5 ms·

Does Level 3 require instant attention? I thought it allowed the car to require some parameters (such as road type or weather). If my car can handle the hours

Does Level 3 require instant attention? I thought it allowed the car to require some parameters (such as road type or weather). If my car can handle the hours-long uninterrupted highway sections of a road trip, yet still require manual driving on city streets, that is still a huge value proposition for time & safety.

mikeash 10y ago
It doesn't require instant attention, no. But it's hard envision a scenario where the car needs attention at some point in the future, not particularly soon, but can't drive itself. Maybe I'm drawing the line at the wrong point, though. If a car can drive itself but may occasionally need to pull over and ask the driver to tell it which way to go, at the driver's leisure, is that level 3 or level 4? I thought 4, but I'm having trouble finding a clear answer.
- Pyxl101 10y ago
  Let's say that the car is entering a fog or other weather condition, which it realizes is beginning to obstruct its visibility or control (e.g. snow, heavy rain, wind). After visibility or control impairment has crossed a warning threshold, but before putting safety at risk, the car can alert the driver and begin the process of handing over manual control.
  - furyg3 10y ago
    I think the idea is that at Level 4, the car can drive the way humans drive. If it's unsafe for the car to drive autonomously, it's unsafe for humans, too.
- trevyn 10y ago
  Level 4: "Such a design anticipates that the driver will provide destination or navigation input, but is not expected to be available for control at any time during the trip. This includes both occupied and unoccupied vehicles." (emphasis added) In my mind, if a level 4 vehicle is unable to reach a given valid destination without assistance, that would be considered a failure. In reality, macro-scale rerouting around obstacles that the self-driving system does not know how to overcome is not a particular challenge, GPS systems do this easily. The definition doesn't say it has to take the most efficient route. ;)
  - secabeen 10y ago
    >In reality, macro-scale rerouting around obstacles that the self-driving system does not know how to overcome is not a particular challenge, GPS systems do this easily. The definition doesn't say it has to take the most efficient route. ;) Oh, that's going to go over really well. Say you're drunk, and want to go home in your self-driving car. However, there's a blind left turn that your car knows it can't safely navigate, so it happily routes you a 15-minute drive through back roads for a trip that should take 5. People are going to love that. (I've heard that UPS does route planning with a system that discourages left turns, even sometimes doing three rights to avoid some dangerous lefts.)
    - mikeash 10y ago
      I've heard the same thing about UPS, but the way I heard it, it's only because left turns can be so much slower. A route that leans more heavily on right turns will usually be faster overall.
- Klathmon 10y ago
  my (completely uninformed) understanding was that level 3 was more like "level 4 in perfect conditions". So it would need to pull over, or warn the driver to take over if it starts raining or snowing or the road (or it's lines) is uneven or ill-defined. Or perhaps that it's 100% self driving in all conditions on a highway, but still needs manual driving for "surface roads". Many of those scenarios would allow some time for the driver to take over, and would most likely be able to pull over if the driver can't or won't for some reason.
- chc 10y ago
  The original NHTSA levels had this very clearly at level 3, but the SAE's levels seem kind of ambiguous as to whether that case would be level 3 or 4. I feel like it's more in the spirit of level 4 than level 3, though, as level 3 requires "prompt response" from the user to a request for intervention, while level 4 has the car still doing something sensible even if the user doesn't respond.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Right, it's that "prompt" which seems critical here. If there is no constraint on how long the driver can take to respond then there isn't an issue, but if there's any requirement for how quickly they need to get back in the game, it seems doomed to failure.

mikeash 10y ago

It doesn't require instant attention, no. But it's hard envision a scenario where the car needs attention at some point in the future, not particularly soon, but can't drive itself. Maybe I'm drawing the line at the wrong point, though. If a car can drive itself but may occasionally need to pull over and ask the driver to tell it which way to go, at the driver's leisure, is that level 3 or level 4? I thought 4, but I'm having trouble finding a clear answer.

Pyxl101 10y ago
Let's say that the car is entering a fog or other weather condition, which it realizes is beginning to obstruct its visibility or control (e.g. snow, heavy rain, wind). After visibility or control impairment has crossed a warning threshold, but before putting safety at risk, the car can alert the driver and begin the process of handing over manual control.
- furyg3 10y ago
  I think the idea is that at Level 4, the car can drive the way humans drive. If it's unsafe for the car to drive autonomously, it's unsafe for humans, too.
trevyn 10y ago
Level 4: "Such a design anticipates that the driver will provide destination or navigation input, but is not expected to be available for control at any time during the trip. This includes both occupied and unoccupied vehicles." (emphasis added) In my mind, if a level 4 vehicle is unable to reach a given valid destination without assistance, that would be considered a failure. In reality, macro-scale rerouting around obstacles that the self-driving system does not know how to overcome is not a particular challenge, GPS systems do this easily. The definition doesn't say it has to take the most efficient route. ;)
- secabeen 10y ago
  >In reality, macro-scale rerouting around obstacles that the self-driving system does not know how to overcome is not a particular challenge, GPS systems do this easily. The definition doesn't say it has to take the most efficient route. ;) Oh, that's going to go over really well. Say you're drunk, and want to go home in your self-driving car. However, there's a blind left turn that your car knows it can't safely navigate, so it happily routes you a 15-minute drive through back roads for a trip that should take 5. People are going to love that. (I've heard that UPS does route planning with a system that discourages left turns, even sometimes doing three rights to avoid some dangerous lefts.)
  - mikeash 10y ago
    I've heard the same thing about UPS, but the way I heard it, it's only because left turns can be so much slower. A route that leans more heavily on right turns will usually be faster overall.
Klathmon 10y ago
my (completely uninformed) understanding was that level 3 was more like "level 4 in perfect conditions". So it would need to pull over, or warn the driver to take over if it starts raining or snowing or the road (or it's lines) is uneven or ill-defined. Or perhaps that it's 100% self driving in all conditions on a highway, but still needs manual driving for "surface roads". Many of those scenarios would allow some time for the driver to take over, and would most likely be able to pull over if the driver can't or won't for some reason.
chc 10y ago
The original NHTSA levels had this very clearly at level 3, but the SAE's levels seem kind of ambiguous as to whether that case would be level 3 or 4. I feel like it's more in the spirit of level 4 than level 3, though, as level 3 requires "prompt response" from the user to a request for intervention, while level 4 has the car still doing something sensible even if the user doesn't respond.
- mikeash 10y ago
  Right, it's that "prompt" which seems critical here. If there is no constraint on how long the driver can take to respond then there isn't an issue, but if there's any requirement for how quickly they need to get back in the game, it seems doomed to failure.