Autonomous Car Progress

[rxlawdude]

You cannot operate your Model 3 as a robotaxi because it won't operate without someone in the driver's seat applying pressure to the wheel. And if that person fails to intervene now and then, it will crash.

No, in some cases it could crash. In most scenarios, it slows and turns on emergency flashers and comes to a safe stop.

 

[powertoold]

Vehicle features with a Level 4 "design intent" that are being tested with a safety driver are still Level 4. (J3016 8.2)

Nah, you don't understand what design intent means here. Even if the intent is L4 (i.e., eventually when the software matures), but there is still expectation that the driver take over, it's L2 or L3 max. Design intent relates to the design of the feature itself. A feature is level 4 if the software designers intend it to be so, by following the requirements in the definition. This means you can have a very poor performing L4 feature, as long as the designers (software developers) intended it to be L4.

If a feature requires a safety (fallback) driver, then it's not level 4, regardless of what the developer intends for it to be in the future.

Once again, the levels are so tempting to discuss because people get it wrong all the time. But even if people are wrong, they won't admit it, so it's pointless. Lol

Quote from the definition:

At levels 4 and 5, the ADS must be capable of performing the DDT fallback and achieving a minimal risk condition. Level 4 and 5 ADS-equipped vehicles that are designed to also accommodate operation by a driver (whether conventional or remote) may allow a user to perform the DDT fallback if s/he chooses to do
so. However, a level 4 or 5 ADS need not be designed to allow a user to perform DDT fallback and, indeed, may be designed to disallow it in order to reduce crash risk (see 8.9).

Once again, my prior statement still stands because people don't understand the definition, even though they read it. Again, my prior statement that you bolded:

Let's wait until Mobileye announces that they don't require safety drivers to say they're L4.

Thanks for playing. I'm out of this one.

 

[Bitdepth]

Nah, you don't understand what design intent means here. Even if the intent is L4 (i.e., eventually when the software matures), but there is still expectation that the driver take over, it's L2 or L3 max. Design intent relates to the design of the feature itself. A feature is level 4 if the software designers intend it to be so, by following the requirements in the definition. This means you can have a very poor performing L4 feature, as long as the designers (software developers) intended it to be L4.

If a feature requires a safety (fallback) driver, then it's not level 4, regardless of what the developer intends for it to be in the future.

Once again, the levels are so tempting to discuss because people get it wrong all the time. But even if people are wrong, they won't admit it, so it's pointless. Lol

You don't know what you are talking about.

 

[Daniel in SD]

But perhaps you were joking when you said "when it’s out of beta later this year."

Perhaps. End of this year would actually be a year late!
Just to be clear, I am joking!
My prediction is that HW3 will never be achieve robotaxi safety 200% greater than the average human or whatever the current goal is. In other words, FSD on HW3 will never be out of beta.

 

[Bladerskb]

If a feature requires a safety (fallback) driver, then it's not level 4, regardless of what the developer intends for it to be in the future.

Once again, the levels are so tempting to discuss because people get it wrong all the time. But even if people are wrong, they won't admit it, so it's pointless. Lol

Let's wait until Mobileye announces that they don't require safety drivers to say they're L4.

Thanks for playing. I'm out of this one.

Direct contradiction of the SAE document:

"The level of a driving automation system feature corresponds to the feature’s production design intent. This applies regardless of whether the vehicle on which it is equipped is a production vehicle already deployed in commerce, or a test vehicle that has yet to be deployed. As such, it is incorrect to classify a level 4 design-intended ADS feature equipped on a test vehicle as level 2 simply because on-road testing requires a test driver to supervise the feature while engaged, and to intervene if necessary to maintain safe operation."

Take your own advise!

 

[Terminator857]

Direct contradiction of the SAE document:

"The level of a driving automation system feature corresponds to the feature’s production design intent. This applies regardless of whether the vehicle on which it is equipped is a production vehicle already deployed in commerce, or a test vehicle that has yet to be deployed. As such, it is incorrect to classify a level 4 design-intended ADS feature equipped on a test vehicle as level 2 simply because on-road testing requires a test driver to supervise the feature while engaged, and to intervene if necessary to maintain safe operation."

Take your own advise!

In other words: SAE level only means what the manufacturer says it means. There are no tests. If matchbox says their cars are level 4, then they are level 4 according to SAE definition.

 

[diplomat33]

Shashua describing the sensors and tech in the Mobileye robotaxi and the Zeekr 001 consumer car. He also shares about their mapping tech.

I think it is pretty informative.

 

[powertoold]

You don't know what you are talking about.

I do know. But yes, the design intent part is confusing to a lot of people.

Again, a feature cannot be level 4-5 if it requires a safety driver. For example, if the developers designed-in a "take over immediately" / "take over in 10 seconds" or something similar, then the feature cannot be level 4-5.

However, the software developer can remove all such warnings or take over designs (along will fulfilling all other level requirements), and it can fulfill level 4-5 (see my part about having a very poor performing level 4 feature).

I'll admit I may be wrong on this one though. It's possible that the feature doesn't expect a fallback driver but the developer (Mobileye) requires one. In this case, my prior statement about Mobileye requiring a safe driver isn't clearly true. It should have been "let's wait until Mobileye's robotaxi (the software) doesn't require a safety driver to say it's level 4" to be 100% correct. But people who know would understand what I meant, lol.

To make this even more clear, fsd beta is *only* level 2 because it still has a "take over immediately" screen, wheel tug, and DMS (the software expects the driver to monitor). Without any of these take over immediately feature (and if it has some feature to pull over, which I'm sure it has), it would be level 5, even if Tesla requires a safety driver.

 

[diplomat33]

I do know. But yes, the design intent part is confusing to a lot of people.

Again, a feature cannot be level 4-5 if it requires a safety driver. For example, if the developers designed-in a "take over immediately" / "take over in 10 seconds" or something similar, then the feature cannot be level 4-5.

However, the software developer can remove all such warnings or take over designs (along will fulfilling all other level requirements), and it can fulfill level 4-5 (see my part about having a very poor performing level 4 feature).

I'll admit I may be wrong on this one though. It's possible that the feature doesn't expect a fallback driver but the mfg (Mobileye) requires one. In this case, my prior statement about Mobileye requiring a safe driver isn't clearly true. It should have been "let's wait until Mobileye's robotaxi doesn't require a safety driver to say it's level 4" to be 100% correct. But people who know would understand what I meant, lol.

It is all about whether the safety driver is required to handle part of the dynamic driving tasks. If the car requires a driver to handle some dynamic driving tasks in the ODD then it is not L4. But if the AV can do all dynamic driving tasks on its own in the given ODD then it is L4, even if there is a safety driver present in the car.

Waymo, Cruise, Mobileye are claiming that their AVs are capable of handling the entire OEDR and are responsible for all dynamic driving tasks in its designated ODD. So they are claiming that the AV does not require a safety driver to handle any dynamic driving tasks in the given ODD. Therefore, they are claiming L4, even when there is a safety driver present since the safety driver is not responsible for handling any dynamic driving tasks.

Tesla is saying a driver is required to handle part of the dynamic driving tasks. Therefore, it is L2. See the bold and underlined parts in the Tesla email to the CA DMV:

City Streets continues to firmly root the vehicle in SAE Level 2 capability and does not make it autonomous under the DMV’s definition. City Streets’ capabilities with respect to the object and event detection and response (OEDR)sub-task are limited, as there are circumstances and events to which the system is not capable of recognizing or responding. These include static objects and road debris, emergency vehicles, construction zones, large uncontrolled intersections with multiple incoming ways, occlusions, adverse weather, complicated or adversarial vehicles in the driving path, unmapped roads. As a result, the driver maintains responsibility for this part of the dynamic driving task(DDT).

If Tesla said that FSD beta could handle the entire OEDR and did not require a driver to handle any part of the dynamic driving tasks, then they could claim L4 or L5, even if the vehicles still had someone in the driver seat.

 

[Bitdepth]

I do know. But yes, the design intent part is confusing to a lot of people.

Again, a feature cannot be level 4-5 if it requires a safety driver. For example, if the developers designed-in a "take over immediately" / "take over in 10 seconds" or something similar, then the feature cannot be level 4-5.

The design intent is confusing to you, not me, not several people who have explained it to you in this thread already.

There is no such descriptor of "take over immediately" or "take over in 10 second" being an identifier of what a level is. The documents says having a safety driver does not demote the level assigned to a system just as not having one does not promote a system to a higher level. They give an example of a level 5 system not being able to handle a road it encounters does not demote it to level 4. The document does not tell you how well a given system performs, it just describes systems that can perform partial or entire DDT and OEDR subtasks of the DDT.

However, the software developer can remove all such warnings or take over designs (along will fulfilling all other level requirements), and it can fulfill level 4-5 (see my part about having a very poor performing level 4 feature).

Again the document says:

Direct contradiction of the SAE document:

"The level of a driving automation system feature corresponds to the feature’s production design intent. This applies regardless of whether the vehicle on which it is equipped is a production vehicle already deployed in commerce, or a test vehicle that has yet to be deployed. As such, it is incorrect to classify a level 4 design-intended ADS feature equipped on a test vehicle as level 2 simply because on-road testing requires a test driver to supervise the feature while engaged, and to intervene if necessary to maintain safe operation."

I'll admit I may be wrong on this one though.

First true statement you have made thus far.

It's possible that the feature doesn't expect a fallback driver but the developer (Mobileye) requires one. In this case, my prior statement about Mobileye requiring a safe driver isn't clearly true. It should have been "let's wait until Mobileye's robotaxi doesn't require a safety driver to say it's level 4" to be 100% correct. But people who know would understand what I meant, lol.

And then wrong again. Those who read the documentation and have quoted it many times know that Waymo, Mobileye, Cruise, Zoox, Argo, Apollo et al using a safety driver to test their level 4 autonomous driving systems does not make it L3 or L2, thus you are unequivocally mistaken in your assumption and reasoning. When Tesla starts testing their L5 system with safety drivers it is still a level 5 system if it is their design intent. Removing nag does not make a system level 4 or 5.

To make this even more clear, fsd beta is *only* level 2 because it still has a "take over immediately" screen and DMS. Without any of these take over immediately feature (and if it has some feature to pull over, which I'm sure it has), it would be level 5, even if Tesla requires a safety driver.

To make it clear FSD Beta is L2 because Tesla says it is. Not because of "take over immediately". Now apply the bold to L4 cars being tested with safety drivers.

 

[powertoold]

If Tesla said that FSD beta could handle the entire OEDR and did not require a driver to handle any part of the dynamic driving tasks, then they could claim L4 or L5, even if the vehicles still had someone in the driver seat.

I see what you mean, but that's actually not completely true either.

The levels have nothing to do with what developer claims. The levels relate purely to the software feature. Even if the developer knows that the software can't handle the entire OEDR, but the software is designed around the level 4 / 5 requirements, then it's still level 4 / 5. This is where the design intent part comes in.

For example, fsd beta doesn't always handle road closure / blocks, but it does attempt to do so and doesn't expect a fallback driver to deal with it (well it does, but only through the wheel tug, lol, you know what I mean). Tesla knows this, but the software doesn't.

 

[scottf200]

Shashua describing the sensors and tech in the Mobileye robotaxi and the Zeekr 001 consumer car. He also shares about their mapping tech.

I think it is pretty informative.

He makes reference to "level 2 plus" for their 11 camera version. This screen capture show the 11 cameras and their field of view. 192 is crazy.

 

[diplomat33]

I see what you mean, but that's actually not completely true either.

The levels have nothing to do with what developer claims. The levels relate purely to the software feature. Even if the developer knows that the software can't handle the entire OEDR, but the software is designed around the level 4 / 5 requirements, then it's still level 4 / 5. This is where the design intent part comes in.

For example, fsd beta doesn't always handle road closure / blocks, but it does attempt to do so and doesn't expect a fallback driver to deal with it (well it does, but only through the wheel tug, lol, you know what I mean). Tesla knows this, but the software doesn't.

I think you might be referring to the ODD. Yes, the developer can change the ODD to ensure the ADS can perform the OEDR in that ODD. That's what L4 means: the car can perform the entire OEDR but only in a given ODD. My point is that if the developer feels that the car can perform the entire OEDR in a specific ODD, then they can certainly make the claim that the car is L4 in that ODD.

He makes reference to "level 2 plus" for their 11 camera version. This screen capture show the 11 cameras and their field of view. 192 is crazy.

Correct. The camera-only system is "L2 plus". ME says it will do the same highway and city self-driving as the robotaxi but it requires constant driver supervision. When Mobileye adds the radar+lidar, the system becomes L4 and ME says that it does not require driver supervision anymore.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Perhaps. End of this year would actually be a year late!
Just to be clear, I am joking!
My prediction is that HW3 will never be achieve robotaxi safety 200% greater than the average human or whatever the current goal is. In other words, FSD on HW3 will never be out of beta.

So you are saying there will never be a public release of City Streets on HW3? That's all FSD Beta is developing for, not for "200% greater than the average human".

 

[powertoold]

That's what L4 means: the car can perform the entire OEDR but only in a given ODD. My point is that if the developer feels that the car can perform the entire OEDR in a specific ODD, then they can certainly make the claim that the car is L4 in that ODD.

That's where people misunderstand the levels. The levels provide very clear cut classifications.

It doesn't matter if the car can or can't perform the entire OEDR (because this is a performance criteria), as long as the autonomy feature is *designed* to do so. For example, we know that Waymo / Cruise / etc. aren't able to recognize and handle every single object or obstacle in the DDT, but they've (probably) designed the software to attempt it all, even if it fails. This is the part where the definition says that a car is still level 4 even if the developer requires a safety driver to intervene in unsafe / unforeseen situations. However, the level 4 feature *itself* can't require a safety driver.

Once again, I go back to my prior comment that fsd beta is level 5 if they simply removed all driver monitoring features (wheel tug / take over immediately / DMS).

 

[Terminator857]

He doesn't sound as sure of himself as he has in the past. Example: "No one knows ...". Sounds like he is worried about Tesla. I think Tesla will win / be more popular then Mobileye, at least here in the U.S. Just because Tesla is less conservative. In other words, Mobileye like most companies are very injury risk adverse. Many will say that is a good thing.

He makes reference to "level 2 plus" for their 11 camera version. This screen capture show the 11 cameras and their field of view. 192 is crazy.

 

[diplomat33]

Once again, I go back to my prior comment that fsd beta is level 5 if they simply removed all driver monitoring features (wheel tug / take over immediately / DMS).

No. That is contradicted by Tesla's own words to the CA DMV where they said that FSD Beta is L2 because it requires a driver to handle part of the DDT. So just removing all DMS and nags would not make it L5 since the car cannot perform the entire DDT on its own. If you removed the DMS and nags, you would still have L2, just without any way of making sure the driver is able to intervene. If you were right, then Tesla should say that it is L5, just with driver supervision. They don't. They say it is only L2:

City Streets continues to firmly root the vehicle in SAE Level 2 capability and does not make it autonomous under the DMV’s definition. City Streets’ capabilities with respect to the object and event detection and response (OEDR)sub-task are limited, as there are circumstances and events to which the system is not capable of recognizing or responding. These include static objects and road debris, emergency vehicles, construction zones, large uncontrolled intersections with multiple incoming ways, occlusions, adverse weather, complicated or adversarial vehicles in the driving path, unmapped roads. As a result, the driver maintains responsibility for this part of the dynamic driving task(DDT).

L5 is clearly defined based on whether the ADS can perform the entire DDT with no ODD restrictions:

Here is the definition of L5:

The sustained and unconditional (i.e., not ODD-specific) performance by an ADS of the entire DDT and DDT fallback.

 

[stopcrazypp]

He makes reference to "level 2 plus" for their 11 camera version. This screen capture show the 11 cameras and their field of view. 192 is crazy.

If 192 is done on a single camera that implies a fairly extreme fisheye. For comparison the Tesla front fisheye is around 150 and rear is around 140. That type of camera (in the 4 cam arrangement shown) is usually used for near field and things like 360 birdseye view for parking, but not sure if it really helps much for ADAS at higher speeds.

They have something marked as 100 degree on the side, but not sure what direction that faces as the diagram is a bit vague on that. I imagine that camera is far more important, esp. at highway speeds.

 

[scottf200]

If 192 is done on a single camera that implies a fairly extreme fisheye. For comparison the Tesla front fisheye is around 150 and rear is around 140. That type of camera (in the 4 cam arrangement shown) is usually used for near field and things like 360 birdseye view for parking, but not sure if it really helps much for ADAS at higher speeds.

They have something marked as 100 degree on the side, but not sure what direction that faces as the diagram is a bit vague on that. I imagine that camera is far more important, esp. at highway speeds.

You may very well be right.
See 2:00+ in above video mentions/shows camera locations. Says 8 Megapixel cameras at that point. Watch the short video at 2:00.
"Two in the mirror" mentions parking in that context it seems. One on the fender and seems angle is similar to Tesla's fender marker 'repeater' camera.

 

[powertoold]

L5 is clearly defined based on whether the ADS can perform the entire DDT with no ODD restrictions:

Here is the definition of L5:

Ok but you posted the definition of L5 with respect to the DDT and ODD.

I thought we were talking about OEDR?

Are you saying that level 5 requires an unlimited OEDR capability vs limited? I don't understand.