Design Con 2015
Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
JCreasey
User Rank
Freelancer
Re: ADAS or Level 4 Automation is not necessarily AI
JCreasey   1/2/2014 6:21:12 PM
NO RATINGS
Unfortunately (IMO) the SDC agenda is being driven by a lot of vested interest groups and individuals who stand to garner money, market position, influence etc by creating the islands of automation solutions beyond Level 3/ADAS.

While many support V2V communications in their autonomous plans, the fact is that the communications latency and size of the vehicle mesh quickly becomes unmangeable. If using V2V only then the control horizon is limited; and V2I followed by I2V has some problems to solve position and speed problems quickly, which is why IMO the lgoic should center in the infrastructure. Infrastructure based control would allow broadcasts messages from a central controller (at least central within a much larger horizon of vehicles). Some might raise the possibility of loss of infrastructure control (some massive failure), but this now becomes a simple "orderly stop" response for all vehicles at an ADAS level.

In large part the current situation can be considered a failing of the govenrment bodies failing to take responsibility and provide the correct longterm solution strategies and direction. The lack of drive from the authorities will I fear make implementation of the correct strategies take decades longer than it might otherwise take.

...all just my opinion of course.

 

Duane Benson
User Rank
Blogger
Re: ADAS or Level 4 Automation is not necessarily AI
Duane Benson   1/2/2014 2:09:34 PM
NO RATINGS
"When was the last time you had a confused PC?" I'd have to say, this morning.

Pretty much the rest of what you're saying, JC, I see as being right on target.

Right now, we spend huge amounts of money engineering the road systems based on the limitations of humans and current cars. It's perfectly logical to start engineering road systems for autonomous vehicles.

JCreasey
User Rank
Freelancer
ADAS or Level 4 Automation is not necessarily AI
JCreasey   12/24/2013 11:51:15 AM
NO RATINGS
@Davide. I think you are being overly optimistic to consider the current research platforms such as Google Car to be approaching anything like AI. An AI would learn, adapt and change its responses based on experience. The current flock of attempts are nowhere near this level of power.

In a fully automatic (Level 4) vehicle by current definition, the driver is not needed, so all the sensors to establish the state of the human are unnecessary. Consider that one of the projected hot applications of the automated car is taxi cabs; why would the human in a cab be expected to take control if the automation reached its limit??  In a Level 3 vehicle you would potentially need to pass control back to the human, and here it really just becomes ADAS, with no potential for AI involved at all.

"Full autonomy still requires constant supervision." ...if this is true we are dead in the water for Level 4.

"There is no system that can yet match a human driver's ability to respond to the unexpected." ...so not true within the limits of the current automation. Watch Audi do Pikes Peak at the limit of the tires!

" The last thing we want to do is leave a confused car in control. " ...we are talking computer control here aren't we. When was the last time you had a confused PC? An AI or any advanced logic system either has a solution or not; it's an automaton. Next you'll have an angry car?

I hold grave doubts for the island of automation (individual automated cars) solutions to achieve our societal goals and would dearly like the logic to be in the infrastructure so we only need to deliver ADAS/Level3 automation in the vehicle. One set of logic governing all the (autonomous) cars (one ring to bind them all if you like a magic metaphor).

We can save immense amounts of investment by providing coverage in the infrastructure for our highest occupancy freeways and roads. Even the Google car today is not able to cope with some of the merging and ramp complexities, and infrastructure sensors can be designed to have an excellent view of these situations. It makes no sense IMO to design automation with the severely limited horizon of the individual cars sensors when you can get a view of hundreds of cars from the freeway infrastructure.

Let's have a sensible discussion about computing power in automated vehicles and not make it science fantasy.

AZskibum
User Rank
CEO
Re: not so easy
AZskibum   12/23/2013 7:11:26 PM
NO RATINGS
I have to agree with Frank Tu on this one. Very few consumers will be willing to pay for expensive electronics that permit their autonomous car to drive only on a small number of roads. And what roads are we talking about anyway -- new ones, or existing ones from which human-controlled cars will be banned? Either way, that's a tough sell politically & economically.

If autonomous cars are ever to reach the marketplace, it seems clear to me that they must share the same roads with error-prone human drivers -- and be designed accordingly to deal with those unpredictable humans.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Intelligent cars along with non-intelligent cars
junko.yoshida   12/23/2013 6:14:17 PM
NO RATINGS
@sanjib. Good question. However, as any ADAS technology promoters would tell us, this is about a new ADAS-equipped self-driving car being able to detect objects and pedestrians around the car. In other words, your non-self-driving cars will be, in theory, "watched" better by those self-driving cars.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: But can it teach a teenager to drive safely
junko.yoshida   12/23/2013 6:09:48 PM
NO RATINGS
@betajet, this is too funy. Do you think we can program our car to be like John Hoseman? That would be awesome!

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Redefining full autonomy
junko.yoshida   12/23/2013 6:06:51 PM
NO RATINGS
@Bert, I think you nailed it in your comment here.

By redefining what "autonomous car" means, I have no doubt that a target date of 2020 can be reached.

I think both carmakers and those who supply technologies to car companies still need a better definition of "autonomous cars" and what they do for us.

junko.yoshida
User Rank
Blogger
Re: self driving car
junko.yoshida   12/23/2013 6:03:02 PM
NO RATINGS
@sheetal, I don't think you are alone asking that question. And the automobile industry needs to come up with better answer than...say, a generic answer like, "safety." Because clearly, there are a lot of saftey issues carmakers themselves are wading through right now for autonomous cars.

Sanjib.A
User Rank
CEO
Intelligent cars along with non-intelligent cars
Sanjib.A   12/22/2013 8:49:58 AM
NO RATINGS
Are these cars going to co-exist with the non-intelligent cars (cars of today)? I assume that might not be easy isn't it? Because not all of the present cars would be capable of communicating to the automatic cars. What is the plan for that?

betajet
User Rank
CEO
Re: But can it teach a teenager to drive safely
betajet   12/21/2013 9:05:47 PM
NO RATINGS
I want the monitor to be like John Houseman from The Naked Gun (1988):

It's okay. Normally you would not be going sixty-five down the wrong way of a one-way street...

All right, Stephanie, gently extend your arm. Extend your middle finger. Very good. Well done.

John Houseman was the unflappable driving instructor in a car Lt. Drebin commandeers.  The instructor is utterly calm no matter what mayhem is going on around him.

Page 1 / 3   >   >>


Flash Poll
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Life
Frankenstein's Fix, Teardowns, Sideshows, Design Contests, Reader Content & More
Max Maxfield

Want to Present a Paper at ESC Boston 2015?
Max Maxfield
1 Comment
I tell you, I need more hours in each day. If I was having any more fun, there would have to be two of me to handle it all. For example, I just heard that I'm going to be both a speaker ...

Martin Rowe

No 2014 Punkin Chunkin, What Will You Do?
Martin Rowe
Post a comment
American Thanksgiving is next week, and while some people watch (American) football all day, the real competition on TV has become Punkin Chunkin. But there will be no Punkin Chunkin on TV ...

Rich Quinnell

Making the Grade in Industrial Design
Rich Quinnell
9 comments
As every developer knows, there are the paper specifications for a product design, and then there are the real requirements. The paper specs are dry, bland, and rigidly numeric, making ...

Martin Rowe

Book Review: Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design
Martin Rowe
1 Comment
Controlling Radiated Emissions by Design, Third Edition, by Michel Mardiguian. Contributions by Donald L. Sweeney and Roger Swanberg. List price: $89.99 (e-book), $119 (hardcover).