2 ms·
It's astonishing to me that emergency brakes were off. The investigation report clearly shows that the pedestrian was classified incorrectly, alternating multip
by ACS_Solver 7y ago
It's astonishing to me that emergency brakes were off. The investigation report clearly shows that the pedestrian was classified incorrectly, alternating multiple times between wrong classifications, and the path prediction was off. Despite all of those failures, it was still correctly determined that a crash was imminent 1.2 seconds before impact, and a second later realized that avoidance had failed - at some point around 1.2 seconds before the crash, AEB should have engaged.
Instead, as the report says:
> The vehicle was factory-equipped by Volvo with several advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), including forward collision warning (FCW) system and automatic emergency braking (AEB) system. However, Volvo collision avoidance ADAS were not active at the time of the crash; the interaction of the Volvo ADAS and ATG ADS is further explored in section 1.9.
It was apparently disabled by Uber because it was difficult to run the Volvo systems alongside their own, which strikes me as highly irresponsible. Autonomous driving software relies on multiple redundancy, and AEB is the last-resort system for when everything else, from automatic maneuvers to alerting the driver, has already failed.