2017-02-23
4th edition of the 5th year of SmartDrivingCars
February 24, 2017
Google’s Waze Plans Expansion of Ride-Sharing Service
J. Nicas, Feb 22, " Google is planning
to dramatically expand a carpool service
on its popular navigation app Waze,
setting the tech giant on a collision
course with the ride-sharing industry.
Google is targeting launches of its Waze
carpool service in several U.S. cities
and Latin America over the next several
months after testing in Israel and the
San Francisco Bay Area met expectations,
Waze chief Noam Bardin said in an
interview.
The growth of Waze's carpool service
puts Alphabet Inc.'s Google more
directly in competition with Uber
Technologies Inc., the startup that
pioneered the ride-sharing industry,
growing to a juggernaut with a $68
billion valuation. Google and Uber were
once allies, but they are increasingly
becoming rivals in areas such as mapping
and self-driving cars.
"Can we get the average person on his
way to work to pick someone up and
drop them off once in a while?
That's the biggest challenge," Mr.
Bardin said...." [Read more](https://www.wsj.com/articles/googles-waze-plans-expansion-of-ride-sharing-service-1487768582)Hmmm...That
is the $64,000 question. One thing
is certain... the App will need to
be super simple on both ends (rider
and ridee) and totally non-sketchy.
The key is to find other
correlations besides going between
the same places at about the same
time that would make the ride-share
non-sketchy. Alain
Alphabet’s Waymo Alleges Uber Stole Self-Driving Secrets
M. Bergen, Feb 23, “It took Alphabet Inc.’s Waymo seven years to design and build a laser-scanning system to guide its self-driving cars. Uber Technologies Inc. allegedly did it in nine months.
Waymo claims in a lawsuit filed
Thursday that was possible because a
former employee stole the designs and
technology and started a new
company....Anthony Levandowski, a
former manager at Waymo, in December
2015 downloaded more than 14,000
proprietary and confidential files,
including the lidar circuit board
designs, according to the complaint.
He also allegedly created a domain
name for his new company and confided
in some of his Waymo colleagues of
plans to "replicate" its technology
for a competitor...." [Read more](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-23/alphabet-s-waymo-sues-uber-for-stealing-self-driving-patents)
Hmmm...This is very serious. So
unfortunate. :-( Alain
Delivering the first autonomous vehicle on public roads without stewar
Press Release, Feb 20, “From 2018 2getthere’s autonomous ParkShuttle in the city of Capelle aan den IJssel will be transformed in the world’s first autonomous system operating on public roads without safety driver or steward. This world first, follows the first autonomous vehicle pilot (Schiphol Airport, 1997), the first urban autonomous vehicle application (Capelle aan den IJssel, 1999), the first mixed traffic demonstration with an autonomous vehicle (Delft, 2004) and the world’s first Personal Rapid Transit system (Masdar City, 2010). Last November the Metropolitan region Rotterdam The Hague (MRDH) announced the extension of the current operating concession of Connexxion through 2018. The city of Capelle aan den IJssel and 2getthere at that time already expressed their ambition to renew the system and extend the route using existing public roads. This ambition is now becoming reality with help of an investment of 4,25 million Euro on behalf of the ‘Verkeersonderneming Rotterdam’, a public-private-partnership between the city of Rotterdam, MRDH, the ministry of Infrastructure and the Port of Rotterdam….” Read more Hmmmm…While it hasn’t happened yet, it is scheduled to happen and this schedule has substance and is not simply a publicity stunt. Congratulations Robert! Alain
Tesla Offering Customized Auto Insurance to Customers in Asia
Feb 23, “…Adam Jonas asked: “On insurance, if your cars prove to be as much as 90 percent safer than other cars on a per-mile basis – as I think you’ve alluded as a reasonable target medium-term – and if insurance companies only offer your customers, say, a piddling 5 percent discount versus a comparably priced car, would you consider offering a service or product like P&C insurance directly to Tesla owners from your own platform and your own stores?” … Great question, Adam!
Jon McNeill, Tesla’s president of global sales and service, told an analyst that “the majority of Tesla cars are sold [in Asia] with an insurance product that is customized to Tesla.” “It takes into account not only the Autopilot safety features, but also the maintenance cost of the car,” McNeill said. “So, it’s our vision in the future that we’ll be able to offer a single price for the car – maintenance, and insurance – in a really compelling offering for the consumer. And we’re currently doing that today.” Read more Hmmmm…Perfect answer. Is insurance awake??? Alain
Self-Driving Cars Might Need Standards, but Whose?
J. Quain, Feb 23, "The PC revolution,
the internet boom, the smartphone
economy — all were propelled along by a
common set of technological standards.
So will a standard platform or operating
system be necessary to get autonomous
cars rolling, too?...Riding in Hyundai's
self-driving Ioniq, for example, is like
taking a Sunday drive with your
grandmother. The car is extremely adept
at staying squarely in its lane without
ping-ponging back and forth, but it is
also cautious in the extreme, stopping
nine feet short of crosswalks and
stubbornly refusing to go forward if a
pedestrian looks poised to step off the
sidewalk. It is behavior that can ignite
road rage in nearby human drivers.
By comparison, Delphi's test car, which
uses an Intel computing platform
installed in an Audi Q5, is more
aggressive. It can easily merge into
highway traffic and negotiate complex
intersections. However, it treats
pedestrians with less deference, taking
right-hand corners more quickly — even
though pedestrians may be contemplating
entering the crosswalk...[Read more](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/automobiles/wheels/self-driving-cars-standards.html)
Hmmmm...Basic Capitalism with little
government intervention :-) Alain
Ford’s dozing engineers side with Google in full autonomy push K. Naughton, Feb 20, “…“Level 3 may turn out to be a myth,” Waymo CEO John Krafcik said of autonomous cars that require human intervention. “Perhaps it’s just not worth doing.” Ford and Waymo’s views show there’s a rift developing among the creators of autonomous cars over what role – if any – humans should play when cars begin driving themselves. Most automakers believe that, at least initially, people must supplant the robot to avoid crashes in complex situations. Others contend that asking an inattentive human to respond in seconds to a life-or-death situation is a recipe for disaster…“ Read more Hmmmm…Since when have we all be trained “to avoid crashes in complex situations” We aren’t SuperHeros. The whole focus of the automation is to avoid getting into complex situations in the first place and to degrade/fail safely in the rare instances. Alain
When driverless cars call for backup: Suppliers develop redundant systems for safety
D. Sedgewick, Feb 18, “So engineers are doing the next best thing: developing backup systems for the brakes, steering, sensors and computer chips that guide a self-driving vehicle.
The idea is to give vehicles secondary systems that will allow them to safely pull over in case of a catastrophic equipment failure. But to keep a lid on redundant costs, suppliers are developing components that can be programmed to handle more than one function..” Read more Hmmmm…Right-on! Alain
GM is reportedly deploying a fleet of thousands of autonomous Bolt EV with Lyft as soon as next year
F. Lambert, Feb 19, “…“General Motors Co plans to deploy thousands of self-driving electric cars in test fleets in partnership with ride-sharing affiliate Lyft Inc, beginning in 2018, two sources familiar with the automaker’s plans said this week.” GM invested $500 million in Lyft just over a year ago and has said in the past that self-driving vehicle deployment would start with the ride-sharing service…“ Read more Hmmmm…It will be getting very interesting. Alain
Auto Insurance Voices Caution As Self-Driving Cars Near
Sentieo, Feb 21, “We analyzed over 9 million financial documents, covering more than 10,000 companies across the globe, for mentions of the self-driving car theme. We found that interest in self-driving cars has grown 8.5x in the past two years, but suspect that there is much more interest to come….
Swiss Re, a Swiss reinsurer, has regularly mentioned self-driving cars as a major risk since a 2013. It sees a substantial reduction in the growth of the car insurance market, and argues that diversification will be key to survival. From their 2015 annual report: “Autonomous cars […] are […] a highly disruptive technology. […]Swiss Re held various events since 2013 with] experts from car manufacturing and technology, safety and legal specialists. […] this will present many new challenges to the way we do business and how we view and manage risk, retail insurance and liability. […] 1. Autonomous cars will improve safety; 2. The sharing economy will drive autonomous car adoption; 3. They are more climate-friendly and can reduce energy reliance; 4. Consumers will begin to embrace the technology; 5. Regulation and the law will adapt, slowly; 6. Cyber risk will increase; and 7. Autonomous cars will affect liability and tort cases. Although it is uncertain how legal and regulatory issues will play out, it is clear that our role as re/insurers will change considerably. Many of these changes will also create new opportunities for businesses who quickly adapt and diversify their products and services so as to target new market segments.”…Read more Hmmmm…I’m pleased that at least Swiss Re believes…“Many
of these changes will also create new
opportunities for businesses who
quickly adapt..." :-) Alain
Mobileye installs anti-crash tech on NYC cars
S. Solomon, Feb 19, "...From this month,
4,500 for-hire vehicles in New York City
will feature Mobileye's vision sensors
and technologies to identify potential
dangerous scenarios in real time, and
alert drivers about impending
collisions, giving them time to react,
Mobileye said in a statement..." [Read more](http://www.timesofisrael.com/mobileye-installs-anti-crash-tech-on-nyc-cars/)
Hmmmm...Unfortunately these are just
warning as opposed to doing.
Hopefully their false-positives
won't cause New Yorkers to turn them
off. Alain
Reader’s
Comments..
with respect to my comment in the previous issue:
Read moreHmmm…“Automated
Collision Avoidance" or
anything having to do with
'Safe-driving Cars'
is not mentioned anywhere
in the Press Release. One
of us is missing something
very fundamental here!!
So depressing!! :-(
Alain...
Steffen Bartschat wrote: The 6th of
the 8 NSC 'callings' on a [road to zero deaths](http://www.nsc.org/learn/NSC-Initiatives/Pages/The-Road-to-Zero.aspx) is
indeed:
From Doug Gettman… “The NSC release does have some discussion of automated braking, blind spot warning, etc. electronic warning systems “…Standardize and accelerate into the fleet automotive safety technologies with life-saving potential, including blind-spot monitoring, automatic emergency braking, lane departure warning and adaptive headlights…“ Furthermore,
NSC's Position/Policy
Statement on Automotive Safety
Technology is strong; however,
I firmly believe that it
should be much stronger. It
should be #1 on their list and
it should go beyond 'Warnings"
and "Taking partial control"
to taking Full control, if
necessary, "...to avoid or
lessen the severity of crashes
if a driver does not respond
quickly enough." But
why the timidity here???
Alain
From Amitai
Bin-Nun... "you say
about ADAS technologies that
they have "a very attractive
ROI". Can you point me to
any literature on this?...
For buses :http://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/LutinKornhauser_2016TRB_BusACAS.pdf
Trucks are similar because the little liability data that I’ve been able to find is similar to that of buses, if not even higher.
For cars one needs to look at the cost of auto insurance about 80% goes to pay liabilities. But insurance only pays about 50% of the cash cost of crashes ( of which about 75% is eaten by individuals through deductibles and uncoverables) and NHTSA has estimated that the societal costs of crashes is twice the cash costs.
Given that Tesla data shows that their ACA reduces crashes by 40% and that component of AutoPilot costs ~$1000. And that you pay $1000 for auto insurance, then
Expected
liability w/o ACA is $800
Reduction
by 40% saves insurer $320/yr.
RoI is a little over 3 years
for the insurer
The car owner saves $240/yr in self insurance dollars. (RoI) a little over 4 years
But if you add the pain and suffering, (which is borne by the individual) that amounts to 40% of 2x$800 which is $640/ yr of pain and suffering. Or an RoI of less than 2 years.
For the individual in total it is $960/yr so the RoI is basically 1year.
If you are a corporation that actual suffers the real & societal cost if one of its employees is involved in a crash then the RoI for a corporation (or any responsible entity that can’t run away from its liabilities) is really 1 year.
And if they largely self-insure then the savings is $1,200/yr and the RoI is less than one year!!!
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
###
C’mon Man!(These
folks didn't get/read
the memo)
Calendar
of Upcoming Events:
Recent
Highlights of:
#
###
###
February 17, 2017
Motor Vehicle Deaths in 2016 Estimated to be Highest in Nine Years
Press release, Feb. 15, “NSC offers insight into what drivers are doing and calls for immediate implementation of proven, life-saving measures…
With the upward trend
showing no sign of
subsiding, NSC is calling
for immediate
implementation of
life-saving measures that
would set the nation on a
[road to zero](http://www.nsc.org/learn/NSC-Initiatives/Pages/The-Road-to-Zero.aspx) deaths:..."
[Read more](http://www.nsc.org/Connect/NSCNewsReleases/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?ID=180)Hmmm..."Automated
Collision Avoidance"
or anything having to
do with 'Safe-driving
Cars' is not
mentioned anywhere in
the Press Release.
One of us is missing
something very
fundamental here!! So
depressing!! :-(
Alain
February 10, 2017
Regulatory Chill May Pivot Connected Vehicle Tech’s Course
M. Ross, Feb 8, “Technology and telecommunications groups opposed to a federal mandate that cars automatically communicate with each other are hoping the proposal is an early victim of President Donald Trump’s regulatory clampdown.
The Department of
Transportation rushed to
publish a draft rule in
the final days of the
Obama administration that
would mandate all new cars
and light trucks be
equipped to transmit data
to other vehicles to warn
their drivers of potential
collisions. The department
and automobile
manufacturers have been
laying the groundwork for
such a rule for more than
a decade, with millions
of dollars in
testing indicating that
the radio-based technology
could immediately
save lives. No,
that's its fundamental
flaw. Even if you
have it, it can't do
you any good unless
the other guy has it.
Thus it can't do
anything immediately
...The
draft rule could save up
to 1,365 lives each year
by 2060.
Immediately??? I'll
surely be dead and
gone. All that money
spent to get such a
finding.
....The total annual costs
to comply with the mandate
30 years after the rule's
launch range from $2.2
billion to $5 billion,
according to 2016 NHTSA
data. Consumers can expect
to pay about an extra $300
per vehicle equipped with
DSRC technology, the data
show.
That's a lot of 'good
money to be thrown
after bad'. Let's
spend Billions to
justify our Millions
in sunk costs? Much
worse than 'doubling
down' ...Meanwhile,
artificial intelligence,
camera technology, sensors
and radar, which are
already being used in
autonomous vehicle
development, improve
vehicle safety and don't
require cars to be
connected to each other,
Paul Brubaker, president
and CEO of the Alliance
for Transportation
Innovation,..."
Read moreHmmm…
Not 'Regulatory Chill'
but simply Common
Sense. [C'mon Man!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtWZCq8A4T4) I'm
on the AV side of this
one. V2V is fine on
top of AV, but staying
on the DSRC bandwagon
is silly when it will
be completely
obsolesced by [5G](https://www.ericsson.com/news/170207-ericsson-st-ericsson-bmw-group-korea_244010065_c)
before it has
sufficient penetration
to be better than 'a
hope & a prayer'
in avoiding crashes.
V2V requires both
vehicles to have the
technology. The
chance that both
cars can even talk to
each other, let alone
know what to do and do
what is needed, to
avoid a crash is the
product of the
adoption percentage of
DSRC. So, a mandate
today, that pertains
only to having DSRC in
new cars, will be
lucky to be in 30% of
the cars by 2025.
Thus, the chance that
DSRC is even relevant
in an impending crash
is 0.3 x 0.3 = 0.09.
Meaning that there is
only about a 10% (1
in 10) chance that
DSRC is even relevant
in averting a crash.
It simply takes a long
time to replace the
cars that are on the
road today with new
ones. However, many
of us replace our
phones with the latest
and greatest [much more quickly](https://www.statista.com/statistics/263437/global-smartphone-sales-to-end-users-since-2007/), so
that by 2025 it is not
unreasonable that as
many as 70% of drivers
will have 5G phones.
The chance that these
phones will have the
opportunity to be a
relevant V2V device in
averting a crash is
0.7 x 0.7 = 0.49 .
Which road should we
go down... DSRC
mandate giving us at
best a 1 in 10 chance
of being relevant in
2025 ( and we still
need AV to perform the
avoidance of the
crash) or wait and
piggy back on our 5G
device that gives us a
1 in 2 chance in 2025
at no additional cost
because we will have
purchased it for
other reasons.
Alain
February 4, 2017
Autonomous Vehicles Meet Human Drivers: Traffic Safety Issues for States
J. Hedlund, Feb 2017Fully autonomous vehicles – cars and trucks that can drive themselves, without a human
at the controls – are
coming soon. In fact, they
already are on the road. Yes!
...Autonomous
vehicles will change our
lives in many ways. Yes!
... But all
vehicles on the road will
not be autonomous for a
very long time, perhaps
never. Until then,
autonomous vehicles must
share the road with
vehicles driven by humans.
Yes!
How can this
be done safely? States are
responsible for safety on
the roads – for licensing
drivers, registering
vehicles, and establishing
and enforcing traffic
laws. So states must take
the lead in dealing with
the many traffic safety
issues that a mix of
driver-operated and
autonomous vehicles will
bring. Yes!
In
particular, states should
help educate the public
about the benefits that
autonomous vehicles will
bring and the risks that
they may present, educate
drivers of semi-autonomous
vehicles about their
driving responsibilities,
and educate all drivers
about how to share the
road safely with
autonomous vehicles. Yes!
This report
should help states
understand and address
these issues. It's written
for state Departments of
Transportation (DOTs),
Departments of Motor
Vehicles (DMVs), and State
Highway Safety Offices
(SHSOs)....Great!
The public’s views on new technology can change quickly. AVs today may well be similar to automobiles a century ago or smart phones only 10 years ago: a new technology with a few ardent supporters and many skeptics initially but which quickly became both acceptable and highly desirable. As Henry Ford is purported to have said regarding automobiles (probably incorrectly), “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Also, today’s teenagers are more accepting of AVs: in the Kelley Blue Book survey, 48% of respondents age 12-15 said they would be comfortable riding in an AV compared to 36% of all respondents….Yes!
Laws or regulations formed in haste may hinder rather than help AV testing and implementation. (p17) Yes! “ Read more Hmmm…
This is a very well
written and well
referenced report that
is well balanced and
properly presents the
challenges. Some
modest suggestions
are: Abandon the
SAE/NHTSA Levels and
go with 3
types/classes/levels:
Safe-Driving,
Self-driving and
Driverless. Also,
this is not the first
technological change
that DMVs have faced.
The advent of turn
signals changed driver
testing. Self-driving
is really not that
much different. DMVs
could start by
addressing cruise
control in that they
could promote &
educate on the best
use of cruise
control. By the way,
I am not aware of a
single sign along any
highway
encouraging/promoting/prohibiting
the use of cruise
control. DMVs could
start with that since
it really is not much
different that
Self-driving. Alain
January 27, 2017
Serving the Nation’s Personal Mobility Needs with the Casual Sharing of autonomousTaxis & Today’s Urban Rail, Amtrak and Air Transport Systems
A. Kornhauser, Jan 14, “Orf467F16 Final Project Symposium quantifying implications of such a Nation-wide mobility system on Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO), energy, environment and congestion, including estimates of fleet size, needed empty vehicle repositioning, and ridership implications on existing rail transit systems (west, east, NYC) and Amtrak of a system that would efficiently and effectively perform their ‘1st mile’/’last-mile’ mobility needs. Read more Hmmm…
Now linked are 1st
Drafts of the chapters
and the powerPoint
summaries of these
elements. Final
Report should be
available by early
February. The major
finding is, nationwide
there exists
sufficient casual
ridesharing potential
that a well--managed
Nationwide Fleet of
about 30M aTaxis (in
conjunction with the
existing air, Amtrak
and Urban fixed-rail
systems) could serve
the vehicular mobility
needs of the whole
nation with VMT 40% less
than today's
automobiles while
providing a
Level-of-Service (LoS)
largely equivalent and
in many ways superior
than is delivered by
the personal
automobile today.
Also interesting are
the findings as to the
substantial increased
patronage
opportunities
available to Amtrak
and each of the fixed
rail transit systems
around the country
because the aTaxis
solve the '1st and
last mile' problem.
While all of this is
extremely good news,
the challenging news
is that since all of
these fixed rail
systems currently lose
money on each
passenger served, the
additional patronage
would likely mean that
they'll lose even more
money in the future.
:-( Alain
January 20, 2017
Fiscal Year 2016 SRD Program Grant Selections
Public Announcement, Jan 22: “Pierce Transit will receive $1,664,894 to deploy buses equipped with collision avoidance warning systems or automatic braking features. The objective of this project is to deploy and demonstrate collision avoidance technology in partnership with the Washington State Transit Insurance Pool (WSTIP), a collaborative organization of 25 Washington public transit agencies that combine their resources to provide and purchase insurance coverage, manage claims and litigation, and receive risk management and training. Pierce Transit will work with WSTIP to accurately determine the business case for investing in these technologies.” Read moreHmmm…
Finally!! More than 3
years since Lou
Sanders of APTA,
Jerome Lutin and I
first proposed to FTA
to do such a thing for
the benefit of the
entire bus transit
industry (which FTA
deemed as non-worthy)
the FTA has finally
turned around and
jumped on-board. The
unfortunate news: we
lost 3 years. The
fortunate news: the
process of
substantially reducing
bus crashes is finally
underway thanks to the
hard work in the
interim by Jerome
Lutin and Jerry Spears
(formerly of WSTIP).
This and the good news
below from Tesla may
finally enlighten the
insurance industry to
play a leadership role
in the market adoption
of
SafeDrivingCars/Buses/Trucks.
Congratulations Jerome
& Jerry! Alain
ODI (Office of Defects Investigation) Findings on Tesla AEB & AutoPilot
###
(Above
link should work) Jan
19, "... Summary:
... NHTSA's
examination did not
identify any defects in
the design or
performance of the AEB
or Autopilot systems of
the subject vehicles nor
any incidents in which
the systems did not
perform as designed.
AEB systems used in the
automotive industry
through MY 2016 are
rear-end collision
avoidance technologies
that are not designed to
reliably perform in all
crash modes, including
crossing path
collisions. The
Autopilot system is an
Advanced Driver
Assistance System
(ADAS) that requires the
continual and full
attention of the driver
to monitor the traffic
environment and be
prepared to take action
to avoid crashes.
Tesla's design included
a hands-on the steering
wheel system for
monitoring driver
engagement...
... ODI analyzed data
from crashes of Tesla
Model S and Model X
vehicles involving
airbag deployments that
occurred while operating
in, or within 15 seconds
of transitioning from,
Autopilot mode. Some
crashes involved impacts
from other vehicles
striking the Tesla from
various directions with
little to no warning to
the Tesla driver. Other
crashes involved
scenarios known to be
outside of the
state-of-technology for
current-generation Level
1 or 2 systems, such as
cut-ins, cut-outs and
crossing path
collisions....
...The Florida fatal
crash appears to have
involved a period of
extended distraction (at
least 7 seconds)..." .Hmmm... nothing
else is written
about this nor is
a basis given for
the 'at least 7
seconds'.
Possibly the most
important
information
revealed in this
summary is Figure
11, p11: "...
Figure 11 shows
the rates
calculated by
ODI for airbag
deployment
crashes in the
subject Tesla
vehicles before
and after
Autosteer
installation.
The data show
that the Tesla
vehicles crash
rate dropped by
almost 40
percent after
Autosteer
installation...
...A
safety-related
defect trend has
not been
identified at
this time and
further
examination of
this issue does
not appear to be
warranted.
Accordingly,
this investigation
is closed. " [Read more](http://www.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/Orf467F16/NHTSA_ODI_FindingsOnTeslaFloridaCrash.PDF) Hmmm...
WOW!!! . Every
word of this Finding
is worth reading.
It basically
exonerates Tesla,
states that AEBs
(Automated Emergency
Braking) systems
don't really work
and aren't designed
to work in some
scenarios (straight
crossing path (SCP)
and left turn across
path (LTAP), see p
2,3). ...which
suggests, to me,
that DoT/NHTSA
should be placing
substantial efforts
on making these
systems really work
in more scenarios.
And... there is the
solid data
that 'AutoSteer"
reduced Tesla
crashes by almost
40%!!! WOW!! Will
Insurance now
finally get on-board
and lead? Alai
January 13, 2017
Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx Announces New Federal Committee on Automation
News, Jan 10, “…U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “I’m proud to announce this new automation committee, and look forward to seeing its members advance life-saving innovations while boosting our economy and making our transportation network more fair, reliable, and efficient.”… Read more Hmmm…
Excellent!!!
Congratulations Chris,
Bryant, Missy and
everyone else. Alain
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](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_5_January%202017.pdf) " 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](http://orfe.princeton.edu/%7Ealaink/SmartDrivingCars/PDFs/The%20Dispatcher_5_January%202017.pdf)" 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](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArYTxDZzQOM&feature=youtu.be) 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 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
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 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
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"](http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/nhtsa-iihs-commitment-on-aeb-03172016) to
have AEB on all new
cars, but to date
these systems really
don't work. In 12 mph
[IIHS test,](http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/ratings-info/front-crash-prevention-tests) [few stop](http://www.iihs.org/iihs/news/desktopnews/iihs-issues-first-crash-avoidance-ratings-under-new-test-program-7-midsize-vehicles-earn-top-marks-for-front-crash-prevention) before [hitting the target](http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/ratings-info/front-crash-prevention-tests), and,
as we
may have seen with
the Florida [Tesla](https://www.tesla.com/blog/upgrading-autopilot-seeing-world-radar)
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 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 1, 2016
Mobileye Ends Partnership With Tesla
July 11, 2016
Lessons From the Tesla Crash
July 5, 2016
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
March 25, 2016
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](http://mnsenate.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=235).
The testimony is Excellent
and very compelling!
Also see [Self-Driving Minnesota](http://www.selfdrivingmn.org/) Alain
March 17, 2016
U.S. DOT and IIHS announce historic commitment of 20 automakers to make automatic emergency braking standard on new vehicles
February 18, 2016
Motor Vehicle Deaths Increase by Largest Percent in 50 Years
December 19, 2015
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 |
This list is
maintained by
[Alain Kornhauser](mailto:alaink@princeton.edu) and hosted by the [Princeton University LISTSERV](http://lists.princeton.edu).
This list is maintained by Alain Kornhauser and hosted by the Princeton University LISTSERV.