5 ms·

> level 4 really is right around the corner I disagree. Level 4 does not require driver attention. That is still a long way off. From Wikipedia [1]: Level

> level 4 really is right around the corner I disagree. Level 4 does not require driver attention. That is still a long way off. From Wikipedia [1]: Level 4: The automated system can control the vehicle in all but a few environments such as severe weather. The driver must enable the automated system only when it is safe to do so. When enabled, driver attention is not required. Level 5: Other than setting the destination and starting the system, no human intervention is required. The automatic system can drive to any location where it is legal to drive and make its own decision. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_car

_delirium 10y ago
Yes, so far at least, I don't think any company is even proposing anything past Level 3 on their near-future roadmap.
jessriedel 10y ago
By my reading of the article, stale2002 is correct. Pratt is clearly talking about the difference between Level 4 and Level 5 in his first two answers. Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem, and this change-over is the situation that Pratt worries about in his fourth answer. (NB: When he says "The article was talking about level 5", it's clear from context that stale2002 means that the article was talking about level 5 in terms of technological difficulty and timelines.)
- function_seven 10y ago
  > Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem Sincerely asking. Doesn’t that mean it requires driver attention?
  - jessriedel 10y ago
    I don't think so, mostly because I don't think a qualifying system would actually require an instant switch over. I can't find anywhere that it the timescale is defined; if I had to guess, I'd say it's defined in terms of whatever the minimum safe timescale is (empirically), i.e., Level 4 is whatever it needs to be to allow a human to read a book safely, but not necessarily sleep. For instance, a Level 4 car probably can't deal with unexpected road construction, and might simply bring the car to a halt, smoothly but quickly. It would be dangerous if the driver was asleep and the car stopped dead on the highway for the 30 seconds it takes someone to wakeup and get oriented, but it could be pretty safe if the driver just needs to look up from their movie and grab the wheel. That's just speculation, though.
- stale2002 10y ago
  Level 4 doesn't require driver change over. Level 4 is "it works perfectly on highways and in major cities". Level 4 is awesome! Level 5 is "all cars in the entire world don't have steering wheels anymore". Yeah, level 5 is hard, but who cares, level 4 is good enough.
  - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
    So basically by your definition, level 5 will never ever happen? Seems a bit useless then TBH. Also, as pointed out in another comment, Level 4 does require driver changeover, it's just that the car is supposed to safely handle the event of driver not responding to that request (e.g. by stopping in the middle of the road).
    - unityByFreedom 10y ago
      > So basically by your definition, level 5 will never ever happen? Seems a bit useless then TBH. Well, even trains on tracks have humans ready to pull the break if something is wrong up ahead. Would you ride a train that had an accident caused by something for which its driverless system was not prepared, but that a human conductor could have avoided? I think it's possible level 5 will happen. There will still be accidents on roads where only driverless vehicles exist. Some people will choose to ride in such vehicles, and some won't.
      - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
        No, what I'm trying to get at is GP post changed the definition of level 5 from "some cars don't have steering wheels" to "all cars don't have steering wheels". A non-self-driving car will (by definition) always be cheaper than a self-driving car, and some people just like driving or distrust machines. Together with the fact that (especially in the United States of Freedom) governments will never ban cars with steering wheels, that definition of level 5 will never happen.
        unityByFreedom 10y ago
- unityByFreedom 10y ago
  > Pratt is clearly talking about the difference between Level 4 and Level 5 in his first two answers No, Pratt is saying that manufacturers are hyping level 4 as being around the corner, but it is not. Pratt does not think the claims for level 4 are sufficiently backed up: "...That’s Level 4. And I wouldn’t even stop there: I would ask, “Is that at all times of the day, is it in all weather, is it in all traffic?” > Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem How exactly would that work? You don't have to be attentive but you must be available to take over? At any rate, this is not the definition provided by the Society of Automotive Engineers [1], which is the definition NHTSA has adopted for levels of autonomous vehicles. SAE says for level 4: "the driving mode-specific performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task, even if a human driver does not respond appropriately to a request to intervene" In other words, the system could request human intervention, but it will still do something even if the human does not respond. Wikipedia appears to have either summarized this in different words or has a different version. > this change-over is the situation that Pratt worries about in his fourth answer. I wholeheartedly agree with Pratt that "In some ways, the worst case is a car that will need driver intervention once every 200,000 miles..." [1] https://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf https://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf
  - jessriedel 10y ago
    > "...That’s Level 4. And I wouldn’t even stop there: I would ask, “Is that at all times of the day, is it in all weather, is it in all traffic?” But that doesn't actually contradict stale2002 or diminish the enormous potential economic importance by more than (say) a factor of 2. Level 4 systems that are available to use 60% of the time are still revolutionary, and compatible with both stale2002's and Pratt's comments. > How exactly would that work? See my comment to function_seven for my speculation. Although I used the Wikipedia definition, I believe everything I said is compatible with the definition from SAE you have quoted. In particular "the system could request human intervention, but it will still do something even if the human does not respond" does not conflict with "it just requires the driver to be available if the system has a problem" because the "something" the system may do is bring the car to a rapid (or even emergency) stop. This can become dangerous if the human can't resume control within a few seconds, but is an easily acceptable risk to occur once every 100k miles as a price of Level 4 autonomy.
- exDM69 10y ago
  > Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem Based on my best understanding of the article and the good description on these levels in the CES keynote linked in the article... This is Level 2, when the driver must be available instantly. Level 3 is when there driver must be available but there's plenty of time (the article mentioned 15 seconds) to swap. Level 4 should not need any human intervention when engaged. It can only be engaged when it's safe to do (e.g. in a city in good weather conditions) but once it's enabled, it fulfills the task given to it without ever needing to fall back to human hands. You should be able to sit on the back seat drinking beer. Level 4 should be able to safely stop the car and wait for assistance if things go bad without driver intervention. Level 2 is where the cars out there are now. Level 5 is a long way away.
gsam 10y ago
Google can almost drive a half-year to a year's worth of driving for the average individual without any intervention at all. That is very impressive, and their streak is growing fairly quickly. Of course, that would probably be done in less than a week as a ride-share service, but consider that any intervention may also be predictable beforehand (e.g. weather conditions).

_delirium 10y ago

Yes, so far at least, I don't think any company is even proposing anything past Level 3 on their near-future roadmap.

jessriedel 10y ago

By my reading of the article, stale2002 is correct. Pratt is clearly talking about the difference between Level 4 and Level 5 in his first two answers. Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem, and this change-over is the situation that Pratt worries about in his fourth answer. (NB: When he says "The article was talking about level 5", it's clear from context that stale2002 means that the article was talking about level 5 in terms of technological difficulty and timelines.)

function_seven 10y ago
> Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem Sincerely asking. Doesn’t that mean it requires driver attention?
- jessriedel 10y ago
  I don't think so, mostly because I don't think a qualifying system would actually require an instant switch over. I can't find anywhere that it the timescale is defined; if I had to guess, I'd say it's defined in terms of whatever the minimum safe timescale is (empirically), i.e., Level 4 is whatever it needs to be to allow a human to read a book safely, but not necessarily sleep. For instance, a Level 4 car probably can't deal with unexpected road construction, and might simply bring the car to a halt, smoothly but quickly. It would be dangerous if the driver was asleep and the car stopped dead on the highway for the 30 seconds it takes someone to wakeup and get oriented, but it could be pretty safe if the driver just needs to look up from their movie and grab the wheel. That's just speculation, though.
stale2002 10y ago
Level 4 doesn't require driver change over. Level 4 is "it works perfectly on highways and in major cities". Level 4 is awesome! Level 5 is "all cars in the entire world don't have steering wheels anymore". Yeah, level 5 is hard, but who cares, level 4 is good enough.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  So basically by your definition, level 5 will never ever happen? Seems a bit useless then TBH. Also, as pointed out in another comment, Level 4 does require driver changeover, it's just that the car is supposed to safely handle the event of driver not responding to that request (e.g. by stopping in the middle of the road).
  - unityByFreedom 10y ago
    > So basically by your definition, level 5 will never ever happen? Seems a bit useless then TBH. Well, even trains on tracks have humans ready to pull the break if something is wrong up ahead. Would you ride a train that had an accident caused by something for which its driverless system was not prepared, but that a human conductor could have avoided? I think it's possible level 5 will happen. There will still be accidents on roads where only driverless vehicles exist. Some people will choose to ride in such vehicles, and some won't.
    - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
      No, what I'm trying to get at is GP post changed the definition of level 5 from "some cars don't have steering wheels" to "all cars don't have steering wheels". A non-self-driving car will (by definition) always be cheaper than a self-driving car, and some people just like driving or distrust machines. Together with the fact that (especially in the United States of Freedom) governments will never ban cars with steering wheels, that definition of level 5 will never happen.
      - unityByFreedom 10y ago
unityByFreedom 10y ago
> Pratt is clearly talking about the difference between Level 4 and Level 5 in his first two answers No, Pratt is saying that manufacturers are hyping level 4 as being around the corner, but it is not. Pratt does not think the claims for level 4 are sufficiently backed up: "...That’s Level 4. And I wouldn’t even stop there: I would ask, “Is that at all times of the day, is it in all weather, is it in all traffic?” > Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem How exactly would that work? You don't have to be attentive but you must be available to take over? At any rate, this is not the definition provided by the Society of Automotive Engineers [1], which is the definition NHTSA has adopted for levels of autonomous vehicles. SAE says for level 4: "the driving mode-specific performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task, even if a human driver does not respond appropriately to a request to intervene" In other words, the system could request human intervention, but it will still do something even if the human does not respond. Wikipedia appears to have either summarized this in different words or has a different version. > this change-over is the situation that Pratt worries about in his fourth answer. I wholeheartedly agree with Pratt that "In some ways, the worst case is a car that will need driver intervention once every 200,000 miles..." [1] https://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf https://www.sae.org/misc/pdfs/automated_driving.pdf
- jessriedel 10y ago
  > "...That’s Level 4. And I wouldn’t even stop there: I would ask, “Is that at all times of the day, is it in all weather, is it in all traffic?” But that doesn't actually contradict stale2002 or diminish the enormous potential economic importance by more than (say) a factor of 2. Level 4 systems that are available to use 60% of the time are still revolutionary, and compatible with both stale2002's and Pratt's comments. > How exactly would that work? See my comment to function_seven for my speculation. Although I used the Wikipedia definition, I believe everything I said is compatible with the definition from SAE you have quoted. In particular "the system could request human intervention, but it will still do something even if the human does not respond" does not conflict with "it just requires the driver to be available if the system has a problem" because the "something" the system may do is bring the car to a rapid (or even emergency) stop. This can become dangerous if the human can't resume control within a few seconds, but is an easily acceptable risk to occur once every 100k miles as a price of Level 4 autonomy.
exDM69 10y ago
> Level 4 doesn't require driver attention, it just requires the driver to be (instantly?) available if the system has a problem Based on my best understanding of the article and the good description on these levels in the CES keynote linked in the article... This is Level 2, when the driver must be available instantly. Level 3 is when there driver must be available but there's plenty of time (the article mentioned 15 seconds) to swap. Level 4 should not need any human intervention when engaged. It can only be engaged when it's safe to do (e.g. in a city in good weather conditions) but once it's enabled, it fulfills the task given to it without ever needing to fall back to human hands. You should be able to sit on the back seat drinking beer. Level 4 should be able to safely stop the car and wait for assistance if things go bad without driver intervention. Level 2 is where the cars out there are now. Level 5 is a long way away.

gsam 10y ago

Google can almost drive a half-year to a year's worth of driving for the average individual without any intervention at all. That is very impressive, and their streak is growing fairly quickly. Of course, that would probably be done in less than a week as a ride-share service, but consider that any intervention may also be predictable beforehand (e.g. weather conditions).