I agree. I had posted this in the Tesla vision thread with a comment that this is compelling support for a vision-only approach, at least in urban driving. The really thought-provoking aspect is his emphasis that the whole concept of rigid lanes and rigid road-use rules is flawed. The situation is very fluid and safe operation actually demands frequent operation outside those boundaries, with a strong component of managing around other drivers' expectations.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Autonomous Car Progress
- Thread starter stopcrazypp
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Autonomous Vehicles
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
The driver, though I imagine there may be some arguments over whether or not the system gave the driver enough time to take over and whether or not there was enough time for the driver to take corrective action. Handing over to the driver when a collision is unavoidable and blaming the driver doesn't seem reasonable. As I said I still haven't seen an example where this would be a real world problem.
This was the statement that prompted this whole exchange. You should have been more clear and said the driver will be responsible when a L3 system is NOT engaged. I interpreted your statement as saying the driver is responsible while the L3 system performing the dynamic driving task. That's the distinction between an L2 and an L3 system.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
Volvo announced their next gen electric SUV, to be revealed in 2022, will come standard with lidar, FSD chip, safety features, OTA updates and autonomous driving:
Some highlights:
"The fully electric successor to Volvo Cars’ XC90, to be revealed in 2022, will come with state-of-the-art sensors, including LiDAR technology developed by Luminar and an autonomous driving computer powered by the NVIDIA DRIVE Orin™ system-on-a-chip, as standard.
Once introduced, the technology is expected to mature over time, becoming more capable and allowing the car to assist and improve the capabilities of a human driver in safety critical situations. Whereas previous generations of technology largely relied on warning the driver for potential immediate threats, this new safety technology will over time increasingly intervene as needed to prevent collisions.
Beyond the sensor suite and AI computing performance, Volvo’s forthcoming flagship model will also come with back-up systems for key functions such as steering and braking that make it hardware ready for safe, unsupervised autonomous driving once available.
These back-up systems alongside LiDAR, compute and software will enable the Highway Pilot functionality, developed in-house together with Volvo Cars’ autonomous driving software development company Zenseact. An autonomous driving feature for use on motorways, the optional Highway Pilot will be activated for customers when verified safe and legally allowed for individual geographic locations and conditions."
www.media.volvocars.com
Some highlights:
"The fully electric successor to Volvo Cars’ XC90, to be revealed in 2022, will come with state-of-the-art sensors, including LiDAR technology developed by Luminar and an autonomous driving computer powered by the NVIDIA DRIVE Orin™ system-on-a-chip, as standard.
Once introduced, the technology is expected to mature over time, becoming more capable and allowing the car to assist and improve the capabilities of a human driver in safety critical situations. Whereas previous generations of technology largely relied on warning the driver for potential immediate threats, this new safety technology will over time increasingly intervene as needed to prevent collisions.
Beyond the sensor suite and AI computing performance, Volvo’s forthcoming flagship model will also come with back-up systems for key functions such as steering and braking that make it hardware ready for safe, unsupervised autonomous driving once available.
These back-up systems alongside LiDAR, compute and software will enable the Highway Pilot functionality, developed in-house together with Volvo Cars’ autonomous driving software development company Zenseact. An autonomous driving feature for use on motorways, the optional Highway Pilot will be activated for customers when verified safe and legally allowed for individual geographic locations and conditions."
Next generation pure electric Volvo comes with LiDAR technology and AI-driven super computer as standard to help save lives
Volvo Cars’ forthcoming fully electric flagship SUV will have industry-leading safety technology as standard, helping to save even more lives as the company sets a new benchmark for automotive safety.
www.media.volvocars.com
They discuss what could happen if an L3 driver does not take over when requested. Car may, for example, simply stop in place. Doesn't say who is liable.
8.6 DDT Fallback versus Failure Mitigation Strategy
Vehicles equipped with level 2 and level 3 driving automation features may have an additional failure mitigation strategy
designed to bring the vehicle to a controlled stop wherever the vehicle happens to be, if the driver fails to supervise the
feature’s performance (level 2), or if the fallback-ready user fails to perform the fallback when prompted (level 3). For
example, if the fallback-ready user of a level 3 traffic jam feature fails to respond to a request to intervene after traffic clears
(an out-of-ODD condition), the vehicle may have a failure mitigation strategy designed to bring the vehicle to a controlled
stop in its present lane of travel and turn on the hazard lamps.
Interesting case where an ADS-dedicated L3 vehicle may not have the controls to allow the driver to control it. You might be able to ask it to stop but not have any control over it beyond that. Maybe in that case the driver would not be liable?
8.9 User Request to Perform the DDT when a Level 3, 4 or 5 ADS is Engaged
Vehicles equipped with an engaged level 3 ADS feature are expected to relinquish the DDT upon request by a DDT fallback-
ready user. This expectation is a logical consequence of the DDT fallback-ready user’s need to be able to perform the DDT
fallback whenever required, including in cases when a DDT performance-relevant vehicle system failure has occurred that
the ADS may not be monitoring (such as a broken suspension component).
Some ADS-equipped vehicles may not be designed to allow for driver operation (i.e., ADS-dedicated vehicles). In these
types of vehicles, passengers may be able to demand a vehicle stop by, for example, pulling an emergency stop lever, and
in response, the ADS would achieve a minimal risk condition.
8.9 User Request to Perform the DDT when a Level 3, 4 or 5 ADS is Engaged
Vehicles equipped with an engaged level 3 ADS feature are expected to relinquish the DDT upon request by a DDT fallback-
ready user. This expectation is a logical consequence of the DDT fallback-ready user’s need to be able to perform the DDT
fallback whenever required, including in cases when a DDT performance-relevant vehicle system failure has occurred that
the ADS may not be monitoring (such as a broken suspension component).
Some ADS-equipped vehicles may not be designed to allow for driver operation (i.e., ADS-dedicated vehicles). In these
types of vehicles, passengers may be able to demand a vehicle stop by, for example, pulling an emergency stop lever, and
in response, the ADS would achieve a minimal risk condition.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Haha. I'm pretty sure an L3 vehicle without controls would need to be an L4 vehicle. How could a driver perform the DDT without controls?
rxlawdude
Active Member
So you think Tesla will be liable when its L3 system does something untoward. Interesting, and now this is becoming more of a legal question that will be more fully resolved when L3 systems are deployed.
I believe that the driver will still be liable for L3 operation at all times. You're entitled to believe otherwise. The future will tell who was right.
My reading of Level 3 is that the driver must be ready to take over at any time, but the car is responsible for making that call, with at least enough warning for the driver to do so. Thus I would say you should not be watching a movie or reading a book, but you don't need to have your eyes on the road at all times. This allows the driver to relax, which was my point upthread when I said that L2 is unsuitable for city driving because in the city you might have to react in an instant. With L3 you have at least a few seconds. No watching movies, but you don't need to be constantly alert. Just ready to take over in a few seconds. This means that the car, not the driver, is responsible for avoiding collision with a person or obstacle that appears suddenly.
I don't expect to see an L3 system available for individuals to buy any time soon. I don't expect Tesla to get to L3 or higher in the next five years, and it could be ten.
I don't expect to see an L3 system available for individuals to buy any time soon. I don't expect Tesla to get to L3 or higher in the next five years, and it could be ten.
Legal liability is a different question than SAE definitions of the levels. SAE says that a Level 3 car is one capable of safely making the decision to turn operation over to the driver. If the law says that the driver is always responsible, then the law is limiting cars to level 2 operation, even if they are capable of Level 3.
At Level 3 the car is responsible. When and if the law allows this is up to the lawmakers.
rxlawdude
Active Member
L2+ or L3- is what I expect out of HW3. But you can see that legal liability for periods where "the car is responsible" is an unknown at this time.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I'm not aware of any jurisdiction where L3 vehicles are explicitly legal that puts the liability on the driver. That would make no sense. What would the difference between L2 and L3 be then?
rxlawdude
Active Member
Legal liability is certainly an issue deserving of discussion here. Especially when claims like answering emails and watching movies while L3 is engaged continue to be proffered.
I'm puzzled at your statement that the law is limiting cars to Level 2 operation. That's absurd. Nothing precludes L3, 4 or 5 operation, other than a presumption the driver is the responsible liable party for any accidents.
Of course, with full L4 or L5, there may not be driver controls and a steering wheel. Then we clearly have a distinction where the occupant cannot be held liable (no duty to drive a vehicle that has no driver controls!).
rxlawdude
Active Member
L3 allows "several seconds" for the back-up driver to take control; L2 requires "immediate" response from the back-up driver.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
It also requires the vehicle to tell the driver when to take control. That's a HUGE difference.
For example, in the cases you appear to be referring to here the driver would not be responsible because the system did not notify them to take control.
In California:
North Carolina puts it on the registered owner for fully autonomous vehicles (at least for moving violations):
How is your insurance handling "autonomy"?
That's not obvious at all. It's not even necessarily true. In some states the the automated driving system, when engaged, is legally the operator. In some states the owner is legally responsible for any legal violations of the vehicle, even on an L4 or L5 vehicle. (Even if he's not in the...
teslamotorsclub.com
Note the distinction in legal liability is not necessarily the same as the SAE designation.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Definitely want to lease your Tesla in North Carolina!North Carolina puts it on the registered owner for fully autonomous vehicles (at least for moving violations):
How is your insurance handling "autonomy"?
That's not obvious at all. It's not even necessarily true. In some states the the automated driving system, when engaged, is legally the operator. In some states the owner is legally responsible for any legal violations of the vehicle, even on an L4 or L5 vehicle. (Even if he's not in the...
Volvo has stated two things about their intent for their L3 (highway self-driving) system:
Hopefully we'll get updates on all this at the June 30th event.
- You do not have to pay attention in this mode. In fact you can do other things or take a nap, per Volvo. I assume it will work increasingly hard to wake you up as you are a few minutes from the planned exit.
- Volvo will assume liability for accidents that occur while in L3 driving. (Comment: they are promoting subscription models including insurance, and I wouldn't be entirely surprised if the liability guarantee were tied to an overall Volvo insurance package, to avoid messy resolution debates between insurers)
Hopefully we'll get updates on all this at the June 30th event.
rxlawdude
Active Member
Thanks for the California regulations.
However, you've selected regulations pertaining to the testing of autonomous vehicles, not full public deployment. The authority statute CVC § 38750, is similarly limited in scope to testing by manufacturers and their "employees, contractors, or other persons designated by the manufacturer of the autonomous technology." CVC 38750(b)(1). That is not Joe Public.
There's a difference between testing and actual deployment. As I said, liability assignment during operation of autonomous vehicles by members of the public has not been litigated.
rxlawdude
Active Member
And you've hit the nail on the head. It's Volvo's intent. Not a promise. Not a guarantee that when the time comes, their L3 would allow you to nap. In fact, that's contrary to the SAE definition requiring taking over within several seconds.
I agree it's their stated intent, and as far as I can tell they started saying it at least back in 2015 so we'll see what happens with that.
Regarding the wake-up and handoff warning interval, I don't think the SAE says it can't be longer, nor that the car can't do more than just slowly come to a stop in the traffic lane in case of a failed hand-off. I think those are the minimum requirements for L3, not limitations. It can do more, but it's not L4 because it cannot complete the entire drive once it leaves the L3 ODD (the highway in this case).
Similar threads
- Article
