Weekly
Session of the
Princeton
SmartDrivingCar
Summit at noon
on Thursday,
April 1: What
Will Power
Safely-driven
Cars?
(no
correlation
with April
Fool's pranks,
promise)
Alain
R.
Mitchell,
March 2, "With
the
introduction
of its new C40
Recharge on
Tuesday, Volvo
became the
latest
automaker to
bet that
consumers who
have so far
been cool to
the idea of an
electric
vehicle might
change their
minds if it
comes in a
form they
love: the
crossover.
Whether they
do may be
crucial to the
success of
California's
plan to end
sales of
gasoline and
diesel cars by
2035.
Volvo joins
Ford of Europe
and Jaguar in
going all in
on EVs,
promising
every car it
makes and
sells by 2030
will be
all-electric.
In a webcast
to introduce
the new
vehicle, the
company also
laid out a
radical new
retail
strategy —
the C40 and
all electric
Volvo cars
will be
available for
purchase only
online.
A slew of
electric
crossovers has
hit the market
in recent
months,
including the
Ford Mustang
Mach-E, the
Tesla Model Y
and the
Volkswagen
ID.4...." Read
more Hmmmm... Maybe. We'll see if
these are able
to eat into
Tesla's market
share. Alain
G. Wilson,
March 3,
"Marking three
years since
automotive
manufacturer -
Ford Motor
Company -
began its
plans to test
and
commercialise
its
self-driving
services in
Miami, we take
a look at what
the company
has been up to
in the last
three years to
develop the
technology...."
Read
more Hmmmm... To get all of this to
work safely
and to "make
everyone
'whole' should
something bad
happen" while
you don't have
a capable
driver in the
driver's seat
is
non-simple!
Elon's fine
print requires
a capable
driver in the
driver's seat
who will be
held
responsible to
"make everyone
'whole' should
something bad
happen"
because Elon
is unwilling
to accept that
responsibility. He knows he isn't rich enough and FSD isn't good enough
for him to
take that
risk. As soon
as he
proclaims that
he is
accepting that
risk, then,
maybe, we'll
begin to pay
attention to
his
proclamations
about FSD.
Alain
E. Lipton,
March 3,
"While serving
as
transportation
secretary
during the
Trump
administration,
Elaine Chao
repeatedly
used her
office staff
to help family
members who
run a shipping
business with
extensive ties
to China, a
report
released
Wednesday by
the
Transportation
Department's
inspector
general
concluded.
The inspector
general
referred the
matter to the
Justice
Department in
December for
possible
criminal
investigation.
But in the
weeks before
the end of
Trump
administration,
two Justice
Department
divisions
declined to do
so..."
Read more Hmmmm... Trump lies through his
teeth,"suggests" that a mob invades the Capitol, has everyone stay at
his hotel down
the street and
"Transportation Department’s
inspector
general" goes
after Elaine.
Sure,
her husband
should have
voted for
impeachment,
but...
C'mon
Man!!!
Alain
T. Lee,
March 4,
"Bloomberg reports
that Cruise, a
self-driving
company
jointly owned
by GM and
Honda, is in
talks to
acquire the
startup
Voyage.
Founded four
years ago,
Voyage is
working to launch
a self-driving
taxi service
at the
Villages,
a massive
retirement
community in
Florida.
Bloomberg says
that "no deal
is imminent,"
and I don't
have any
inside
information.
But such a
deal would be
consistent
with an ongoing
trend:
it's becoming
harder and
harder for
self-driving
startups to
remain
independent.
Voyage was
part of a wave
of
self-driving
startups that
were founded
between 2013
and 2018.
Cruise itself
was one of the
earliest of
these
companies; it
was co-founded
in 2013 by its
current CEO
Kyle Vogt.
Others
included
nuTonomy in
2013, Zoox in
2014,
Drive.ai,
Optimus Ride,
and TuSimple
in 2015,
Starsky
Robotics, Nuro
and Udelv in
2016, Voyage,
Aurora, and
May Mobility
in 2017, and
Ike and Kodiak
Robotics in
2018.
But over the
last three
years, these
companies have
suffered a
high attrition
rate. Cruise
was acquired
by GM in
2016. This
early
acquisition
was a sign of
confidence in
Cruise, and GM
has since
poured
billions of
dollars into
the startup.
Similarly,
auto parts
maker Aptiv
acquired
NuTonomy in
2017 and has
made its CEO
the leader of
Motional, a
joint venture
with Hyundai.
Other startups
didn't have
such happy
exits. Apple
acquired
Drive.ai
in 2019 as the
firm was on
the verge of
shutting down.
Trucking
startup
Starsky shut
down last year,
and Amazon bought
Zoox for a
bargain price.
Ike sold
to its larger
startup rival
Nuro in
late 2020..."
Read more Hmmmm... Not listed are the
Otto
Shenanigans
and others.
What everyone
is realizing
is that
SafelyDrivenCars
are the
purview of the
legacy OEM and
Driverless
mobility,
while having
enormous
upside
potential, is
requiring
equally
enormous
capabilities/investments
to get off the
ground. So
far there is
only one that
has been able
to barely get
started, and
only after a
meticulous,well
executed and
outrageously
expensive
"Spring
Training".
More @ Detroit
News if
you have a
subscription.
Alain
Press
release, "Feb
26, "... When
we acquired
Blackmore in
2019, we said
it would be a
gamechanger
for our
ability to
pursue
autonomous
trucking
because FMCW
lidar allows
us to see
further and
faster than
ever before.
(Long-range
sensing?
Check!) Since
then, we have
moved quickly
to deploy our
trucks in
Texas,
outfitted with
Aurora's
FirstLight
Lidar, which
allows us to
see well
beyond 300
meters,
measures
velocity
instantaneously,
and is
interference-free.
Plus, it's
purpose-built
to meet the
needs of the
Aurora Driver,
on Aurora's
timeline.
We focused on
performance
first, and now
it''s time to
scale. As we
look to expand
our fleet and
commercialize
our driverless
trucks,
FirstLight
Lidar must be
increasingly
scalable'
needs to be
smaller and
less
expensive, but
just as
powerful. To
make that
happen, we're
excited to
announce that
we're
acquiring OURS
Technology, a
lidar-on-a-chip company that will help us do just that. (Scalability?
Check!) And in
addition to
their
cutting-edge
tech, we look
forward to
having their
team join
Aurora!..." Read more
Hmmmm...
Interesting.
"Interference
free" is very
important,
especially at
long
distance. The
key is to be
able to
determine
one's relative
velocity with
the objects in
the the lane
ahead and
especially to
be able to reliably
determine
if one is able
to pass under
stationary
objects
(objects whose
relative speed
= current
speed) that
are positioned
in the lane
ahead. That
is non-easy.
It needs to be done in real-time and far enough away so
that the truck
has time to
come to a
complete
stop.
Certainly,
digital map
databases are
helpful, But
only as long
as the
stationary
object
detected ahead
is properly
correlated to
the map
database; if
it is not,
then
relegating it
as a false
positive, as
Uber did with
Elaine
Herzberg,
doesn't have a
pretty
ending.
Stationary
object abound
in lanes
ahead...
signs, traffic
lights, tree
canopies,...
Easy to detect
and measure
location to
Evey face
point.
Surface point
underneath in
order to
measure
clearance...
not so much.
I sure hope
this LiDAR
helps. If
not, then what
does it use to
justify its
expense?
Alain
T. Lee.,
Feb. 27,
"Aspiring
electric truck
maker Nikola
has
admitted to
the Securities
and Exchange
Commission
that nine
statements
made by
founder Trevor
Milton were
"inaccurate."
Milton was forced
to resign
from Nikola in
September,
shortly after
the falsehoods
first came to
light.
Between 2016
and 2020,
Milton told a
series of
whoppers about
his fledgling
truck maker.
At a 2016
press event,
Milton took to
the stage to
unveil a
prototype of
the company's
first truck,
dubbed the
Nikola One.
During the
event, Milton
claimed that
the truck
"fully
functions." In
reality,
Nikola never
got the truck
to move under
its own power.
..." Read
more Hmmmm... Is Nikola
still in
business??? I
guess SPACs
never go
away??? Alain
F. Lambert,
March 1,
"Fisker says
that it has
given up on
solid-state
batteries
after having
announced a
“breakthroughâ€
that was
supposed to
enable “500
miles of range
and 1-minute
charging†in
its electric
cars. After
relaunching
his electric
vehicle
startup,
Henrik Fisker
started making
a lot of very
ambitious
claims about
the
capabilities
of the new
company’s
future
electric cars.
We have
highlighted
some of those
in a report
called: “A
look at
Fisker’s
unbelievable
claims about
its upcoming
all-electric
car with
‘over 400
miles of
range’ &
‘9-minute
charging.â€
But one of the
biggest claims
was regarding
the batteries
that Fisker
planned to
use.
At first, the
company
announced that
their first
car will be
powered by a
new
graphene-based
hybrid
supercapacitor
technology.
That idea
didn’t stick
for long and
Fisker instead
announced a
solid-state
battery
“breakthroughâ€
for electric
cars with
“500 miles
range and
1-minute
charging.â€
As with most
battery
breakthrough
claims, we
were skeptical
of Fisker’s
announcement.
Now, a few
years later,
Henrik Fisker
announced that
they have
actually given
up on the
supposed
breakthrough
over a year
ago....." Read
more Hmmmm... Does it seem that the
EV sector is
substantially
over-hyped
with Tesla,
Nikola,
Fisker, ...
? Batteries
should have
won the
"power-plant
war in "1905"
against
Stanley's
Steamer
and
Otto's ICE.
But batteries
and sourcing
the electrons
proved to
be a real
challenge.
After more
than 100 years
at trying and
under the best
imagined
environmental
and political
circumstances,
smoke, mirrors
and the EV
sector may be
rising
out of the
ashes.
Scaling
batteries and
electrons to
efficiently
and
environmentally
meet the
nation's
mobility needs
and
aspirations
remains a very
open
challenge.
We'll discuss
some of this
in the
Summit's 14th
Session: What
will Power
SmartDrivingCars?
on April 1.
Alain
These
editions are
sponsored by
the SmartETFs
Smart
Transportation
and Technology
ETF, symbol
MOTO. For more
information
head to www.motoetf.com
F. Fishkin,
Nov 25, "What
you should
know about
electric cars,
climate change
and more. The
Dispatcher
publisher
Michael Sena
joins
Princeton's
Alain
Kornhauser and
co-host Fred
Fishkin in an
eye opening
edition of
Smart Driving
Cars.."
F. Fishkin, Nov 24, "When it comes to active driver assistance systems, what works and what needs improvement? Some answers from Kelly Funkhouser… program manager for vehicle interface, head of connected and automated vehicles at Consumer Reports. She joins Princeton's Alain Kornhauser and co-host Fred Fishkin for episode 186 of Smart Driving Cars."
F. Fishkin, July 20, "Is Driverless home delivery the fastest route to Affordable Mobility for the Mobility Disadvantaged? ... "
F. Fishkin,
July 2,
"Transportation,
racial
injustices and
changing the
thinking
around the
future of
mobility. NYU
McSilver
Institute for
Poverty Policy
& Research
fellow Henry
Greenidge
joins
Princeton's
Alain
Kornhauser and
co-host Fred
Fishkin in an
eye and mind
opening
episode of
Smart Driving
Cars. Plus
Amazon, Zoox,
Waymo, Tesla
& more.
."
F. Fishkin,
June 2, "But
the debate is
not really
about
technology nor
is it about
who delivers
the best value
for the money
or the most
privacy. It is
about ..."
M. Sena, Feb 23, " ... There is no way to test a car virtually...
OEMs
are still
learning that
that today’s
cars are not
your
father’s
Oldsmobile.
Vehicle
connectivity
is not
something that
is tacked onto
a car, like a
battery-operated portable TOMTOM or GARMIN (or CoPilot...Michael,
How could you
forget?...
ðŸ˜)...navigation
system....
M.
Scribner, Feb.
11,
"“Automated
vehicle
technology is
coming; it’s
advancing very
quickly,â€
said
now-confirmed
Secretary of
Transportation
Pete Buttigieg
during his
confirmation
hearing. “It
is something
that holds the
potential to
be
transformative
and I think in
many ways
policy has not
kept up.â€
Secretary
Buttigieg is
absolutely
correct. The
U.S.
Department of
Transportation, specifically the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration
division, has
a number of
tools at its
disposal that
can be used to
modernize the
federal
regulatory
environment to
help speed the
deployment of
automated
vehicle
technologies
that can
greatly
enhance
safety,
mobility, and
access for all
Americans.
There is also
an important
role for
Congress,
especially at
this early
stage of
automated
vehicle
development.
To support
reform efforts
within the
executive and
legislative
branches, my
new Reason
Foundation
policy brief,
Challenges
and
Opportunities
for Federal
Automated
Vehicle Policy,
lays out
several steps
policymakers
can take to
adapt the
automotive
regulatory
apparatus to
automated
driving system
technologies.
The brief is
broken into
three main
sections:
defining
automated
vehicles, a
survey of
current
federal
automated
vehicle policy
development
activities,
and
recommendations
for federal
policymakers.
G.
Laniewki, Jan
26.
"Ride-hailing
apps (Uber and
Lyft) have
long been
criticized for
their
inability to
generate
profitâ€â€
especially
now, since
they have been
one of the
hardest hit by
the pandemic1.
It seems that
the viability
of their
businesses
relies heavily
on automation,
eliminating
drivers to cut
their largest
cost and
hopefully
generating
profit.2 This
hail-mary
strategy rests
on that idea
that
autonomous
driving will
become a
valuable
industryâ€â€where
some have
estimated to
be worth as
much as $1.5
trillion3â€â€and
any pioneering
company would
have a
non-nominal
market
penetration in
it.
With that
being said,
there is a
need for
research that
analyzes the
viability of
autonomous
ridesharing
while
it’s in
its infancy.
Our approach
is
simulation-based
and is built
from a
foundation of
work from
previous
courses:..."
Read
more Hmmmm... Very nice Nation-wide
investigation
by my students
this past
Fall. Alain
E.
Chao, Jan.
2021, "The
Automated
Vehicles
Comprehensive
Plan
(Comprehensive
Plan)
describes how
the United
States
Department of
Transportation
(U.S. DOT) is
supporting the
safe
integration of
Automated
Driving
Systems (ADS)2
into the
surface
transportation
system. It
explains
Departmental
goals related
to ADS,
identifies
actions being
taken to meet
those goals,
and provides
real-world
examples of
how these
Departmental
actions relate
to emerging
ADS
applications...
" Read
more Hmmmm... I guess this is a good
plan. Of
course, Safety
is #1, as it
should be.
DoT's #1
public
responsibility
is Safety.
Whether Cyber
Security and
Privacy are #
2 and 3 and
ahead of
Enhanced
Mobility and
Accessibility
is certainly
debatable.
And if the Enhanced
Mobility and
Accessibility
of the
"mobility
disadvantaged
that have been
left behind by
our current
favored
transport
system" were
to be a
category, then
that one
should be
right behind
Safety at #2
if not ahead
of Safety and
a solid #1.
The rest. as
they should,
are
appropriately
details. What
is most
disconcerting
about the
report are the
images. To me,
those images
depict the
current
"haves", not
"have-nots"
and thus don't
really address
the mobility
needs and
desires of
those whose
quality-of-life
could be most
enhanced by
automation
technology.
These images
seem to focus
the Plan on
giving those
that already
have pretty
good ways to
get around,
yet another
way to get
around, where,
when you
finally get
right down to
it, may at
best be only
slightly
better than
what they
already have.
This
Comprehensive
Plan should
first be
focused on
providing
high-quality
affordable
mobility to
those whose
quality-of-life
could be most
improved by
such new
technologies
and
subsequently
serve those
that already
enjoy and can
afford other
high-quality
forms of
mobility.
Also, Elaine, thank you for a really good 4 years. You (and USDoT) were really the star of what was otherwise a most embarrassing Presidency. Also, thanks to Diana Furchtgott-Roth and many others in US DoT. Alain
C.
Isidore, Dec
17, "Automatic
braking, once
a feature
available
exclusively to
high-end cars,
is becoming
common across
the industry,
according to
analysis from
Consumer
Reports and
the Insurance
Institute for
Highway
Safety.
But the
industry has
some notable
exceptions,
including
General Motors
(GM) and Fiat
Chrysler
(FCAU), which
badly trail
rivals in
offering
automatic
braking as
standard
equipment,
according to
the safety
groups.
Automatic
braking uses
sensors to
apply brakes
when a vehicle
ahead is
stopped, and
the car's
onboard
computer can
avoid or
lessen the
impact of an
accident. It's
an
increasingly
popular
feature with
car buyers.
Many
automakers are
emphasizing
the feature in
their
advertising
and sales
pitches.
Four
higher-end
brands already
had the
feature on 99%
or better of
their vehicles
before this
past year:
Audi,
Mercedes-Benz,
Volvo and
Tesla (TSLA).
Six more have
the feature on
at least 96%
of the
vehicles they
sold in the
United States
between
September 2019
and September
2020: BMW,
Hyundai,
Mazda, Subaru,
Toyota (TM)
and Volkswagen
(VLKAF). Three
more
automakers
â€â€Â
Ford (F),
Honda (HMC)
and Nissan
(NSANF), had
automatic
braking on
more than 90%
of their US
vehicles....
" Read
more Hmmmm... Set up for the 3rd
session of the
SDC Summit.
Alain
D. Shapiro,
Dec. 17, "When
it comes to
future
mobility, you
may not have
to pave as
many paradises
for personal
car parking
lots.
This week,
autonomous
mobility
company Zoox
unveiled its
much-anticipated
purpose-built
robotaxi.
Designed for
everyday urban
mobility, the
vehicle is
powered by
NVIDIA and is
one of the
first level 5
robotaxis
featuring
bi-directional
capabilities,
providing a
concrete view
into the next
generation of
intelligent
transportation...."
Read
more Hmmmm... Watch Zoom-Cast 192.
Alain
C. Metz
& K.
Conger, Dec 7,
"Uber, which
spent hundreds
of millions of
dollars on a
self-driving
car project
that
executives
once believed
was a key to
becoming
profitable, is
handing the
autonomous
vehicle effort
over to a
Silicon Valley
start-up, the
companies said
on Monday.
Uber will also
invest $400
million in the
start-up,
called Aurora,
so it is
essentially
paying the
company to
take over the
autonomous car
operation,
which had
become a
financial and
legal
headache. Uber
is likely to
license
whatever
technology
Aurora manages
to create.
The deal
amounts to a
fire-sale end
to a
high-profile
but
star-crossed
effort to
replace
Uber’s
human drivers
with machines
that could
drive on their
own. It is
also
indicative of
the challenges
facing other
autonomous
vehicle
projects,
which have
received
billions in
investments
from Silicon
Valley and
automakers but
have not
produced the
fleets of
robotic
vehicles some
thought would
be on the
streets by
now...." Read
more Hmmmm... Actually a good
article.
Alain
S. Wilmot,
Nov 30,
"Nikola Corp.
NKLA 0.76%
isn't turning
out to be the
next Tesla
that investors
and were
hoping for.
The
electric-vehicle
startup put
its
eye-catching
“Badgerâ€ÂÂÂ
pickup-truck
project on ice
Monday as part
of a radically
shrunken
version of its
deal with GM.
All that is
left of the
original
agreement
signed in
September is a
plan for GM to
supply Nikola
with fuel-cell
technology for
U.S. big rigs.
Detroit's
biggest auto
maker had
planned to
take an equity
stake in
Nikola in
exchange for
building the
Badger under
contract. But
the deal has
been in doubt
almost from
the start
after a
hedge-fund
report
detailed the
limitations of
Nikola's
technology,
leading to the
resignation of
founder Trevor
Milton.
GM won't sell
Nikola fuel
cells soon.
For all its
fanfare about
hydrogen, the
startup is
currently
focused on
battery-powered
versions of
its first
electric
truck, theTre,
It hopes to
start
full-scale
production in
the fourth
quarter of
next year in
Germany and in
early 2022 in
Coolidge,
Ariz. Hydrogen
trucks won't
come before
2023, and in
Europe Nikola
is using Bosch
as its
fuel-cell
supplier.
..." Read
more Hmmmm... Lessons for many in this
endeavor. See
also Andrew
Hawkin's take
as well as David
Morris'.
Alain
N, Webb,
Oct. 30, "As
the world's
most
experienced
developer of
automated
driving
systems, Waymo
has extensive
experience in
developing and
applying
state-of-the-art
safety
methodologies.
Waymo's
methodologies
help implement
Waymo's
forward-looking safety philosophy: Waymo will reduce traffic injuries
and fatalities
by driving
safely and
responsibly,
and will
carefully
manage risk as
we scale our
operations.
Waymo's safety
methodologies,
which draw on
well
established
engineering
processes and
address new
safety
challenges
specific to
Automated
Vehicle
technology,
provide a firm
foundation for
safe
deployment of
our Level 4
ADS, which we
also refer to
as the Waymo
Driver.
Waymo's
determination
of its
readiness to
deploy its AVs
safely in
different
settings rests
on that firm
foundation and
on a thorough
analysis of
risks specific
to a
particular
Operational
Design Domain
)...." Read
more Hmmmm... The process. Must
read! Alain
M. Schwall, Oct. 30, "Waymo's mission to reduce traffic injuries and fatalities and improve mobility for all has led us to expand deployment of automated vehicles (AVs) on public roads without a human driver behind the wheel. As part of this process, Waymo is committed to providing the public with informative and relevant data regarding the demonstrated safety of Waymo's automated driving system (ADS), which we call the Waymo Driver...." Read more Hmmmm... The substance. Must read! ...
I had the priveledge of reviewing Waymo's most recent
Safety
Reports 1 , 2 (above)
In the past, safety reports by the AV community have
largely been a
response to
NHTSA'¢s Voluntary
Safety
Self-Assessments and
have, in my
opinion, been
largely public
relations
documents.
While
generally
descriptive
about the
testing
processes they
contain very
little, if
any,
substantive
information
about their safety
related experience
to-date
focused
exclusively on
driverless
operation.
Safe driverless operation is absolutely necessary for
AVs to evolve
from extremely
expensive
chauffeured
rides to
affordable
mobility
available to
essentially
anyone
throughout an
Operational
Design Domain
(ODD).
Affordability
requires that
the mobility
be delivered
without a
driver or
attendant
on-board the
vehicle. Only
passengers.
The decision to remove the driver/attendant rests in
part on the
shoulders of
public safety
regulators who
need to allow
such
operation, but
more
importantly,
on the
shoulders of
the real
decision
makers at the
AV company.
In the end, it
is those AV
company
decision
makers who
will be held
fully
responsible
for any lapse
in the safety
of the
driverless
operation.
These decision
makers are
inside the AV
companies and
are, of
course, privy
to all the
details and
substance
about their
own safety
related
driverless
operation,
which, in the
past, has not
been shared in
their
Voluntary
Safety
Self-assessments.
My impression is that these just released Waymo Safety
Reports
contain the
substantive
information
that clearly
depicts
Waymo's
safety-related
driverless
operational
experience.
To me, they
read like
internal
documents
meant to guide
and inform
internal
decision
makers to
objectively
decide if a
sufficiently
safe
operational
experience has
been achieved
in order to
vote to fully
accept the
safety
responsibility
of driverless
operation in
their
Operational
Design
Domain.
Given the information that is contained in these
documents, it
does not
surprise me
that Waymo
decision
makers have
decided to
proceed with
driverless
operation in
the Phoenix
Operational
Design Domain.
Had I had the
responsibility
of being one
of the
decision
makers
reviewing
these
documents, I
would have
also voted
yes.
Alain
Staff,
Oct. 2020 "On
this page you
will find the
gradings of
cars tested by
Euro NCAP on
automated
driving
technologies.
For its 2020
assessment of
Highway Assist
systems, Euro
NCAP has
developed
dedicated test
and assessment
protocols,
divided into
two main
areas:
Assistance
Competence,
based on the
balance
between Driver
Engagement and
Vehicle
Assistance,
and Safety
Backup...." Read
more Hmmmm....Look carefully at each
component of
the rating
system. NCAP
has chosen one
algorithmic
way of "adding
apples and
oranges" to
get their
rating.
Unfortunately
they don't
divulge the
secret
formula. To
me, it doesn't
seem to be
sufficiently
iweighted on
what I
consider to be
the most
important
element...
"Collision
Avoidance".
If the system
doesn't do
that well,
then why
bother being
good at
Consumer
Information
(unless that
information
says clearly
that the
system doesn't
work well".
If NCAP itself did a good job of
Consumer
Information
then it would
divulge its
algorithm and
allow the
consumer to
edit its
weights to
trade-off what
the consumer
believes is
more or less
important.
A. Kornhauser, Jan 12, Hmmmm... Self-driving cars are hot and the OEMs are responding. I'm about to buy a new Subaru Outback and EyeSight is standard. It is no longer just AutoPilot or expensive options that car salesmen don't sell. Car companies, as reflected in what is in showrooms and what was promoted at CES, have realized the comfort and convenience of Self-driving technology (cars that have a lot of the Safe-driving car features but also enable you to take your feet off the pedals and hands off the wheel at least for short periods of time. These technologies are really becoming the 'chrome and fins' that sell cars to individuals in the 2020s. The momentum is all behind that happening and there is little Washington or Trenton or Princeton Council can do about it. Hopefully part of that momentum will be to make these systems actually work well, especially the Automated Emergency Braking Systems (MUST quit assuming that all stationary objects in the lane ahead can be passed under and consequently each is disregarded. As Tesla is finding out, sometimes those objects are parked firetrucks.) and begin to put hard limits on over-speeding, tailgating and use while driver is impaired. Self-driving cars are unfortunately going to lead to substantial urban sprawl, increased VMT, increased congestion and do nothing to help the energy and pollution challenges of our addiction to the personal automobile. Only 'Waymo-style Driverless' (autonomousTaxis, (aTaxis)) tuned to entice ride-sharing can potentially stem the tide of ever more personal car ownership and ever expanding urban sprawl. Alain
A. Kornhauser, Jan. 6, Hmmmm... I'm in rehab and hope to go home on Wednesday morning. Thank you to so many of you for all the good wishes and prayers. They each helped. I'm looking to making a full recovery. Remember, if you don't feel well, get evaluated by a doctor. I was totally clueless about what hit me from out of nowhere. Alain
Oct 16, Establishes
fully
autonomous
vehicle pilot
program A4573 Sponsors:
Zwicker (D16);
Benson (D14)
Oct 16, Establishes New
Jersey
Advanced
Autonomous
Vehicle Task
Force AJR164Sponsors:
Benson (D14);
Zwicker (D16);
Lampitt (D6)
May
24, "About
9:58 p.m., on
Sunday, March
18, 2018, an
Uber
Technologies,
Inc. test
vehicle, based
on a modified
2017 Volvo
XC90 and
operating with
a self-driving
system in
computer
control mode,
struck a
pedestrian on
northbound
Mill Avenue,
in Tempe,
Maricopa
County,
Arizona.
...The
vehicle was
factory
equipped with
several
advanced
driver
assistance
functions by
Volvo Cars,
the original
manufacturer.
The systems
included a
collision
avoidance
function with
automatic
emergency
braking, known
as City
Safety, as
well as
functions for
detecting
driver
alertness and
road sign
information.
All these
Volvo
functions are
disabled when
the test
vehicle is
operated in
computer
control..." Read
more Hmmmm.... Uber must believe
that its
systems are
better at
avoiding
Collisions and
Automated
Emergency
Braking than
Volvo's. At least this gets Volvo
"off the
hook".
"...According to data obtained from the self-driving
system, the
system first
registered
radar and
LIDAR
observations
of the
pedestrian
about 6
seconds before
impact, when
the vehicle
was traveling
at 43 mph..." (=
63
feet/second)
So the system
started
"seeing an
obstacle when
it was 63 x 6
= 378 feet
away... more
than a
football
field,
including end
zones!
"...As the vehicle
and pedestrian
paths
converged, the
self-driving
system
software
classified the
pedestrian as
an unknown
object, as a
vehicle, and
then as a
bicycle with
varying
expectations
of future
travel
path..." (NTSB: Please tell us
precisely when
it classified
this "object'
as a vehicle and
be explicit
about the
expected "future
travel
paths." Forget the path, please just tell us the precise
velocity
vector that
Uber's system
attached to
the "object",
then the
"vehicle".
Why didn't the
the Uber
system
instruct the
Volvo to begin
to slow down
(or speed up)
to avoid a
collision? If
these paths
(or velocity
vectors) were
not accurate,
then why
weren't they
accurate? Why
was the object
classified as
a
"Vehicle" ?? When did it finally classify the object as a "bicycle"? Why did
it change
classifications?
How often was
the
classification
of this object
done. Please
divulge the
time and the
outcome of
each
classification
of this
object.
In the tests
that Uber has
done, how
often has the
system
mis-classified
an object as a"pedestrian"when the object was
actually an
overpass, or
an overhead
sign or
overhead
branches/leaves
that the car
could safely
pass under, or
was nothing at
all??
(Basically,
what are the
false alarm
characteristics
of Uber's
Self-driving
sensor/software
system as a
function of
vehicle speed
and
time-of-day?)
"...At 1.3 seconds before impact, (impact speed was 39mph = 57.2 ft/sec) the self-driving system determined that an emergency braking maneuver was needed to mitigate a collision" (1.3 x 57.2 = 74.4 ft. which is about equal to the braking distance. So it still could have stopped short.
"...According to Uber, emergency braking maneuvers are not
enabled while
the vehicle is
under computer
control, to
reduce (eradicate??) the potential for erratic
vehicle
behavior.
..." NTSB: Please describe/define potential and erratic vehicle behavior Also
please uncover
and divulge
the design
& decision
process that
Uber went
through to
decide that
this risk
(disabling the
AEB) was worth
the reward of
eradicating " "erratic vehicle behavior". This is fundamentally BAD design. If the Uber
system's false
alarm rate is
so large that
the best way
to deal with
false alarms
is to turn off
the AEB, then
the system
should never
have been
permitted on
public
roadways.
"...The vehicle operator is
relied on to
intervene and
take action. " Wow!
If Uber's
system
fundamentally
relies on a
human to
intervene,
then Uber is
nowhere near
creating a
Driverless
vehicle.
Without its
own Driverless
vehicle Uber
is past "Peak
valuation".
Video similar to part of Adam's Luncheon talk @ 2015 Florida Automated Vehicle Symposium on Dec 1. Hmmm ... Watch Video especially at the 13:12 mark. Compelling; especially after the 60 Minutes segment above! Also see his TipRanks. Alain
This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauserand hosted by
the Princeton
University
Leave |Re-enter
229 Sherrerd Hall Princeton University Princeton, NJ [log in to unmask] 609-258-4657 (o) 609-980-1427 (c) |
[log in to unmask]" class="" width="90" height="100" border="0"> |