Thursday evening Nov. 18, through Saturday Nov. 20,
2021. Live
(Covid
permitting)
Trenton, New
Jersey.
This 5th Summit is inspired by the many levels of
public-sector,
community and
neighborhood
welcoming and
support that
now exists in
New Jersey for
the deployment
of
high-quality
affordable
mobility made
possible by
automated
driving
technology
that is
especially
targeted to
serve those
that, for
whatever
reason, don't
have access to
their own
personal
car.
The Princeton SDC Summits were initiated in 2017 to
provide a
venue for the
open
discussion of
how
technology, in
particular
automation,
can be shaped
to improve
mobility of
people and
goods between
and within
cities. Early
on it was
realized that
this form of
mobility could
easily provide
yet another
alternative to
those that are
so fortunate
as to
currently
enjoy one or
many high
quality
mobility
options.
But, more importantly, it became obvious that
substantial
improvement in
quality-of-life and equitable mobility can readily be made available to
the un-served
and
under-served.
Those who
cannot drive
themselves,
cannot afford
the transport
alternatives
that exist for
them, or who
live in areas
where, for
either
economic or
other reasons,
neither public
nor private
desireable
forms of
transport are
offered.
Furthermore,
such initial
OODs can be
readily
expanded and
replicated to
allow the vast
investments
continuing to
be made in
this
technology to
actually yield
their
envisioned
societal and
financial
benefits.
The recently completed 4th Summit set the ground
work for these
initial
deployments to
serve these un-served and under-served
communities.
Communities
with many
households
having access
to one or
fewer cars and
with
challenged
transit
alternative.
We concluded
the 4th Summit
by envisioning
a deployment
throughout
Trenton, NJ,
a community
where 70% of
the household
have access to
one or fewer
cars.
We believe that Trenton is a perfect Operational
Design Domain
(ODD) to
successfully
deploy begin
to deliver
equitable,
high-quality,
affordable
mobility.
The opportunity to expand throughout Mercer County
and replicate
this
deployment
scenario
throughout the
State exist
and serve as a
blueprint for
many other
"Trentons" of
this world.
The ground work set by the 4th Summit and the NJ
Autonomous
Vehicle Task
Force has
enable us to
create a "most
welcoming
environment"
in New Jersey
for creating a
Public-Private
Partnership to
deliver this
enhanced
mobility to
the residents
of Trenton and
all New
Jersians. The
5th
Summit
will focus
directly on deployment
in
Trenton.
The Summit
will take
place in
Trenton. We
will also
envision its
expansion
throughout
Mercer County
and its
replication in
and around New
Jersey's other
major
cities.
[log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" class="" 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 initiative
Press
release, Sep.
23, , "Las
Vegas has
played an
important role
in Motional’s
growth as a
global
driverless
technology
leader. It's
home to our
public robotaxi
fleet, a
service that
has safely
conducted over
100,000 public
rides, and is
also an
important hub
for our
testing and
research.
Motional is
now
significantly
expanding our
Las Vegas
footprint as
we continue to
scale up ahead
of our 2023
commercial
robotaxi
deployment. We
are tripling
the size of
our Las Vegas
closed-course
testing
facility,
doubling our
operations
center, and
growing our
Las Vegas team
by over 100
new employees.
This
represents
Motional’s
largest
operations
investment in
the Las Vegas
area to
date....."
Read more Hmmmm...
Nice. Hope
they choose to
participate in
the
5th Summit
and look to
deploying in
New Jersey. See video. Alain
S. Shladover, Sep. 25, "... With the benefit of hindsight, it has become obvious that the prevailing view during that period was false, with no more than a handful of advanced prototype vehicles having been driven on public roads by last year without the need for onboard safety drivers to intervene when the automation systems needed human help. The term “self-driving” has lost its original intended meaning because the driving assistance feature on the cars that have been labeled “full self-driving” cannot maneuver without constant human supervision, and “cars” are far less relevant for automation today than trucks, buses and shared-ride vans...
...The organizational learning curve and costs have been much longer and higher than expected. After investing at least a decade and billions of dollars in ADS development, the companies have learned that the technical requirements to support widespread use of the technology are far more complicated than they had originally envisioned. At the same time, companies such as Tesla and less mature start-ups that continue to plug faster and wider-scale deployments are those that are still working their way up a learning curve and have not yet realized how far they are from their goal...
... Automated urban and suburban ride-hailing services could become available on a limited basis as well, but the location-specific challenges to their deployment are sufficient that this is unlikely to reach a national scale soon. Read more Hmmmm... Very nice and consistent with our SDC ZoomCast with Steve a couple of weeks ago. Even Cell phones didn't reach "national scale" in a short period of time. That's why SAE's thoughts about "Level 5" are so absurd. Henry Ford was an important step in the evolution of the Conventional car that still isn't "Conventional everywhere, all weather, Level 5". Drivers couldn't get to Princeton when Ida came through here. In 1908, the Model T's Operational Design Domain (ODD) was very limited indeed. We need to start small where we'll deliver the most value and the Technology will be most appreciated. That's the market that Henry went after. That's why Trenton is and ideal place to get started. It has the need, is welcoming, small, yet big enough and relatively easy. Alain
S.
Sumagaysay,
Sep. 22,
"FedEx Corp.
and
self-driving
vehicle
startup Aurora
Innovation
Inc. are
launching a
pilot program
for
autonomous-truck
shipments
between Dallas
and Houston,
with the
companies
announcing
Wednesday what
they called a
first-of-its-kind partnership involving the two companies and a truck
maker.
“This is an
exciting,
industry-first
collaboration
that will work
toward
enhancing the
logistics
industry
through safer,
more efficient
transportation
of goods,”
said Rebecca
Yeung, vice
president of
advanced
technology and
innovation at
FedEx FDX,
-1.00%, in a
news release.
The initial
fleet will
involve a
“modest”
number of
autonomous
trucks and use
backup drivers
for safety at
first, an
Aurora
spokeswoman
said. The
trucks will
make the
nearly
500-mile
round-trip
along the I-45
corridor
multiple times
a week,
according to
FedEx.
“At the end of
2023, we will
launch our
trucking
business and
haul loads
autonomously
between
terminals
without a
safety
driver,”
Aurora said.
The
original-equipment
manufacturing
partner for
this pilot is
truck maker
PACCAR Inc.
..". Read
more Hmmmm... Realistic and
responsible.
Aurora/Chris
may well find
that Aurora's
technology so
enhances the
driver's
quality-of-worklife
and its
associated
return to
FedEx that the
RoI of the
technology is
very
attractive to
FedEx as a
"drier
assistance"
technology without
removal of the
driver. That
would make
Aurora's
technology
viable today
on interstate
operations not
just
intra-red-states.
Alain
R. Elliot,
Sep.19, "...
Jennifer
Homendy, the
new head of
the National
Transportation
Safety Board,
said Tesla
shouldn’t roll
out the
city-driving
tool before
addressing
what the
agency views
as safety
deficiencies
in the
company’s
technology.
The NTSB,
which
investigates
crashes and
issues safety
recommendations though it has no regulatory authority, has urged Tesla to
clamp down on
how drivers
are able to
use the
company’s
driver-assistance
tools.
“Basic safety
issues have to
be addressed
before they’re
then expanding
it to other
city streets
and other
areas,” she
said in an
interview. Ms.
Homendy also
expressed
concern about
how Tesla
software is
tested on
public
roadways...."
Read
more Hmmmm... With over-the-air
updating Tesla
can readily
monitor the
Use of FSD and
can readily
disable FSD on
any Tesla used
by any driver
that
mis-behaves
using FSD. I
can't
understand why
Elon just
doesn't do
it. I guess
all of the
free press he
gets is more
valuable than
the
liabilities
associated
with FSD's
mis-use. Not
a good
tug-of-war.
Alain
S. Blanko,
Sep. 19, "...
Vay, which is
based in
Germany, has
been testing a
slightly
different
technology on
the streets of
Berlin that
relies on
teledrivers
doing most of
the work,
operating the
cars from
computer
stations that
have a basic
driver's-seat
setup—including a steering wheel, pedals, and several monitors to see
what's around
the
car—alongside
a network
that, vitally,
doesn't suffer
from too much
latency... Read
more Hmmmm...If latency was the major
challenge,
then life
would be
easy. Alain
"Automatic emergency braking systems are designed to first warn you of an impending frontal collision, then automatically apply the brakes if you don’t — or if you don’t apply them hard enough. While this may not happen in time to completely avoid an accident, particularly on slippery roads, any reduction in speed will reduce the force of impact... " Read more Hmmmm... If NHTSA is going to go after Elon for using terminology that inflates the expectation of what a system can actually do, then they should go after SAE wrt AEB. And, why the caveats about wet roads (cameras can readily see if the road is wet, or the windshield wipers are on. Tires can actually can measure their coefficient of friction.). And why don't brakes trigger early enough to stop. And why is AEB turned-off at high speeds... Folks who live in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones. Alain
S. Tripp,
Sep 2021, "...
To bring
autonomous
mobile systems
solutions to
market, it is
not sufficient
to build
capacity in
any one
component of
the technology
stack. Rather,
the goal of
full
deployment of
autonomous end
market
solutions
requires
capabilities
(or the
ability to
reliably
source those
capabilities)
across the
entire
technology
stack, as well
as the means
of linking the
capabilities
in each layer
of the stack
so that a
system can
perform as a
fully
integrated
platform
rather than a
partial
solution that
requires
further
commercialization
by others. Regions
who are able
to build out
their
technology
ecosystems to
support this
type of
integration
will be poised
to realize
major economic
growth.
Triangulating
results from
multiple
recent market
research
reports places
the
terrestrial
autonomous
mobile systems
market alone
at an
estimated $802
billion global
market by
2025-26.
When adding
aerial,
marine, and
defense
autonomous
systems to
capture the
broader
autonomous
mobile systems
market space
context, the
total likely
climbs above
$1 trillion in
total market
size during
the mid- to
late-periodof
the present
decade. If
a region with
a robust and
well-supported
technology
ecosystem were
to capture
even 1% of the
$1 trillion
global
autonomous
mobile systems
market, it
would equate
to a $10
billion growth
opportunity
developing
within the
next decade...."
Read
more Hmmmm...
Worth paying
attention to.
Alain
Staff, Sep
26, "hanghai
factory is
expected to
produce
300,000 cars
in the first
nine months of
the year,
capped by a
delivery rush
in the end of
the
July-September
quarter,
despite a
global
semiconductor
shortage, two
sources
said...." Read
more Hmmmm...
That's greater
than 30k per
month. 1k per
day. 1 per
working
minute.
That's pretty
impressive for
a largely
serial
production
process.
They're "Just
Doing It"!
Alain
Staff, Sep. 14, "General Motors Co's (GM.N) venture capital arm has invested millions of dollars in Oculii, a U.S. startup maker of software for radar sensors used in self-driving cars, Oculii co-founder Steven Hong said..." Read more Hmmmm... Nice; however, the image shows an Audi. Whoops. (unfortunately, I've been there.) Alain
G. Kay,
Sep. 24, "The
Florida
Highway Patrol
released a
dashcam video
of a Tesla
that was
reportedly on
Autopilot
nearly hitting
a state
trooper.... "
Read
more Hmmmm...
Watch
the video.
Given the lane
change that
the Tesla
seems to be
making at the
time of the
crash, it is
more likely
that the
driver was
steering the
Tesla and not
AutoPilot in
the seconds
before the
crash. Alain
Staff,
Sep.26,
"China's Geely
(GEELY.UL)
aims to set up
5,000 battery
swapping
stations for
electric
vehicles (EV)
globally by
2025, as sales
grow in the
world's
biggest
vehicle
market, the
automaker said
in a statement
on
Sunday...." Read
more Hmmmm...
Seems like the
non-parsimonious way to do things. Should we do a tire
rotation/exchange
at the same
time??? Alain
A. Morando, Sep. 2021, "We present a model for visual behavior that can simulate the glance pattern observed around driver-initiated, non-critical disengagements of Tesla’s Autopilot (AP) in naturalistic highway driving.
Drivers may
become
inattentive
when using
partially-automated
driving
systems. The
safety effects
associated
with
inattention
are unknown
until we have
a quantitative
reference on
how visual
behavior
changes with
automation...."
Read
more Hmmmm...Very nice should-read paper. The input is
the system's
use and the
output is
glance
behavior, but
as is
expressed
upfront,
implications
on Safety are
as yet
unknown. What
is now needed
is the
relationship
between glance
behavior and
safety, which
may not be a
simple task.
Most, maybe
even >90%,
of crashes
involve what I
term driver
misbehavior.
Safety
associated
with these
crashes may
have little to
do with
"reduced
attentiveness"
but rather if
these systems
intervene
during such
misbehavior to
avert or
mitigate
crashes and
improve
safety. Also,
attentiveness,
may lead to
stress,
discomfort and
bad behavior
that may be
averted if the
stress and
discomfort
associated
with
attentiveness
is alleviated.
Also, in the
short run, our
focus is on
just one side
of the
distribution,
crashes that
happened.
Hidden from
view are
crashes that
didn't
happen. In
the long run,
we'll know if
the behavioral
changes netted
out to more,
less or not so
much change in
safety. It
just would be
nice to not
have to wait.
From a
simplistic
perspective,
Safety is
largely about
driver
misbehavior.
If the system
is tuned to
mitigating
driver
misbehavior,
then it has a
chance of
overriding/compensating
for additional
driver
misbehavior
that it
induces.
Over-hyping
these systems
capabilities
can't be good
and neither
can
over-stressing
about them.
Good common
sense should
prevail.
Alain
G.
Bensinger,
Sep. 26, "
Too many of
our digital
maps are
sellouts.
Just like the
projection
maps we’re all
familiar with
that
inaccurately
depict
Greenland
dwarfing South
America, the
digital maps
that orient
our lives on
smartphones
and laptops
are the result
of a series of
compromises or
half-truths
and don’t
always
accurately
represent the
world as it
is...." Read
more Hmmmm...
Wow, maps
aren't
perfect. I'm
sure Greg
Bensinger is
perfect.
"half-truths"...
That's not an
accurate
depiction, now
is it Greg.
Don't bother
reading this.
Not worth your
time. Bad
enough it was
a waste of
mine. Alain
H. Poser'77, Sept 13, 2020. "Creating Value for Light Density Urban Rail Lines" . See slides, See video Hmmmm... Simply Brilliant. Alain
These
editions re
sponsored by
the SmartETFs
Smart
Transportation
and Technology
ETF, symbol
MOTO. For more
information
head to www.motoetf.com
R.
Duffy, Aug 23,
"Chandler,
Arizona, is a
city of just
over 250,000
that’s located
southeast of
Phoenix. Like
most of
Arizona, it's
hot, dry, and
lined with
cacti and palm
trees.
But unlike
most of
Arizona—or
virtually
anywhere else
in the
world—Chandler
residents
share the road
with fully
driverless
robotaxis,
courtesy of
Waymo. As
Stacy, a
Chandler
resident, told
us, “Waymos
are like
rabbits in my
neighborhood.”
Since October
2020, the
Alphabet
subsidiary has
been running
its driverless
ride-hail
service, Waymo
One, in a
50-square-mile
service area
that
encompasses
parts of
Chandler,
Tempe, Mesa,
and Gilbert.
Anyone with a
smartphone,
credit card,
and GPS
coordinates in
the service
area can hail
a completely
driverless
ride of their
own.
In
December 2018,
Waymo opened
Waymo One
(with safety
drivers) to
the general
public,
expanding
beyond an
early rider
program
available to
pre-approved,
NDA-bound
Phoenix
residents. The
company’s
current
testing zone,
for driverless
and safety
operator-supervised
vehicles,
stretches
across roughly
100 square
miles.
And although
residents
living in or
near the
service area
may be used to
seeing Waymo’s
glossy-white,
sensor-laden
Chrysler
Pacificas
roving around,
the chances
they’ve ridden
in one are
much, much
lower. .." Read
more As I've been writing, Chandler is a great place to
test
Driverless
mobility to
make sure it
at least
begins to
work; however,
the value in
the technology
is not as
amusement or
thrill ride or
as circus
sideshow. The
value is its
ability to
affordably
deliver high
quality
on-demand
mobility. It
will be a long
time before it
can provide a
higher quality
of service
that a
chauffeured
"Black car" or
limousine, so
it can't
compete for
those
traveling on
an expense
account or the
well to do.
It also can't
really compete
to serve the
Drive-it-Yourself
(DiY) folks
that can
afford to buy
their own cars
and park them
for free when
not in use.
Conventional
mobility
serves all of
these folks
very well.
Where this form of mobility has a real advantage is
to serve folks
who are
required to
conform to
mobility whose
very limited
service is
provided on a
"take-it-or-leave-it" operational philosophy. Services that operate
between few
fixed
locations at
strictly
stipulated
times
specified by
the service
provider. The
disparity in
service is
incredible
between
mobility
options that
respond
directly to
customer needs
in terms of
from/to/when
(walking, DiY
personal car,
Uber/Lyft/taxi/limousine/WaymoOne)
and public
transit's "take-it-or-leave-it"
customer
service
approach.
M. Sena,
Issue (08-10)
, Aug. 25,"
Some of you
are fans of Douglas Adams and
will enjoy
this month's
Musings.
Sometimes a
little humor
helps to get a
serious point
across better
than trying to
be seriously
persuasive.
The lead
article in
this issue is
the first part
of a two-part
series. This
month I
discuss why
there is still
a chance for
the Western
automotive
OEMs to stay
in the game of
manufacturing
cars, rather
than being
relegated to
assemblers of
battery
electric
vehicle
components.
Next month I
examine why
the position
they have held
for the past
century, King
of the Hill,
is about to be
challenged.
In the second
article is
focused on the
need for
cooperation
between robot
and driver in
highly
automated
driving. If
Tesla had done
a better job
on this score
it could have
avoided being
called on the
carpet by the
National
Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration. We'll see where that leads.
Dispatch
Central, as
usual,
attempts to
have something
for everyone.
I've called
the European
Commission out
for a major
miss in its
intelligent
speed
assistance
regulation,
not for
passing it but
for not making
it as robust
as it should
be.
Yes, I did use
these summer
months to
start work on
a follow-up to
the Princeton
SmartDrivingCars Summit, and I did enjoy a very pleasant summer here in
Sweden. I hope
you enjoyed
your summer as
well wherever
and however
you spent it.
M. Sena"
Read more Hmmmm... Enjoy & Learn this month's Dispatcher ( especially how to "... turn... pig’s ear into a silk purse...; no-brainers (P. 17); Some interesting Statistics on World energy & BEVs (P.18, thank you Fred Dryer), a possible upside for coal mines (P. 19), why 'Level 3' is even less probable than 'Level 5' which is reached only 'in the limit as time goes to infinity' and Evolutionary Domesticity (P. 29) and the answer is '42' ! Listen/watch to the Pod/Zoom-Cast 231 with Michael, Fred and me centered on this issue. Alain
M
Henninger, Aug
11, "A bright
orange,
battery-powered
train breaks
the lush green
stillness of
Rockhill
Furnace,
Pennsylvania,
as it
traverses
track
originally
laid in 1876.
At the helm in
a bright
green/yellow
safety vest,
Meg Richards
tweaks the
throttle and
brakes as the
two-car train
passes by
baseball
fields,
crosses
streets and
completes the
day's test
run.
Along for the
ride, Henry
Posner III,
the chairman
of Railroad
Development
Corporation
(RDC) and an
adjunct
instructor at
Carnegie
Mellon
University,
sits eager to
demonstrate
his vision for
a rail-based
mass transit
system in the
United States.
The original
concept for
Pop-Up Metro —
a
battery-powered,
modular train
that can be
inserted onto
existing
infrastructure
— evolved in
parallel with
his Department
of History
class, The
American
Railroad-Decline
and
Renaissance in
the Era of
Deregulation.
CPUC, Nov
23, '20, "This
decision
creates two
new autonomous
vehicle
programs that
authorize fare
collection
(deployment
programs), one
for drivered
autonomous
vehicles and
the other for
driverless
autonomous
vehicles.
Among other
requirements,
applicants to
the existing
driverless
pilot program
and the new
driverless
deployment
program must
submit
Passenger
Safety Plans
that outline
their plans to
protect
passenger
safety for
driverless
operations.
In addition,
the decision
establishes
four goals
that apply to
both the
existing pilot
programs and
the new
deployment
programs; 1.)
Protect
passenger
safety; 2.)
Expand the
benefits of AV
technologies
to all of
Californians,
including
people with
disabilities;
3.) Improve
transportation
options for
all,
particularly
for
disadvantaged
communities
and low-income
communities;
and 4.) Reduce
greenhouse gas
emissions,
criteria air
pollutants,
and toxic air
contaminants,
particularly
in
disadvantaged
communities.
The Commission
will collect
data to
monitor permit
holders’
progress
toward each of
the goals...."
Read
more Hmmmm...
Sorry for not
reporting this
sooner, and
thank you Doug
Coventry for
bringing it to
my attention.
It is must
reading
for any
jurisdiction
making
regulations
regarding the
provision of
autonomousTaxi
mobility.
Its four goals are laudable, especially the 3rd, even if
it may end up
violating part
of the 4th.
Moreover, the
clauses of the
3rd should be
re-ordered to
be: ...
Improve
transportation
options for
disadvantaged
communities,
low income
communities
and those with
disabilities,
and, if
possible, for
all... This
also reduces
the goals to 3
important
ones, ...
safety, the
environment
and improved
mobility for
those that
have been left
behind by the
personal
automobile
Of course, one wants to improve mobility for those that
drive their
own personal
car; however,
that is a entrenched
well-served
set of
customers that
are not
readily going
to flip from
driving their
car to
something that
isn't really
better and may
largely be
perceived as
no cigar.
Certainly, the
public sector
should in no
way use public
resources to
give car
drivers yet
another good
but inferior
choice as was
done with many
public transportation investments
that actually
provide
inferior
mobility to
those that
were to be
attract as
customers.
These systems
are rebuffed
by many that
they were
intended to be
taken off the
road for the
trips they
already make,
let alone
deliver
quality-of-life
benefits by
providing
mobility to
new places
that they
couldn't
previously
access.
A properly designed Operational Design Domain focused on from and where low income communities want to go is, to my mind, where the best opportunity exits for these safe, environmentally responsible systems . In such ODDs these driverless aTaxis can actually improve quality-of-life; and thus, deserve accommodation and promotion by public agencies such as CPUC. Alain
July 12
-> 15,
"..." Read
more Hmmmm...I haven't been able to
find a public
source for any
of the content
from the
symposium but
there were at
least three
sessions (of
the few that I
was able to
attend) that
were really
good. One
was B-101-
An inside Look
at
Policy-Making
for Automated
Vehicles,
moderated by
Baruch
Feigenbaum of
the Reason
Foundation.
Pay particular
attention to
the insights
offered by
Kevin Biesty
of Arizona
DoT. So far,
no one in the
world has done
it better.
A second one was B204-Inclusive
by Design:
Creating an
Equitable and
Accessible
Automated
Future,
moderated by
Charlotte
Frei.
The
third was
Richard
Mudge's B402-
Shark Tank:
Everything
from Free
Freight to AV
for Low-Income
Travelers to
how many AV
Firms will
Survive?.
(Spoil
alert... the
answer is [log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" class="" width="16" height="15"> . Selika Talbot's presentation
was absolutely
fantastic.
See PodCast/ZoomCast below
for a
discussion of
parts of this
session. Fred
and I hope to
do
PodCasts/ZoomCasts
with Selika
and Kevin in
the coming
week.
Hopefully TRB will broadly distribute the recorded
videos of
these and the
other
sessions. One
caution is
that even in
this community
there is
substantial
confusion
introduced
over
terminology
which ends up
having people
talk by rather
than with each
other. This
was an "Automated
Road
Transportation" symposium.
One aspect of
road
transportation
is the
fundamental
role of the
human driver.
It is very
different than
that of
elevators that
go from A to B
without any
direct human
driver/operator
intervention.
The customer
only tells the
elevator what
floor to go
to.
Everything
else in the
up/down
mobility
process is
automated
within the
elevator's
Operational
Design Domain
(which is
usually in a
shaft,
stooping only
at designated
stopping
locations
(floors) with
centimeter
accuracy but
only when when
sufficient
power exists
to perform the
various
operations.
(Note: "Level
5 elevators"
(operate under
any
power-available
condition)
will "never"
exist.). It
is easy for us
to see the
phenomenal
difference in
the societal
value that can
be achieved in
elevators that
deliver safe,
shared-ride,
on-demand 24/7
mobility,
indiscriminately
to essentially
everyone.
Unfortunately,
precious
little of that
broad societal
value can be
achieved
unless the
elevator's
safe operation
can be
achieved
without a
human
operator/driver.
This is a bang-bang situation. Either you have it or you don't. Coming close doesn't cut it.
It doesn't mean that human operated elevators don't
deliver value
to individual
owners. My
neighbor
across the
street has a dumbwaiter in
her house that
she and her
husband
control
manually to
move things
including
themselves up
and down in
their house.
Works great.
Real value.
They both
remain capable
of performing
the manual
operations for
themselves and
if they charge
themselves for
the labor,
they gain that
charge so the
transaction
nets to zero
labor cost.
charge
themselves .
While some
benefits
(comfort &
convenience)
might be
gained by them
by automating
some of the
operating
functions,
full
automation
would be silly
unless at
least some
number of
neighbors
would improve
their
quality-of-life
if only they
could easily
go up and down
in their
house. That
latent demand
for improved
quality-of-life
does exist in
tall
buildings.
It's been
consumed in a
large part
because
elevators
became
operatorless
and not just
operator
assisted.
Shared and not
quite
door2door
shortcomings
are endured.
24/7,
on-demand,
affordable
(especially
for the rent
payer on the
"14th" floor.
So much so
that they just
pick up the
tab for the
elevators that
deliver
accessibility
to/from the
"14th floor")
are the
fundamental
mobility
attributes
that totally
dominate the
competition
for mobility
afforded by
the
stairwell.
Without the
elimination of
the
operator/driver,
the 24/7,
on-demand,
affordable
trifecta is
not
deliverable to
anybody.
Way too often during the Symposium automation that
explicitly
requires the
continued
presence of a
driver and is
only at best a
comfort &
convenience
feature as
ascribed
benefits that
accrue only
for systems
that achieve
safe
driverless
operation.
There is no
getting away
from it,
automation
that assist
drivers is
radically
different than
automation
that replaces
drivers.
Hopefully next
year we can
have 2 AV
conferences.
One that
focuses on
automation to
assist human
drivers and
one that
focuses on
technology and
deployments
that replaces
the driver.
Neal
Boudette, July
5, " Benjamin
Maldonado and
his teenage
son were
driving back
from a soccer
tournament on
a California
freeway in
August 2019
when a truck
in front of
them slowed.
Mr. Maldonado
flicked his
turn signal
and moved
right. Within
seconds, his
Ford Explorer
pickup was hit
by a Tesla
Model 3 that
was traveling
about 60 miles
per hour on
Autopilot.
M.
Sena,
July/Aug. '21,
"In
this issue of
The Dispatcher
for July and
August, I
have taken up
a subject in
the lead
article that
has been on my
list for quite
some time. It
is of how cars
that drive
themselves
keep
themselves on
the road while
they make
their journey
to their
destination.
It turns out
that there is
a very good
reason why
Teslas crash
and Waymo is
running around
only in
Chandler,
Arizona after
people who
didn't know
better
promised that
there would be
completely
driverless
cars on all
roads a decade
ago:
localization
of a moving
vehicle is
very, very
hard, even for
a human.
I encourage
you to read
Musings this
month. It's
about making
the journey to
a world
without
climate change
protests, a
world where
they either
won't be
necessary or
allowed. On
most journeys,
we have to
cross bridges.
Sometimes we
have to make
them
ourselves.
Think of the
article as the
first bridge
to cross
toward a
better
understanding
of the climate
change
journey.
Dispatch
Central
contains, as
usual,
something for
everyone.
Insurance is
addressed in
the two main
articles. In
Bits and
Pieces I have
added my
thoughts on
recent events.
This is a
double issue,
in part
because we are
going to try
to do more
this summer
than we could
do last. But
it's also
because I need
some extra
time to work
on a follow-up
to the
Princeton
SmartDrivingCars Summit with Professor Alain Kornhauser. There was a
concrete
proposal put
forward by
Professor
Kornhauser
during the
last session,
and many of us
who took part
in the Summit
have committed
to try to work
on
implementing
that
proposal. Read more Hmmmm... . Once again an
outstanding The
Dispatcher.
I happen to
have a diffent
fundamental
view on"exact
localization" than Michael, many and possibly
even everyone
else... As
usual, I'll
take a very
self-centered
view... I've
lived my whole
life without
knowing (or
caring to
know) my
"exact
location".
I've been
satisfied to
know: "sort
of... where am
I?" but
exact...where
am I? ... not
so much.
What troubles
me about the
"exact where
am I" is that
this exactness
is in some
coordinate
system. Where
is the origin
of that
coordinate
system and is
moving? Oh,
it's the
"center" of
the earth??
Or some
"reference
point". So
"exact" is
actually,
"exact
relative to
some reference
point. Little
seems to ever
be said about
the
"exactness" of
the reference
point, but
that may
actually be
some saving
grace about
"exact".. it
is "exact"
relative to
some reference
point.
I see.. If the reference point is
the center of
the Universe,
then I'd
better be
really-really
precise; else,
small small
changes mean
big-big
differences.
If the
reference is
the center of
the earth,
then I may
just need to
be really
precise; else,
small changes
mean big
differences.
However, if
the reference
point is my
nose and I'm
trying to stay
between two
white lines
and not hit
anything, then
the precision
to which I
need to know
where things
are may not
need to be
very precise
as long as I
have a little
bit of leeway
and still stay
between the
lines and
leave enough
room around
the various
objects to not
hit them.
OK, safe driving requires only
knowing where
I am relative
to objects
around me to a
moderate level
of precision.
I can do it in
two ways...
take the
difference
between two
values:
location of
object and my
location. The
farther away
the reference
point, the
more precise
they will need
to be if
precision of
the difference
is to be
maintained.
Consequently,
if the
measurements
are relative
to my nose,
the need for
about as small
as it can
get.
Moreover, any precision data base
lacks some
"most"
important
values.. 1. a
precise value
for my
location and
2. a precise
value for
anything
around me that
moves (meaning
it wasn't at
its current
location when
the HD
database was
assembled).
Required is
the ability in
real time to
locate and
track objects
relative to me
(my nose, the
hood ornament
of my car, ..)
with only some
precision
These objects
and their
location
aren't
included in
these
precise/HD
databases.
What is needed
is a very
reliable means
of identifying
objects and
determining
their position
and velocity
with little
latency. This
is absolutely
necessary;uyr;y necessary for the moving objects, might as well do it
also for the
stationary
objects. Alain
Please don't suggest that one needs an HD map database in order to run their SLAM (Simultaneous Localization And Mapping) algorithm. That algorithm needs as input the relative position (sensor observations) of objects . The capability to determine those inputs is all that is needed to do collision avoidance, so don't even bother going through the SLAM computation and certainly don't pay for a reference data set.
Saturday, May 29, 2021Waymo
One, May 13,
"... I started
taking it to
work, and
after
crunching the
numbers for
gas,
maintenance,
insurance,
upkeep, and
owning a
depreciating
investment, it
was pretty
much a
no-brainer
that we really
didn't need
two cars. I
sold off my
car and made
Waymo my
choice for
commuting to
and from work
and for trips
my wife and I
need to take
when the other
is using our
car..." Read more Hmmmm...This is really great that
he "crunched
the numbers"
and found it
to be "pretty
much a
no-brainer",
which is what
every real
Waymo customer
in Chandler
has to do to
become a Waymo
customer. One
"doesn't move
to Chandler
unless one has
"two cars". See
slide 5: 70%
of the
households
have 2 or more
cars in
Chandler, so
most of the
folks have had
to do the math
to become a
customer. If
Waymo offered
the same
service in
Trenton, where
70% of the
households
have at most
one car and
30% don't have
any, then it
doesn't take
much number
crunching to
appreciate
Waymo when
walking is the
next best way
to go.
The Chandler Operational Design Domain (ODD) may be a great place to get the technology working. It may well be the "easiest" ODD in the world. A Trenton ODD may well not be all that much more difficult technologically. What Trenton does have are customers for whom what Waymo can deliver is truly a no-brainer. Alain
229 Sherrerd Hall Princeton University Princeton, NJ [log in to unmask] 609-980-1427 (c) |
Thursday
evening Nov.
18, through
Saturday Nov.
20, 2021. Live
(Covid
permitting)
Trenton, New
Jersey. This
5th Summit is
inspired by
the many
levels of
public-sector,
community and
neighborhood
welcoming and
support that
now exists in
New Jersey for
the deployment
of
high-quality
affordable
mobility.
Mobility made
possible by
technology to
especially
those in New
Jersey that,
for what ever
reason, don't
have access to
their own
personal
car.
As
Robin Chase
presented in
one of her
slides in my
course this
past week,
right now,
this instant,
180 million
Americans,
more than 50%,
don't have
access to a
car. All 16
and under,
most above 85,
the many too
poor, half of
two person
households
with one
car... That's
more than 50%
of our US
population. The mobility equity afforded by this technology can
substantially
improve the
quality-of-life
of so many,
immediately.
We envision the initial deployment along the lines of what was presented at the end of the 4th SDC Summit this past Spring, in Trenton, the State Capitol, where 70% of the household have access to at most one car. We believe that this is a perfect Operational Design Domain (ODD) to successfully deploy with the opportunity to expand throughout Mercer County and replicate the deployment throughout the State. The welcoming environment now exists in New Jersey to enable a successful Public-Private Partnership to deliver this enhanced mobility to the residents of Trenton and all New Jersians. The 5th Summit will focus directly on the initial phases of this most equitable mobility deployment in Trenton. Alain
[log in to unmask]" _mf_state="1" title="null" src="cid:[log in to unmask]" class="" 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 initiative
Thursday
evening Nov.
18, through
Saturday Nov.
20, 2021. Live
(Covid
permitting)
Trenton, New
Jersey. This
5th Summit is
inspired by
the many
levels of
public-sector,
community and
neighborhood
welcoming and
support that
now exists in
New Jersey for
the deployment
of
high-quality
affordable
mobility.
Mobility made
possible by
technology to
especially
those in New
Jersey that,
for what ever
reason, don't
have access to
their own
personal
car.
As
Robin Chase
presented in
one of her
slides in my
course this
past week,
right now,
this instant,
180 million
Americans,
more than 50%,
don't have
access to a
car. All 16
and under,
most above 85,
the many too
poor, half of
two person
households
with one
car... That's
more than 50%
of our US
population. The mobility equity afforded by this technology can
substantially
improve the
quality-of-life
of so many,
immediately.
We
envision the
initial
deployment
along the
lines of what
was presented
at the end of
the 4th SDC
Summit this
past Spring,
in Trenton,
the State
Capitol, where
70% of the
household have
access to at
most one car.
We believe
that this is a
perfect
Operational
Design Domain
(ODD) to
successfully
deploy with
the
opportunity to
expand
throughout
Mercer County
and replicate
the
deployment
throughout the
State. The
welcoming
environment
now exists in
New Jersey to
enable a
successful
Public-Private
Partnership to
deliver this
enhanced
mobility to
the residents
of Trenton and
all New
Jersians. The
5th Summit
will focus
directly on
the initial
phases of this
most equitable
mobility
deployment in
Trenton. Alain
D. Yergin,
Aug. 31,
"...Recently,
I asked
Wagoner about
that
conversation.
“The focus
then was on
making the
internal
combustion
engine
better,” he
replied. “I
was asking,
‘If we were
starting the
industry
today, what
would be
different?’”
A pretty clear
answer about
how different
came earlier
this month
from President
Joe Biden when
he issued an
executive
order setting
out the goal
that “50
percent of all
new passenger
cars and light
vehicles sold
in 2030”
should be
electric. In
the order, he
instructed
government
agencies to
implement
regulatory
policies to
achieve that
goal. “There’s
a vision of
the future
that is now
beginning to
happen,” said
the president.
This vision
clearly does
not involve
making the
internal
combustion
engine
better....
The third
challenge
involves the
public — the
people who buy
automobiles...." Read
more Hmmmm...
Amazing...
This article
assumes that
electricity
that goes
through the
chargers into
the batteries
that requires
all that
mining,
transport and
processing to
capture that
electricity
and trickle it
out as we are
leisurely
going to
grandma's
house,
magically
appears.
Where does
electricity
come from?
How is it
manufactured,
by whom, with
what
equipment.
What is
produced today
has persistent
customers that
aren't going
to go away.
All of our nice ways (solar, wind, hydro and nuclear)
to make
electricity
(electricity
is made) are
at capacity
and we are
still using
bad ways
(coal) and not
so bad ways
(natural gas)
to serve
existing
customers.
It was hoped
that better
efficiency and
more makers of
the nice ways
could ween out
the bad and
not so bad;
however, Hydro
is capped by:
only so much
water falls so
far, and
"everyone" is
afraid of
nuclear. That
places the
burden
directly on
solar &
wind to make
the
electricity
that's now
made from
coal.
A ">10x"
improvements
in solar &
wind is needed
to replace the
bad ways
(coal) and
another
">10x" to
replace
natural gas as
a maker of
electricity.
And we haven't
begun
replacing the
gasoline with
electricity
that produces
our mobility.
To do that is
going to
require
another 2
">10x"s.
(The energy
required to
move us is
approximately
equal to all
the energy
procured by
electricity
today. (There
are many
details here
having to do
with rejected
energy).
Moreover, the
use of the
nice ways to
replace the
existing
bad/not so bad
ways does not
require any
change by any
customer.
They've been
using
electricity to
do x,y,z and
the new
electrons from
the new
">10x" nice
ways is
exactly the
same. They''
never know the
difference
Not so when
replacing
petroleum with
electricity.
One also needs
a new way to
create the
mobility that
the petroleum
was delivering
to its
customers
consuming
mobility. A
whole new
layer is
needed (the
EV). So maybe
for this
challenge we
should be
focusing on
"making the
internal
combustion
engine
better",
certainly
until we get a
lot better at
solar and
wind, else we
won't be able
to turn off
those coal and
natural gas
plants for a
very long
time.
A Rule by
the Federal
Communications
Commission on
05/03/2021, "C.
ITS in the
5.895-5.925
GHz Band
25. To promote
the most
effective use
of the upper
30 megahertz
of spectrum in
the 5.9 GHz
band, the
Commission
determined
that the ITS
service should
be based on
use of one
technology,
and concluded
that C-V2X
technology
would provide
the best means
of achieving
its goals for
ITS in the
coming years.
In the First
Report and
Order, the
Commission
provided
technical
flexibility to
enable ITS
licensees
currently
using
DSRC-based
technology to
operate in
this
30-megahertz
ITS band until
the time ITS
services must
operate using
C-V2X
technology.
Because the
Commission
believed that
many, if not
most, of the
active ITS
licensees
would want to
transition to
C-V2X
technology as
soon as
possible to
speed
development
and deployment
of ITS
services, it
decided to
permit,
through its
waiver
process, the
deployment of
C-V2X
technology
during the
transition
period in a
manner that
would not
interfere with
existing
DSRC-based
operations...
Read
more Hmmmm...An
important
ruling that I
had missed.
Alain
A.
LaFOrest, Sep
14, " U.S.
auto safety
regulators are
requesting
substantial
amounts of
data on
advanced
driver-assistance
systems from
major
automakers to
aid their
investigation
into 12 Tesla
crashes
involving
Autopilot and
first
responder
scenes.
NHTSA's Office
of Defects
Investigation
sent letters
Monday to 12
automakers,
including Ford
Motor Co.,
General
Motors, Toyota
Motor North
America and
Volkswagen
Group of
America, to
gather
information
for comparing
vehicles
equipped with
Level 2
driver-assist
systems, where
the vehicle
has the
ability to
control
steering and
braking/accelerating
simultaneously
under certain
conditions.
For each
automaker, the
agency is
seeking the
number of
vehicles
equipped with
Level 2
systems that
have been
manufactured
for sale,
lease or
operation in
the U.S. as
well as the
cumulative
mileage
covered with
the systems
engaged
and a log of
the most
recent updates
to the
systems.
The agency
also is
requesting all
consumer
complaints,
field reports,
crash reports
and lawsuits
that may
relate to the
driver-assist
systems.
Automakers
must describe
the types of
roads and
driving
conditions
where the
systems are
intended to be
used, and the
methods and
technologies
used to
prevent usage
outside the
operational
design domain
specified to
customers. In
addition,
automakers
must provide
an overview of
their approach
to enforce
driver
engagement or
attentiveness
while the
systems are in
use..." Read
more Hmmmm...
Can't wait to
read the
responses. I
wonder if any
of the OEM
even log "mileage
covered with
system
engaged."
Why would
they? ...
NHTSA might
request it
some day.
What are the privacy implications? ??? What other data
are my car
accumulating
on how I use
it without
telling me (Of
course, I
didn't read
even the big
print in my
owner's
manual, let
alone the fine
print.) Alain
H. Poser'77, Sept 13, 2020. "Creating Value for Light Density Urban Rail Lines" . See slides, See video Hmmmm... Simply Brilliant. Alain