2017-01-08

2017-01-08

January 8, 2017

Coming Highlights of Annual TRB Conference

Data Encryption:

      1. Tuesday, Jan 10, 2:15 - 3:15 Marriott Marquis, Marquis
      Ballroom Salon 15 (M2) (Panel Discussion)

          What Apple's Attempt to Keep the "Back Door" Locked
        Means for Transportation

        SmartDrivingCars:

      1. Monday, Jan 9,

          8:00 - 9:45 am, Marriott Marquis Union Station Hotel -
      Woodley Park (M3)

              Automated Transit Systems Committee (AP040) Meeting

          8:00 - 9:45 am, Hall E, Convention Center (Poster), Event
      204

              Ke Wan & A. Kornhauser, "Road Pricing Through
      Financial Derivatives Based on Travel Time"

              Lewis Clements & K. Kockelman, "Economic
        Effects of Autonomous Vehicles"

              R. Ke, J. Spears & J. Lutin, "Automated Vehicle
        - Pedestrian Near - Miss Detection Through Onboard Monocular
        Vision"

          10:15 - 11:00 am, Hall E, Convention Center (Poster),
      Event 288

              Ke Wan & A. Kornhauser, "Implicit Scenario
        Mixture Models for Travel Time Estimation"

          10:15 - noon, Convention Center, 207B (Panel Discussion)

             J. Anderson , S. Shladover, B. Smith... "Automated
        and Connected Vehicles and Tort Law: A Primer"

          1:30 - 3:15, Hall E, Convention Center (Poster)

              P. Lustgarten & S. Le Vine "Public Opinion and
        Consumer Preferences for Selected Attributes of Automated
        Vehicles"

          1:30 - 3:15, Convention Center 145B (Panel Discussion)

              S. Burks, presiding, "Autonomous Trucks: Realities
        and Myths"

          3:45 - 5:30, Convention Center 151a (Panel Discussion)

              S. Barnes, presiding, "Connected and Autonomous
        Vehicles: What Transportation Organizations Need to Know"

      2. Tuesday, Jan 10,

          8:00 - 9:45, Convention Center, Salon C

              M. Venner, presiding, "Managing the Transition to
        Shared Automated Vehicles"

          10:15 - noon, Convention Center, Salon C

               S. Shladover, presiding, "Development of
        Regulations on Automated Driving Systems"

          1:30 - 3:15 pm, Hall E, Convention Center (Poster), Even
      671

              Shirley Zhu & A. Kornhauser, "Interplay Between
      Fleet Size, Level of Service, and Empty Vehicle Repositioning
      Strategies in Large-Scale, Shared-Ride Autonomous Taxi
      Mobility-on-Demand Scenarios"

           Goncalo Correia & B. van Arem, "Model for
        Estimating Urban Mobility Patterns Under a Scenario of
        Automated Driving: Application to Delft, Netherlands"

      3. Wednesday, Jan 11

          8:00 - 9:45 am, 145B Convention Center (Lecturn), Event
      810

              Advanced Automated Transit Trends: Implications for
      Policy Makers

              A. Kornhauser, "Advanced Transit Automation: An
      Opportunity to Lower Costs and Improve Accessibility"

          8:00 - 9:45 am, Hall E, Convention Center (Poster), Event
      847

              Artur Filipowicz, J. Liu & A. Kornhauser, "Learning
        to Recognize Distance to Stop Signs Using the Virtual World
        of Grand Theft Auto 5"

              Paul Carlson, & M. Poorsartep, "Enhancing the
        Roadway Physical Infrastructure for Advanced Vehicle
        Technologies: Case Study in Pavement Markings for Machine
        Vision and Road Map Toward Better Understanding"

Uber debuts Movement, a new website offering access to its traffic data

      D. Etherington, Jan 8, "...The basic idea is that Uber has a
      lot of insight into how traffic works within a city, and it
      can anonymize this data so that it isn't tied to specific
      individuals in most cases. So where that's possible, Uber is
      going to begin sharing said data, first to specific
      organizations who apply for early access, and then eventually
      to the general public.

      Uber says it was looking at all the data it gathered and began
      to realize that it could be used for public benefit, and
      assembled a product team to make this happen. The result of
      this effort was Movement, which aims to address problems city
      officials and urban planners encounter when they're forced to
      make key, transformational infrastructure decisions without
      access to all of, or the proper information about actual
      conditions and causes.

Essentially, according to Uber, it’s hoping to make it easier for those with influence over a city’s transportation picture to make the right decision, and to be able to explain why, where and when the changes are happening with accurate data backing them up. (emphasis added by Alain) It also wants to do this in a way that makes it easy for organizations to work with, so it’s releasing the data organized around traffic analysis zones within cities, which are agreed-upon geographic demarcations that help with existing urban planning and traffic management…  Read more Hmmm… Kudos Uber!!! Please release the data to everyone ASAP.  Everyone working on SmartDrivingCars should also make publicly available all of the real-time data that they capture about the driving environment.  The competitive race to achieve ultimate safety with SmartDrivingCars should NOT be waged with proprietary data about some corner conditions that one just happen to have tripped over.  All data about all ‘corner cases’ (and boring cases) should be made available to everyone to use, if they so desire.  Being more creative about how to more safely address corner cases is advantage enough.  Alain

Self-Driving Vehicles Update

      T. Guarriello, Jan 5 Episode 26  [Podcast](https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/ep.-26-alain-kornhauser-ph.d./id959304430?i=1000379652686&mt=2)  Hmmm... Fun PodCast. :-) Alain

Some other

              thoughts that deserve your attention

###

On the More Technical Side

http://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SmartDrivingCars/Papers/

Half-baked stuff that

                  probably doesn't deserve your time

Why we aren’t ready for self-driving cars - yet

J. Gallagher, Jan 7, “In the push to put autonomous vehicles on the nation’s roads, the most challenging aspect might be with the roads themselves, and the bridges, tunnels and other infrastructure.

                Cities and states have done little to grapple with
                the enormous demands that autonomous vehicles will
                place on transportation infrastructure and on civic
                policy. States and municipalities barely able to
                fill potholes today could soon be charged with
                creating the world's most sophisticated roads with
                embedded sensors, cameras and communication devices
                to help autonomous vehicles talk to one another and
                the environment around them.... [Read more](http://www.freep.com/story/money/business/columnists/2017/01/07/detroit-transportation-mobility-autonomous-semcog/96159502/) Hmmm... Nope!
                    No one in the self-driving business is asking
                    cities to do anything. There is a driver in the
                    car who is expected to deal with the non-self-driving
                    situations.

                    Now if Gallagher's talking about 'driverless'
                    (which is not what was being pitched by any  OEM
                    at CES, maybe even Google has moved it to the
                    back burner and Uber isn't anywhere close) then
                    the whole article is infinitely premature.

Plus there is no one working on driverless that is risking his/her future success on any infrastructure improvements (other than maybe paint and signage that first and foremost helps conventional ‘20th century’ human drivers).   Alain

###

C’mon Man!(These

                  folks didn't get/read the memo)

Calendar

                    of Upcoming Events:

January 8-12, 2017

Washington, DC

Princeton Alumni & Friends Banquet

              Tuesday, 6:00pm Jan 10

Recent Highlights of:

#

###

                    January 4, 2017

Volume 4, Issue 3

M. Sena, Jan. 5, “In This Issue:

Report from Dispatch Central 1 “…While the 12 million people in the EU who earn their livings directly from the automotive industry are delighted by the news that car sales figures for Novem-ber were up significantly, and it looks like 2016 will be another banner year, there are people in governments doing everything in their power to make both building and owning motorized vehicles economically unviable…” Read more  Hmmm…Very interesting!

Autonomous Driving News Apple’s Letter to NHTSA 1 “…The Vehicle Safety Act requires companies to certify vehicles to the FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) before first sale. But this law applies to new motor vehicles intended for sale to the public, and by implication, by companies that make and sell cars, not companies like Apple that may or may not intend to sell cars. Further, FAST Act2 specifically allows car makers, but not non-car makers, to test on public roads without requiring ex-emptions from FMVSS…Read more “ Hmmm… Very interesting!

What Car Companies Are Doing 2 “…So Uber must have made Volvo a pretty sweet offer when it gets rid of all the drivers with their own cars and has its own fleet of driverless cars…Read more” Hmmm…Very interesting!

Reurbanization or Spreading the Sprawl 3 “…Where do you want to go? My chart below has two opposing scenarios. In the top scenario, we keep doing what we have been doing. In the bottom sce-nario, we try to match policies with desired results. You choose…Read more” Hmmm…Very interesting!

Automotive Navigation-The Future of Traffic Info 4  “…ROUTE GUIDANCE WITHOUT

                traffic information is useless..[Read more](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_5_January%202017.pdf)" Hmmm...Stop
                    right there.  We've known that!  The connected
                    world will not get here until most of road
                    vehicles are part of what will be but a few
                    competing fleets.  It is those  fleet
                    owners/managers that will find it compelling to
                    deploy connectedness throughout their own
                    fleets. Any meaningful sharing of data between
                    competing fleets is not in any future that I
                    foresee. It may even violate anti-trust laws
                    (Unless Putin takes over the world).   Alain

Musings of a Dispatcher – Civilis cogitationes 6 “…I did not see a lot of people cycling to their jobs when I was in Västerås in the early autumn of this year.  Like most places in Europe

                and the U.S., when cars became affordable for people
                with even modest incomes—starting in the 50s in the
                U.S. and in the 60s in Europe—it was a delight for
                workers to get out of the rain and snow and into
                their own car. It's the same today in emerging
                markets, especially China,.." [Read more](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_5_January%202017.pdf)  Hmmm...Our
                    only hope is "Driverless"!  Alain

                    December 24, 2016

Waymo’s 100 autonomous Chrysler minivans are here

J. Golson, Dec 19, “Chrysler has completed the 100 autonomous Pacifica minivans that will join the Waymo (née Google) fleet in early 2017. The vans, which are plug-in hybrid variants with Waymo’s self-driving hardware and software built in, are part of a partnership between Fiat Chrysler (FCA) and Waymo that was announced earlier this year.

Waymo CEO John Krafcik said last week that his company is not interested in “making better cars.” Instead, it wants to make “better drivers.”…”

Read more Hmmm…Nice that these vehicles are targeted to a ride-sharing market (more seating capacity and easier in&out than the Prius/Lexus/Bug.)

However,  the quote by John Krafcik is VERY troubling.  To make “better drivers” all one needs is Automated Collision Avoidance systems (or what I’ve termed ‘Safe-driving cars’).  That is indeed a laudable goal; however, that goal can be reached with a lot less hardware and software than what is in these modified Pacificas (which have a conventional steering wheel, brake & throttle pedals and driver’s seat). But Safe-driving cars aren’t helpful to the Steve Mahan’s of this world (or to the young, or the Ubers or enable the Modified Pacifica’s to offer inexpensive high-quality shared-ride on-demand mobility to all.   Most unfortunately, what all of the extra gizmos on the modified Pacificas enable is for the driver to be better able to consume Google Ads for part of his/her time trapped in this vehicle.  So a more honest quote might have been: it wants to make “better drivers who can better consume Google Ads.”  No wonder Chris bailed!  :-(  Alain

                    December 18, 2016

The California DMV says Uber has to stop operating its self-driving cars in SF

J. Bhuiyah, Dec 14, “…In a letter addressed to Anthony Levandowski, the co-founder of Otto and now head of Uber’s self-driving unit, the California DMV demanded that the ride-hail company stop operating its fleet of self-driving cars…“  Read moreHmmm… This is all so confusing.  The letter from DMV describes the ‘testing’ of ‘autonomous technology’, but Uber isn’t ‘testing’, it is operating and it doesn’t describe its cars as ‘autonomous’ anything, but, ‘self-driving’ (which is the correct designation).  To me, what Uber is operating is basically the same thing as what Tesla is selling in California.  Moreover, Uber’s Self-driving is less ‘autonomous’ in its operation than the operation of ‘electronic stability control (ESC)’ that has been mandated in every car built since 2012 that operate on California roads. (ESC has sensors and control logic that coordinate the operation of the brakes and throttle at the discretion of the sensors and over-ride the intended control actions of the driver.  Now that’s real ‘autonomy’  …taking the driver out of the loop at the discretion of some control logic. Anti -lock brakes are similarly ‘autonomous’)  Should everyone in California get a letter from DMV?   Just think, New Jersey is trying to enact CA-like legislation. :-(  Alain

                    December 14, 2016

Google is spinning off its self-driving car program into a new company called Waymo

A. Hawkins, Dec 13, “Today, Google announced that it would be spinning off its six-year-old self-driving project into a standalone business called Waymo, which stands for “a new way forward in mobility,” according to John Krafcik, the CEO of the new company.

                It was previously reported that Google would be
                dropping its plan to build its own vehicle without
                steering wheels and pedals, instead focusing on
                creating the self-driving technology that can be
                installed in third-party vehicles. Krafcik didn't
                provide much clarity there, but did state
                definitively that the new company was still fully
                committed to fully autonomous vehicle technology.

                "We are all in, 100 percent, on Level Four and Level
                Five fully driverless solutions," he said.

                Krafcik didn't comment on a report in Bloomberg that
                Google would be starting its own ride-sharing
                service in partnership with Fiat Chrysler using the
                Italian car maker's Pacifica minivans as its fleet
                of self-driving taxis. Google and FCA announced
                their collaboration earlier this year. Krafcik did
                confirm that the self-driving Pacificas were still
                in the build phase, but would hopefully be on the
                road for testing very soon.

                It may be too soon to say that Google is abandoning
                its plans to build it's own fleet of driverless
                cars, without steering wheels and pedals. That said,
                Krafcik made it clear that Waymo "is not a car
                company, there's been some confusion on that point.
                We're not in business of making better cars, we're
                in the business of making better drivers."...[Read more](http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/13/13936782/google-self-driving-car-waymo-spin-off-company)  Hmmm... Boy that is a lot of hedging.
                    If they are in the business of making better
                    drivers, then all they need to do is to make
                    Automated Collision Avoidance systems that
                    actually work... avoid collisions (aka
                    Safe-driving Cars).  That would make all drivers
                    better drivers, but it wouldn't do anything for
                    non-drivers... the young, old, poor, blind,
                    those under the influence, ...  Has Google
                    abandoned all of those folks and reverted to the
                    'dark-side'?  Alain
                    December 7, 2016

Why the driverless car industry is happy (so far) with Trump’s pick for Transportation secretary

R. Mitchell, Dec 6, “Silicon Valley voted heavily for Hillary Clinton, but companies working on driverless cars seem overjoyed with President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Transportation secretary, Elaine Chao.   Chao will wield great power over how driverless cars and other automated vehicles will be regulated — or not….Industry insiders say they don’t want Chao to ignore driverless car policy….

                Instead, they hope to avoid a patchwork of differing
                and conflicting rules across the 50 states.   "This
                should be centralized," said Alain L. Kornhauser,
                director of the transportation program at Princeton
                University and an autonomous vehicle expert, "but
                that doesn't mean the states don't play a part. It
                would be better if we had a common
                understanding...." [Read more](http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-chao-trump-driverless-20161205-story.html)Hmmm... Yup! Alain

                    November 20, 2016

DSRC’s ‘Dead End,’ Says Qualcomm Exec

J, Yoshida, Nov 15, “…Qualcomm’s pending takeover of NXP Semiconductors isn’t making the path to V2X any clearer.

                NXP remains a staunch advocate for DSRC-based V2X
                (as demonstrated via truck platooning on Munich
                roads last week during Electronica). Qualcomm, a
                leading voice and force behind the progress of the
                cellular standards, is sticking to its cellular
                radio technology-based V2X evolution...We see this
                as a continued cellular revolution with new elements
                coming in... " [Read more](http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1330834) Hmmm...V2X is
                    important, but primarily as a complement to
                    vehicle-centered automated collision avoidance
                    and not as a centralized orchestration of
                    individual vehicles.  Finally seeing this as: "We
                    see this as a continued cellular revolution with
                    new elements coming in..."  may bring
                    some reality to V2X.  Alain

                    November 6, 2016

Our Driverless Future

S. Helpen, Nov 24, “ Review of  Driverless: Intelligent Cars and the Road Ahead by Hod Lipson and Melba Kurma, MIT Press, 312 pp...” Read the review and the book. Hmmm… This book is really about ‘Driverless’ and differentiates it well from ‘Self-driving’, kudos for that.  So while it has no equations, it precisely address the issues.  I enjoyed Ch 6, First there were Electronic Highways, especially pages 116,7 and, of course,  Chapter 7, Build Smart Cars, not Smart Highways.  especially pages 137,8 and the subchapter The value of dumb highways. Chapter 10 Deep Learning: The Final Piece of the Puzzle is a very nice background while much is being advanced ‘as we speak’.   The book appropriately ends with a chapter about hype, Ch 12 The Ripple Effects which references the Zero Principle, addresses local goods movement and lists the potential losers in this technological revolution.  The book ends by supporting the argument that this technological transition is more about the rapid evolution of algorithms than hardware.  Bravo! Alain October 27, 2016

Ontario Must Prepare for Vehicle Automation

B. Grush, Oct. 2016, “Two contradictory stories about our transportation infrastructure are currently in circulation. One is that Ontario’s aging, inadequate and congested infrastructure is perennially unable to catch up with a growing and sprawling GTHA. The other is that vehicle automation will soon dramatically multiply current road capacity by enabling narrower lanes, shorter headways and coordinated streams of connected vehicles to pass through intersections without traffic signals to impede flow.

                Since the premature forecast of peak car in 2008 and
                now the hype surrounding the automated vehicle, we
                are often told that we have enough road capacity;
                that shared robotic taxis will optimize our trips,
                reduce congestion, and largely eliminate the need
                for parking. This advice implies we need wait only a
                few short years to experience relief from our
                current infrastructure problems given by decades of
                under-investment in transportation infrastructure.

This is wishful thinking. Vehicle automation will give rise to two different emerging markets: semi-automated vehicles for household consumption and fully automated vehicles for public service such as robo-taxi and robo-transit. These two vehicle types will develop in parallel to serve different social markets. They will compete for both riders and infrastructure. The purpose of this report is to look at why and how government agencies and public interest groups can and should influence the preferred types and deployment of automated vehicles and the implication of related factors for planning…” Read moreHmmm…Bravo! The Key Findings & Recommendations are excellent.  This is an excellent report (but it largely misses goods movement.) Especially 5.1 (read ‘semi-autonomous’ as ‘Self-driving’ and ‘full-automation’ as ‘Driverless’.  My view:  Driverless may well be at the heals of Self-driving because it is a business play rather than a consumer play. Driverless will be ordered by the hundreds or thousands rather than individually.)  and, of course Ch 10: Ownership (the business model) is more important than technology. Alain

                    October 19, 2016

How Apple Scaled Back Its Titanic Plan to Take on Detroit

M. Gurman, Oct 17, “Apple Inc. has drastically scaled back its automotive ambitions, leading to hundreds of job cuts and a new direction that, for now, no longer includes building its own car, according to people familiar with the project.

                Hundreds of members of the car team, which comprises
                about 1,000 people, have been reassigned, let go, or
                have left of their own volition in recent months,
                the people said, asking not to be identified because
                the moves aren't public.

                New leadership of the initiative, known internally
                as Project Titan, has re-focused on developing an
                autonomous driving system that gives Apple
                flexibility to either partner with existing
                carmakers, or return to designing its own vehicle in
                the future, the people also said. Apple has kept
                staff numbers in the team steady by hiring people to
                help with the new focus, according to another
                person....

                Regardless of Apple's struggles, established
                carmakers have recognized the threat posed by new
                entrants and have embarked on a hiring and
                acquisition splurge to beef up their software
                capabilities. They are wary of allowing technology
                companies to own the lucrative software component of
                new cars..." [Read more](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-17/how-apple-scaled-back-its-titanic-plan-to-take-on-detroit)Hmmm... Very
                    interesting!)  Alain
                    October 7, 2016

An Alarming 10% Rise in Traffic Deaths in the First Half of 2016

D. Victor, Oct. 5,  “Traffic deaths in the United States rose 10.4 percent in the first half of this year compared with the same period in 2015, maintaining a steady climb….

                The [numbers were released on Wednesday](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812332) by the National
                Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which noted
                that Americans drove about 50.5 billion more miles
                in the first six months of 2016 than in the first
                half of 2015, an increase of 3.3
                percent....Officials have not identified a specific
                cause for the most recent increase... " [Read more](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/us/traffic-deaths-up-more-than-10-percent-in-first-half-of-2016.html?_r=0)Hmmm...worst kept
                    secret...Texting!!!  It is an epidemic and the
                    way to address it begins with Automated
                    Collision Avoidance Systems (ACAS)...what is on
                    the shelf today (if it only really worked), and
                    a necessary foundation for Self-driving (which
                    improves Quality-of-Life for some but increases
                    VMT) and Driverless (which improves
                    Quality-of-Life for all and decreases VMT).   Alain
                    October 1, 2016

Do Driverless Cars Favor Urban or Suburban Life?

H. Grabar, Sept 29, “One possibility is that easy mobility—driverless cars, on-demand deliveries, and the like—will dull the pains of suburban life. The long commute, the wasted driving time, the difficulty of running out for a carton of milk—the inconvenience and expense of the subdivision will be melted away by hot new technology. Milk by drone, what a concept!

                Another is that easy mobility produces greater
                advantages in the city. Carless living is better
                than ever. NIMBY battles don't happen because
                parking and congestion aren't problems. Wasted auto
                infrastructure, like lots and curbside parking and
                garages, is converted towards better uses like
                housing and restaurants. Maybe a central highway,
                once evidence of a city's essential unpleasantness,
                becomes a park.... [Read more](http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2016/09/29/are_driverless_cars_better_for_cities_or_suburbs.html)  Hmmm...VERY interesting.
                        My view: There is essentially zero consumer
                        demand for Driverless car ownership.  Without
                        a substantial mobility alternative,
                        suburbanites will buy and love Self-driving
                        cars. Driverless is a useless upgrade.

However, fleets of Driverless vehicles can provide a compelling alternative. They have a much better opportunity to thrive (be a profitable fleet business) if Driverless makes sharing rides “consumer acceptable/desirable”.  This may be achieved through price, amenities, ease-of-use, marketing, ???.  Moderate density generates demand that can be readily served with moderate ridesharing that is substantially better than individual car ownership or car-sharing.   This kind of elevator-like mobility is better in terms of service, price, overhead, environment, … and it substantially enhances the fundamental attractiveness of medium density urban lifestyle.  Thus, ride-share Driverless favors moderate urban while Self-driving favors status quo. Alain

                    September 23, 2016

Federal Automated Vehicles Policy: Accelerating the Next Revolution In Roadway Safety

September 2016, “Executive Summary…For DOT, the excitement around highly automated vehicles (HAVs) starts with safety.  (p5)

…The development of advanced automated vehicle safety technologies, including fully self-driving cars, may prove to be the greatest personal transportation revolution since the popularization of the personal automobile nearly a century ago. (p5)

…The benefits don’t stop with safety. Innovations have the potential to transform personal mobility and open doors to people and communities. (p5)

…The remarkable speed with which increasingly complex HAVs are evolving challenges DOT to take new approaches that ensure these technologies are safely introduced (i.e., do not introduce significant new safety risks), provide safety benefits today, and achieve their full safety potential in the future. (p6)  Hmmm…Fantastic statements and I appreciate that the fundamental basis and motivator is SAFETY.  We all have recognized safety as a necessary   condition that must be satisfied if this technology is to be successful.  (unfortunately it is not a sufficient condition, (in a pure math context)). This policy statement appropriately reaffirms this necessary condition.  Alain

“…we divide the task of facilitating the safe introduction and deployment (…defines “deployment” as the operation of an HAV by members of the public who are not the employees or agents of the designer, developer, or manufacturer of that HAV.) of HAVs into four sections:(p6) Hmmm…Perfect! Alain

“…1. Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles (p6)…“  Hmmm… 15 Points, more later. Alain

“…2. Model State Policy (p7)   The Model State Policy confirms that States retain their traditional responsibilities…but… The shared objective is to ensure the establishment of a consistent national framework rather than a patchwork of incompatible laws…” Hmmm… Well done.  Alain

“…3. NHTSA Current Regulatory Tools (p7) … This document provides instructions, practical guidance, and assistance to entities seeking to employ those tools. Furthermore, NHTSA has streamlined its review process and is committing to…”   Hmmm… Excellent. Alain

“…4. New Tools and Authorities (p7)…The speed with which HAVs are advancing, combined with the complexity and novelty of these innovations, threatens to outpace the Agency’s conventional regulatory processes and capabilities. This challenge requires DOT to examine whether the way DOT has addressed safety for the last 50 years should be expanded to realize the safety potential of automated vehicles over the next 50 years. Therefore, this section identifies potential new tools, authorities and regulatory structures that could aid the safe and appropriately expeditious deployment of new technologies by enabling the Agency to be more nimble and flexible (p8)…“  Hmmm… Yes. Alain

“…Note on “Levels of Automation”  There are multiple definitions for various levels of automation and for some time there has been need for standardization to aid clarity and consistency. Therefore, this Policy adopts the SAE International (SAE) definitions for levels of automation. )  Hmmm… I’m not sure this adds clarity because it does not deal directly with the difference between self-driving and driverless.  While it might be implied in level 4 and level 5 that these vehicles can proceed with no one in the vehicle, it is not stated explicitly.  That is unfortunate, because driverless freight delivery can’t be done without “driverless”; neither can mobility-on-demand be offered to the young, old, blind, inebriated, …without “driverless”. Vehicles can’t be “repositioned-empty” (which (I don’t mean to offend anyone) is the real value of a taxi driver today).  So autonomousTaxis are impossible.

Also, these levels do not address Automated Emergency Braking  (AEB) Systems and Automated Lane Keeping Systems which are the very first systems whose on-all-the-time performance must be perfected.   These are the Safety Foundation of HAV (Highly Automated vehicles).  I understand that the guidelines may assume that these systems are already perfect and that “20 manufacturer have committed” to have AEB on all new cars, but to date these systems really don’t work.  In 12 mph IIHS test, few stop before hitting the target, and, as we may have seen with the Florida Tesla crash, the Level 2/3 AutoPilot may not have failed, but, instead, it was the “Phantom Level 1” AEB that is supposed to be on all the time.  This is not acceptable.  These AEB systems MUST get infinitely better now.  It is a shame that AEBs were were not explicitly addressed in this document.

“…I. Vehicle Performance Guidance for Automated Vehicles (p11) A. Guidance: if a vehicle is compliant within the existing FMVSS regulatory framework and maintains a conventional vehicle design, there is currently no specific federal legal barrier to an HAV being offered for sale.(footnote 7)  However, manufacturers and other entities designing new automated vehicle systems

                are subject to NHTSA's defects, recall and
                enforcement authority. (footnote 8)   . and the "[15 Cross-cutting Areas of Guidance](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/21/technology/the-15-point-federal-checklist-for-self-driving-cars.html?_r=0)" p17)

In sum this is a very good document and displays just how far DoT policy has come from promoting v2v, DSRC and centralized control, “connected”,  focus to creating an environment focused on individual vehicles that responsibly take care of themselves.  Kudos to Secretary Foxx for this 180 degree policy turn focused on safety.   Once done correctly, the HAV will yield the early safety benefits that will stimulate continued improvements that, in turn, will yield the great mobility, environmental and quality-of-life benefits afforded by driverless mobility.

What are not addressed are commercial trucking and buses/mass transit.  NHTSA is auto focused, so maybe FMCSA is preparing similar guidelines.  FTA (Federal Transit Administration) seems nowhere in sight.  Alain

                  August 28, 2016

Prepare to be Underwhelmed by 2021’s Autonomous Cars

                    August 19, 2016

Ford Promises Fleets of Driverless Cars Within Five Years

N. Boudette, Aug 16, “In the race to develop driverless cars, several automakers and technology companies are already testing vehicles that pilot themselves on public roads. And others have outlined plans to expand their development fleets over the next few years.    At a news conference on Tuesday at the company’s research center in Palo Alto, Calif., Mark Fields, Ford’s chief executive, said the company planned to mass produce driverless cars and have them in commercial operation in a ride-hailing service by 2021….

                "That means there's going to be no steering wheel.
                There's going to be no gas pedal. There's going to
                be no brake pedal,'' he said. ...." [Read mor](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/business/ford-promises-fleets-of-driverless-cars-within-five-years.html?_r=0http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/17/business/ford-promises-fleets-of-driverless-cars-within-five-years.html?_r=0)e  Hmmm...This
                    is significant because it implies that Ford, (or
                    an entity under its control) will operate and
                    deliver on a day-to-day basis MaaS (Mobility as
                    a Service).  In other words it will both
                    build/assemble and operate mobility's "Cloud".
                    The scale economies of such a mobility "cloud"
                    are arguably much more substantial than that of
                    the data storage & computing "cloud".  Think
                    about it!  Alain
                    August 8, 2016

Latest to Quit Google’s Self-Driving Car Unit: Top Roboticist

                    August 1, 2016

Mobileye Ends Partnership With Tesla

                    July 21, 2016

Master Plan, Part Deux

Lessons From the Tesla Crash

                  7 Crash

Hmmm…What we know now (and don’t know):

Extracting Cognition out of Images for the Purpose of Autonomous Driving

Chenyi Chen PhD Dissertation , “…the key part of the thesis, a direct perception approach is proposed to drive a car in a highway environment. In this approach, an input image is mapped to a small number of key perception indicators that directly relate to the affordance of a road/traffic state for driving…..” Read more  Hmmm..FPO 10:00am, May 16 , 120 Sherrerd Hall, Establishing a foundation for image-based autonomous driving using DeepLearning Neural Networks trained in virtual environments. Very promising. Alain

Hearing focus of SF 2569 Autonomous vehicles task force establishment and demonstration project for people with disabilities

March 23 Hmmm… Watch the video of the Committee Meeting.  The testimony is Excellent and very compelling! Also see Self-Driving Minnesota Alain

U.S. DOT and IIHS announce historic commitment of 20 automakers to make automatic emergency braking standard on new vehicles

Motor Vehicle Deaths Increase by Largest Percent in 50 Years

Adam Jonas’ View on Autonomous Cars

              Video similar to part of Adam's Luncheon talk @ 2015
              Florida Automated Vehicle Symposium on Dec 1.  [Hmmm ... Watch Video](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/Videos/AdamJonas10T_MorganStanley.mp4)  especially at
                  the 13:12 mark.  Compelling; especially after the
                  60 Minutes segment above!  Also see his [TipRanks](https://www.tipranks.com/analysts/adam-jonas).
                  Alain

                                          This list is maintained by
                                          [Alain Kornhauser](mailto:alaink@princeton.edu) and
                                          hosted by the [Princeton University LISTSERV](http://lists.princeton.edu).

Unsubscribe |Re-subscribe

  Mailto:alaink@princeton.edu 

This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.


This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.