2015-09-14
Automakers Will Make Automatic Braking Systems Standard in New Cars
Vlasic, Sept 11 " Federal regulators said on Friday that 10 automakers had agreed to install automatic braking systems, which use sensors to detect potential collisions, as standard equipment in new vehicles.
But the automakers have not set a timetable for the introduction of the systems, ...Anthony Foxx, the transportation secretary, said in a prepared statement that emergency braking technology could reduce traffic deaths and injuries.
"We are entering a new era of vehicle safety, focusing on preventing crashes from ever occurring, rather than just protecting occupants when crashes happen," Mr. Foxx said....
The 10 companies "will work with I.I.H.S. and N.H.T.S.A. in the coming months on the details of implementing their historic commitment," the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said in a statement (Same as the DoT Statement.) Read more
Hmmm... This is major because the automakers "had agreed..." rather than "the regulators had required..." (although there seems to be a little push-back in that "...had not set a timetable..." We do know that many are now offering these systems at a modest up-sell. So there may actually be substance in the announcement.) What is clear now is that we should all invest in insurance companies that are creative in insuring these new vehicles!!! They are going to become so profitable! Insurance gets the cash benefit of the technology without having to pay for it!!! Wow!!! Congratulations Warren Buffett. He must have played a role in this. He stands to benefit so much. :-) While trucks are mentioned, (amazing that buses aren't; DoT is SO BAD!!), they seem very much the stepchild. SO unfortunate! :-( Alain
IIHS dedicates expanded testing facility to focus on crash avoidance
Press release Sept 11, "The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety began a new chapter Friday, opening an expanded testing facility that will enable it to evaluate the latest crash avoidance technologies year-round.
The $30 million expansion of the Vehicle Research Center was made possible through the support of IIHS member companies. The centerpiece is a 5-acre covered track, one of the largest fabric-covered structures in the United States, which will allow testing to continue rain or shine. Six fabric panels supported by steel trusses arc over the 700-foot-by-300-foot track and are supported by 18 concrete piers, which weigh a total of 7,000 tons and contain more than 39 miles of steel reinforcement bars.
An existing outdoor track was expanded, bringing the total area of track, including the covered section, to 15 acres. A new office and conference space was also part of the project...." Read more See also the video
Hmmmm... This is a major accomplishment and will serve to be an important facility for advancing collision avoidance technologies. Congrats to IIHS! It is a welcome addition to the facilities that are in the various stages of being created in the US including, the ones at Ann Arbor, Michigan, Contra Costa, California and Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.
There is enormous value to be captured by perfecting these technologies for which there is still substantial amount of work to be done that will need all of these facilities and more to approach perfection. Alain
As Head-Up Displays Become Common, Distraction Becomes an Issue
"When Manish Undavia took delivery of the 2016 Audi A7 sedan — list price, about $71,000 — it came with technology rarely found in automobiles, even five years ago: collision avoidance systems, sensors to keep the car from drifting and, perhaps most baffling to Mr. Undavia, a head-up display.
"A what?" he asked the salesman. Richard Cardenas, a salesman at Biener Audi on Long Island, turned on the car and showed Mr. Undavia how it worked. From the driver's seat, the car's speed — "0 mph" — appeared about six feet beyond the dashboard, floating in space, visible only to Mr. Undavia....
To automakers, the technology makes for safer driving because the driver does not need to look down for information. ... But to skeptics, head-up displays are yet another informational distraction for the already data-overloaded driver. ...
Some drivers see the head-up display as the answer to a question that no one's asking. According to a J.D. Power study released in August, 33 percent of more than 4,000 new-car owners recently surveyed said they "never use" the displays in their vehicles. Respondents said that they didn't find the technology useful and that the feature "came as part of a package on my current vehicle and I did not want it."..."Read more
Hmmm... These things are SO BAD!!! There aren't enough things to pay attention to while one is driving, now in our face all the time is what some ^&%$% decided is what we should be looking at all the time. It's bad enough when the back seat driver is yelling out all the time these things, they are now being put in your face continuously, C'Mon Man!!! Please don't! Unfortunately, these systems are yet smart enough to know what the driver knows at each instant and can therefore, not be a total pain in the %^$%^ most of the time. It is nice that a speedometer is not continuously in your face. Actually it is rare (way less than 10% of the time) that you need to see it and with intelligent cruise control, rare is even rarer. Similarly with turn-by-turn nav systems. Again rare, even very rare.
Moreover, the whole concept of Warning need a makeover. Unfortunately it was embraced by the manufacturers because the systems were not good enough to be use to take action, so they just warned.
However, the false alarms cause drivers to ignore the systems or, far worse, turn them off or not buy them in the first place. If/Once the systems become good enough to have very few false alarms, then the car should not bother to warn but to take corrective action itself. (Heck, I don't know what to do in these alarm situations other than slow down and if I turn the wheel, I'll probably flip it and die.) That means that we skip the warning and go directly to automated collision avoidance. Yes!!
By the way, Didn't we learn in the 80s that in-your-ear warnings were a non-starter: Speak & Spell VS The 1986 Chrysler New Yorker In-your-face warnings that are largely irrelevant are even worse! Please stop! Alain
Travis Kalanick Interview
Sep 11, 2015, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick talks about how Uber has changed the taxi industry and what the future holds for the company.See Video
Hmmm...
Nice interview Stephen! Alain
Google Hires an Auto Industry Vet to Run Its Self-Driving Car Project
A. Davis, Sept 14 "Google has hired a veteran auto industry executive to run its self-driving car project, a sign the tech giant is serious about challenging car makers with its autonomous vehicles.
John Krafcik is the former head of Hyundai's American operation, and was most recently the president of TrueCar, a car pricing service that works to make negotiations with dealers less stressful for consumers. He'll join Google later this month as CEO of the self-driving car project, the company said Sunday night. Chris Urmson, the current head of the team, will stay on as the technical leader. Read more
Hmmm...This is serious! Alain
Some other thoughts that deserve your
Uber giving $5.5 million to CMU to support robotics faculty chair, fellowships
K. Lyons Sept 9, "San Francisco-based ride-sharing company Uber will give $5.5 million to Carnegie Mellon University to support a new robotics faculty chair and three fellowships, the company announced today.
The gift is part of a partnership Uber announced in February with CMU's National Robotics Engineering Center, which is aimed at producing self-driving cars.... Read more
Hmmm... Way to step up Uber!! Now a lot of other companies that stand to benefit from SmartDrivingCars, such as Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Apple, Google, Amazon, Insurance Companies, etc. should step up and fund similar programs at other schools. There is yet a lot to be done by many motivated researchers. Much better if those that will really benefit from these technologies step up and fund the research, development and commercialization. Alain
Beyond Traffic Lights: Driverless Cars at Intersections
Aug 27 "...Stone and his team propose an intersection control system using current or near-term sensor technologies, a standardized communication protocol, and the ability to deploy gradually over time to safely accommodate a mix of autonomous and human-driven vehicles in changing proportions...."The beauty of this system as proposed, is its potential to facilitate the transition from today's human-driven vehicles to an era when autonomous vehicles are the norm and perhaps even to accelerate the change by demonstrating a faster and safer way to get around," observed David Yang, Federal Highway Administration's technical representative on the project....Absolute collision prevention...are primary goals..." Read more See Also and AIM
Hmmm... At least the project is focused on the transition from when there will be just an infinitesimally few autonomous vehicles (remember, today there are none.) to a day when there may be a few to many. Since "All" isn't going to happen before anyone that is working today retires, such cases have only asymptotic implications. The assumptions about the distribution of human behaviors manifesting the approach trajectories are critical to the performance expectations. ( I won't comment on the "absolute" goal). Alain
Recompiled Old News :
Half-baked stuff that probably doesn't deserve your time:
Hackers Can Trick Driverless Cars With A Handheld Laser
D. Gershogorn, Sept 8 "Potentially forcing the car to slow down, stop, or swerve... " Please do not read more A kid using a mirror can temporarily blind a driver forcing the car to slow down, stop or swerve! No one should read Popular Science. So Bad!... Alain
C'mon Man! (These folks didn't get/read the memo)
Calendar of Upcoming Events:
http://www.automatedfl.com/our-efforts/florida-automated-vehicles-summit/
Recent Versions of:
Google's Driverless Cars Run Into Problem: Cars With Drivers
M. Richtel & C Dougherty, Sept. 1 " Google, ... has run into an odd safety conundrum: humans.
Last month, as one of Google's self-driving cars approached a crosswalk, it did what it was supposed to do when it slowed to allow a pedestrian to cross, prompting its "safety driver" to apply the brakes. The pedestrian was fine, but not so much Google's car, which was hit from behind by a human-driven sedan.
Google's fleet of autonomous test cars is programmed to follow the letter of the law... Researchers in the fledgling field of autonomous vehicles say that one of the biggest challenges facing automated cars is blending them into a world in which humans don't behave by the book. "The real problem is that the car is too safe," said Donald Norman, director of the Design Lab at the University of California, San Diego, who studies autonomous vehicles. "They have to learn to be aggressive in the right amount, and the right amount depends on the culture."... Read more
Hmmm...
Much of this is good; however, many of the comments about warning systems being turned off and gaps being too large are a result of poor designs and not the real issue here which is that traffic laws have been written to control human drivers and placed in language that will cause human drivers to achieve the desired behavior most of the time or at the critical times. The law addresses the process to achieve the desired outcome, and not the outcome itself. For example, one might argue that the fundamental objective of a stop sign at an intersection is to ensure that one proceeds through the intersection only at a time when there is no chance of a collision with traffic in the cars traveling in the thru lanes. Because of human information processing limitations coming to a complete stop is the parsimonious way for a human to achieve the desired outcome. (The sight-lines on the approach to the intersection are such that a human driver needs to come to a complete rest so as to be able to "look both ways" and determine that it is safe to proceed.) If, however, the automated technology enables the automated vehicle to determine that it is safe to proceed prior to coming to a complete stop, why should that vehicle be required to come to a complete stop?
Speed limits are also an issue. For many, they have little to do with the maximum "safe" speed and their enforcement is totally whimsical. With automated vehicles we have the opportunity to deliver a safe speed limit which can vary along curves, ramps, time-of-day, school in/out, weather, traffic volume, prevailing conditions, etc.
It would be a shame for the automated driving algorithms to be cloistered by the letters of the existing laws. Each of these traffic laws need to be examined and be re-cast with a view as being implemented explicitly by the automated technology. This may well be the most challenging hurdle facing SmartDrivingCars.
Alain
Truck Safety Out of the Box from Autonobox
B Simpson, July 19, 2015 "The premise is promising. Develop and market a plug-and-play, forward-avoidance braking system for the heavy vehicle market that can be installed quickly, upgraded regularly, and even transferred from vehicle to vehicle if necessary.
The Autonobox System essentially is a second braking system for heavy-duty vehicles that addresses the long-standing problem of brakes that overheat after intense use like a panic-stop or sustained use while going downhill.... Read more
Hmmm...A viable after-market retro-fit opportunity. Alain
Self-Driving Cars Could Destroy Fine-Based City Government. What's the Downside?
S. Shackford, July 15 "One of the propelling concepts behind self-driving cars isn't just innovation for the sake of innovation, leading us to our sci-fi Jetsons future. If successfully implemented, it will make ground travel safer, ...Local governments have become increasingly dependent on human screw-ups as a way to raise money. Speeding tickets. DUI citations. Parking violations. Those are all big money-makers for municipalities that could very well go away under a regime of self-driving cars....On top of that, if the theory that self-driving cars will lead people to own fewer cars holds up, revenue from registration fees will drop as well.... Read more
Hmmm... No downside here! These have to be one of the most regressive tax systems, just behind lotteries and gambling. Governments deserve it, but will save because they will need way fewer police who now waste way too much of their time enforcing traffic laws. Police have much better things to do. Wins all around; No Downside! Alain
Lipinski Continues Efforts to Keep Cars and Other Transportation Safe from Cyber Attacks in Wake of Fiat Chrysler Recall
July 28 "...These vulnerabilities pose great risks and the federal government must do more to help protect Americans from these risks."
Late last year, the Cybersecurity Enhancement Act, originally introduced by Congressmen Lipinski, was signed into law. The Act increases the security of federal networks and information systems, improves the transfer of cybersecurity technologies to the marketplace, trains a cybersecurity workforce, and coordinates and prioritizes federal cybersecurity research and development efforts. "Read more
Hmmm... Besides protecting we must also prosecute. There has to be bad consequences and not notoriety to those that do the nasty deed. Alain
Center for Automated Road Transportation Safety @ Fort Monmouth is Launched
Monday, July 20, 2015 – "After more than three (3) years of planning and several major meetings the substantive launch the Center for Automated Road Transportation Safety @ Fort Monmouth (CARTS@FM) occurred this week with the establishment of the not-for-profit. (501(c) (6)), New Jersey Corporation. The mission of this Center is to substantially improve safety on our existing conventional roadway infrastructure through the use of inexpensive automated collision avoidance systems installed on individual vehicles operating harmoniously with conventional vehicles throughout most, if not all, existing roadways. The scope of CARTS's mission is across all modes that utilize the nation's conventional road system: trucks, buses and cars. .." Read more
Automatic Cars Or Distracted Drivers: We Need Automation Sooner, Not Later
D. Norman 6/4/15 "Imperfect automation, continually getting better? Or distracted drivers, continually getting worse? Choose.
I am fearful of the rapid rush toward full automation and have published numerous articles about the difficulties we will face because of the mismatch of the automation and human behavior. However, I am even more fearful of the rapid rise of distracting devices installed in automobiles, mounted on dashboards, worn on the wrist or body, or carried on seats, pockets, and laps of drivers...Each day seems to bring a new distraction. Heads-up displays (HUDs) that once were aids to minimizing distraction by making it easier for the driver to see navigation aids and speed, are now catching featuritis, that deadly disease which corrupts products...." Read more
Hmmm.... Yup!! Plus more comments from Don... "You might also want to add your traditional sarcasm saying "He saw the light!" or something because up to now, I have been arguing for caution (including my keynote at last years automated Vehicles conference (where I met you) -- it's about to be published in the proceedings. And I have a tech review article about to come out arguing the same caution (except I was just able to add a paragraph saying that all my words of caution are correct, but we still should switch to automation quickly).
The most dangerous part of automated vehicles is when they are partially automated: the better the automation, the less able a person is able to take corrective action. This is a point I have argued for since my early work on aviation safety some 20 years ago but has been part of the human factors literature since long before that (Bainbridge
Hmmm...it would not be bad to re-read the 1983 paper.)
So we have to skip this stage if at all possible. I have long argued that we should have either all or none. It is the mixture that is dangerous.
Basically, we have not solved the human element yet. By this I mean the pedestrians, bicyclists, skateboards, manually driven cars that will always be an issue. Moreover they will game the system: deliberately ignoring the cars under the assumption that they are programmed not to hit them, so they can do anything they want.
This assumption will both stall traffic, create roadblocks, and also occasionally prove to be false (automated cars cannot overcome the laws of physics).
Another complexity is aggression. Drivers have to be aggressive to get through traffic, but the amount and form of aggression is cultural. Pedestrians behave differently on college campuses (they think they own the place) versus the same people just a few miles away in cities, where they are more lawful. Korean drivers have to be aggressive to merge. And in China or Vietnam or India? Wow.
Milan drivers are the most lawful I have experienced recently, but even they lose their patience." Alain
Rep. Lipinski Introduces Future Transportation Research and Innovation Act
I. Sancken 03/29/15, "Congressman Dan Lipinski (IL-3) has introduced H.R. 2886, the Future Transportation Research and Innovation for Prosperity (TRIP) Act, to support innovative technologies that have the potential to fundamentally alter mobility in America and beyond.
"Surface transportation used to be rather staid and unimaginative, but today the very concept of 'mobility' is being reinvented through research, innovation, and entrepreneurship," said Rep. Lipinski. "Rapidly advancing automation, connectivity, and information technologies are creating incredible opportunities for transportation innovation. We need to develop innovative ways to improve safety, ease congestion, improve personal mobility, and cut energy use..." Read more
Hmmm... Excellent! Alain
MOSI debuts nation's first driverless vehicle open to public
D. Dangerfield, 6/12/15 "Imagine a vehicle that can drive on its own. On Saturday, the public will be invited to take a ride in one. The new driverless Meridian Shuttle is part of an exhibit that opens at MOSI on Saturday. The vehicle allows up to eight people to ride around the first floor of the museum. Read more
Hmmm... It is all about starting. Congratulations! Alain
NTSB Calls for Immediate Action on Collision Avoidance Systems for Vehicles; Cites Slow Progress as Major Safety Issue
6/8/15 "WASHINGTON – In a report released today, the National Transportation Safety Board outlined the life-saving benefits of currently available collision avoidance systems, and recommended that the technology become standard on all new passenger and commercial vehicles.
"You don't pay extra for your seatbelt," said Chairman Christopher A. Hart. "And you shouldn't have to pay extra for technology that can help prevent a collision altogether."... Read more Hmmm Yea!!! Finally some semblance of sanity in Washington. Alain
John F. Nash Jr., Math Genius Defined by a 'Beautiful Mind,' Dies at 86
E. Goodmay, May 24 "...Dr. Nash and his wife, Alicia, 82, were in a taxi on the New Jersey Turnpike in Monroe Township around 4:30 p.m. when the driver lost control while veering from the left lane to the right and hit a guardrail and another car, Sgt. Gregory Williams of the New Jersey State Police said.
The couple were ejected from the cab and pronounced dead at the scene. The State Police said it appeared that they had not been wearing seatbelts.... Read more
See also: John, Alicia Nash Remembered After Fatal Crash
A Beautiful Mind Mathematician John Nash and His Wife Killed in N.J. Car Crash
Hmmm...
So tragic!!!
What a crying shame!!! So preventable!!! We will miss them :-(
Unfortunately, the NYT and others tried but missed the fundamental point by following up with "Deaths of Math Genius John F. Nash Jr. and Wife Show Need to Use Seatbelts in Back, Experts Say ". Why do we so easily put up with crashes in the first place? It is as if it is OK to go around crashing, just put on a seat belt. Technology is available to avoid crashes, but there isn't sufficient public policy focus on avoiding crashes to accelerate its adoption and enhancement.
The fundamental problem was that the taxi was not equipped with available automated stability control, lane keeping and collision avoidance systems. This was not an accident, it was a failed public safety policy that refuses to move beyond crash mitigation and its challenged "V2x" initiatives to embrace forthright automated crash avoidance.
Moreover, there is a failed Taxi regulatory structure that doesn't even hint that taxis should have electronic stability control, automated lane keeping and collision avoidance. What is the purpose of taxi regulation, to keep "Ubers" out of business?
It is time for the nation's transportation policy to focus intelligence/automation on the vehicle in support of the driver. Hopefully Congress will restructure the pending transportation legislation to focus automated vehicle technologies that actively assist drivers when they make driving mistakes. We are not perfect. We deserve a public safety policy that is more mindful of our imperfections. Policy that isn't aimed at just warning and scolding us but actively takes over and does the right thing. We, not the infrastructure, are the cause of most of the highway carnage. It is the driver who needs help and our public policy should focus on delivering that help. Alain
The View from the Front Seat of the Google Self-Driving Car
Chris Urmson May 11, 2015 "After 1.7 million miles we've learned a lot — not just about our system but how humans drive, too. The most common accidents our cars are likely to experience in typical day to day street driving — light damage, no injuries — aren't well understood because they're not reported to police. Yet according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data, these incidents account for 55% of all crashes. It's hard to know what's really going on out on the streets unless you're doing miles and miles of driving every day. And that's exactly what we've been doing with our fleet of 20+ self-driving vehicles and team of safety drivers, who've driven 1.7 million miles (manually and autonomously combined). The cars have self-driven nearly a million of those miles, and we're now averaging around 10,000 self-driven miles a week (a bit less than a typical American driver logs in a year), mostly on city streets. In the spirit of helping all of us be safer drivers, we wanted to share a few patterns we've seen. A lot of this won't be a surprise, especially if you already know that driver error causes 94% of crashes.
If you spend enough time on the road, accidents will happen whether you're in a car or a self-driving car. Over the 6 years since we started the project, we've been involved in 11 minor accidents (light damage, no injuries) during those 1.7 million miles of autonomous and manual driving with our safety drivers behind the wheel, and not once was the self-driving car the cause of the accident. ... We'll continue to drive thousands of miles so we can all better understand the all too common incidents that cause many of us to dislike day to day driving — and we'll continue to work hard on developing a self-driving car that can shoulder this burden for us." Read more
Hmmm.... MUST reading; HOWEVER, we need much more information to be released, not just a few examples. Please make your data public! We don't need to know who but we desperately need to know what so that not only Google, but the rest of us can... "...work hard on developing..." SmartDrivingCars "....that can shoulder this burden for us." Alain