4 ms·

"do your email, or take a nap" <- The definition of an SAE Level 3 system is that you must remain in the seat, prepared to take control immediately when the sys

"do your email, or take a nap" <- The definition of an SAE Level 3 system is that you must remain in the seat, prepared to take control immediately when the system requests you to. Taking a nap or otherwise not paying attention is not what such a system supports.

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
> prepared to take control immediately I don't think that's correct. I've seen "in a certain amount of time" but you make it sound like it's a safety issue, which it's not, that being a key differentiation from a L2 system. When it can't drive it stops driving and you have to drive. If it's not a safety issue you could conceivably bee sleeping, as long as you can wake up in a timely manner. The SAE makes it clear that the car is driving at L3, and on that basis you would expect the transition to another driver would be graceful, just like with two human drivers.
- olex 3y ago
  That "certain amount of time" is variable, but in practice is on the level of 10-15 seconds for the Mercedes system - at least that's what it was when it was first certified in Germany some time ago. It is designed to let you take your hands off the wheel and look at the scenery, but anything more than that is too much distraction for when it requires you to take over. And it will, because it's really not very capable at all - it's basically an advanced traffic jam autopilot that can follow other cars in a straight well marked line, that's it.
  - dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
    What would be great is the SAE tightened the definitions so there were standards of performance, maybe with different quality sublevels within each.
  - hristov 3y ago
    For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tablet away and grab the wheel.
    - rl3 3y ago
      >For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. I'd argue that isn't remotely enough time to safely take control. You're betting your brain wakes up sufficiently in that time, and if it doesn't the consequences are potentially deadly. >Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tablet away and grab the wheel. That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint, but not from a situational awareness one. You're deprived of both context and situational awareness on the road. Some key details extend far beyond a 10-15 seconds, such as: another car driving erratically, lanes ending, line of sight on pedestrians or cyclists visible prior that are now occluded by traffic. The list goes on.
      - worik 3y ago
        >>Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time > That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint How do you know? Subjective measurement of time is very inaccurate. I have experienced this, when I timed some regular activities I undertook every day, total habit. I would have said they took me ten seconds. When I timed them, it was forty five seconds. I have no faith in anybodies' perception of how long they can switch context like this unless they have objectively measured it I have heard that this has been studied, a quick web search turned up just this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0001691880900013 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000169...
        rl3 3y ago
        >How do you know? That's a good point. On the face of it, I'd assumed an awake person already engaging their brain would perform better than a person just waking up in that context, but perahps not. >I have no faith in anybodies' perception of how long they can switch context like this unless they have objectively measured it Agreed. Moreover, I'd say that the risk for faulty information processing or incorrect preconceptions is higher if the person is distracted but awake.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
GuB-42 3y ago
I guess it is not ok to be asleep as even a loud alarm will take time to wake you up, but not paying attention, like when you are doing your email is fine. In fact, that's the entire point of level 3 autonomy. You are "on call" rather than "at work", so you must be prepared to act when the car rings. If the car doesn't ring, you are free to do whatever you want as long as you can hear the ring and take back control when it happens.
torginus 3y ago
Afaik the key differentiator of a L3 and a L2 system is that if you don't take control when the system requests you to, the L3 system can safely stop/pull aside while all bets are off with an L2 system.
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  You remember wrong. That's the difference between L3 and L4. The L2/L3 difference is that with L2 you have to supervise at all times and you have to decide to take control.

dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago

> prepared to take control immediately I don't think that's correct. I've seen "in a certain amount of time" but you make it sound like it's a safety issue, which it's not, that being a key differentiation from a L2 system. When it can't drive it stops driving and you have to drive. If it's not a safety issue you could conceivably bee sleeping, as long as you can wake up in a timely manner. The SAE makes it clear that the car is driving at L3, and on that basis you would expect the transition to another driver would be graceful, just like with two human drivers.

olex 3y ago
That "certain amount of time" is variable, but in practice is on the level of 10-15 seconds for the Mercedes system - at least that's what it was when it was first certified in Germany some time ago. It is designed to let you take your hands off the wheel and look at the scenery, but anything more than that is too much distraction for when it requires you to take over. And it will, because it's really not very capable at all - it's basically an advanced traffic jam autopilot that can follow other cars in a straight well marked line, that's it.
- dkjaudyeqooe 3y ago
  What would be great is the SAE tightened the definitions so there were standards of performance, maybe with different quality sublevels within each.
- hristov 3y ago
  For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tablet away and grab the wheel.
  - rl3 3y ago
    >For person like me that takes very light naps when sitting, 10 seconds is plenty to wake up and take control. I'd argue that isn't remotely enough time to safely take control. You're betting your brain wakes up sufficiently in that time, and if it doesn't the consequences are potentially deadly. >Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time to put the tablet away and grab the wheel. That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint, but not from a situational awareness one. You're deprived of both context and situational awareness on the road. Some key details extend far beyond a 10-15 seconds, such as: another car driving erratically, lanes ending, line of sight on pedestrians or cyclists visible prior that are now occluded by traffic. The list goes on.
    - worik 3y ago
      >>Also if I am using a tablet doing email or browsing or even playing games, 10 seconds is plenty of time > That's a bit better from an alertness standpoint How do you know? Subjective measurement of time is very inaccurate. I have experienced this, when I timed some regular activities I undertook every day, total habit. I would have said they took me ten seconds. When I timed them, it was forty five seconds. I have no faith in anybodies' perception of how long they can switch context like this unless they have objectively measured it I have heard that this has been studied, a quick web search turned up just this: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0001691880900013 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000169...
      - rl3 3y ago
        >How do you know? That's a good point. On the face of it, I'd assumed an awake person already engaging their brain would perform better than a person just waking up in that context, but perahps not. >I have no faith in anybodies' perception of how long they can switch context like this unless they have objectively measured it Agreed. Moreover, I'd say that the risk for faulty information processing or incorrect preconceptions is higher if the person is distracted but awake.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

GuB-42 3y ago

I guess it is not ok to be asleep as even a loud alarm will take time to wake you up, but not paying attention, like when you are doing your email is fine. In fact, that's the entire point of level 3 autonomy. You are "on call" rather than "at work", so you must be prepared to act when the car rings. If the car doesn't ring, you are free to do whatever you want as long as you can hear the ring and take back control when it happens.

torginus 3y ago

Afaik the key differentiator of a L3 and a L2 system is that if you don't take control when the system requests you to, the L3 system can safely stop/pull aside while all bets are off with an L2 system.

Dylan16807 3y ago
You remember wrong. That's the difference between L3 and L4. The L2/L3 difference is that with L2 you have to supervise at all times and you have to decide to take control.