Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Cruise

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#261
spacecoin said:
Just an observation: L3 is the only mode that can leave the ODD without stopping as it has a hand-over protocol. The L4 would have to stop.
Click to expand...

That is not correct. L4 can also have a handover protocol when it is about to leave the ODD (See J3016, page 32):

in the case that a Level 4 sub-trip feature reaches its ODD limit, the ADS may issue an alert to the passenger that s/he should resume driving in order to complete their trip.
Click to expand...

Here is the full note with an example of L4 highway:

NOTE 2: Level 4 ADS features may be designed to operate the vehicle throughout complete trips (see 3.7.3), or they may be designed to operate the vehicle during only part of a given trip (see 3.7.2), For example, in order to complete a given trip, a user of a vehicle equipped with a Level 4 ADS feature designed to operate the vehicle during high speed freeway conditions will need to perform the DDT when the freeway ends in order to complete his or her intended trip; the ADS, however, will automatically perform the DDT fallback and achieve a minimal risk condition if the user fails to take over when the freeway ends (e.g., because s/he is sleeping). Unlike at Level 3, the Level 4 feature user is not a DDT fallback-ready user while the ADS is engaged (see Example 2 below), and thus is not expected to respond to a request to intervene in order to perform the fallback. Nevertheless, in the case that a Level 4 sub-trip feature reaches its ODD limit, the ADS may issue an alert to the passenger that s/he should resume driving in order to complete their trip. (Note that in this latter case, the alert in question is not a request to intervene, because it does not signal the need for fallback performance.
Click to expand...
 
#263
spacecoin said:
Fine. I'd love to see that being implemented in practice though.
"Please climb into the driver's seat, without touching the wheel". :D
Click to expand...

No. Here is how L4 highway on a consumer car would be implemented: the human would be in the driver seat for the whole trip. They would drive manually before getting to the highway. When the car reaches the on-ramp, the L4 would signal it is ready to take over, the human driver would engage L4. On highways, the human would still be in the driver seat but would not need to watch the road. It would be true "eyes off/hands off". They could text, watch a movie etc... When the car reaches the off ramp, the L4 would signal the driver to take over. The human would take over and manually drive again when the car leaves the off ramp.

spacecoin said:
I think if you can do L4 highway there is no reason for handover. Just take an exit and park.
Click to expand...

We are talking about a consumer car where you need to get off a highway to finish your trip. You don't want the car to take an exit and park on the side of the road. You will want to take over again so you can finish your trip and reach your destination.
 
Last edited:
#264
diplomat33 said:
No. Here is how L4 highway on a consumer car would be implemented: the human would be in the driver seat for the whole trip. They would drive manually before getting to the highway. When the car reaches the on-ramp, the L4 would signal it is ready to take over, the human driver would engage L4. On highways, the human would still be in the driver seat but would not need to watch the road. It would be true "eyes off/hands off". They could text, watch a movie etc... When the car reaches the off ramp, the L4 would signal the driver to take over. The human would take over and manually drive again when the car leaves the off ramp.
Click to expand...
It needs to wake up the driver to move her to fallback-ready 5-10min before, but I guess that could work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doggydogworld
#265
spacecoin said:
It needs to wake up the driver to move her to fallback-ready 5-10min before, but I guess that could work.
Click to expand...

Yes, the L4 would notify the human in advance to take back control before the car leaves the ODD. And if the human fails to take over, then the L4 would pull over safely to the side of the road. That is the advantage of L4: it does not need the human to take over. So if the human does not take over, it is not a problem.
 
#266
diplomat33 said:
Yes, the L4 would notify the human in advance to take back control before the car leaves the ODD. And if the human fails to take over, then the L4 would pull over safely to the side of the road. That is the advantage of L4: it does not need the human to take over. So if the human does not take over, it is not a problem.
Click to expand...
What I meant was that the system need to put the human into fallback-ready mode way before it's time to take over. Fallback-ready isn't "doing fallback". If you're napping you need more than 10s to take over the OEDR.

Also you can't "pull over safely to the side of the road" if you aren't allowed to (like on a highway). This is a real challenge for getting to L4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diplomat33
#267
spacecoin said:
What I meant was that the system need to put the human into fallback-ready mode way before it's time to take over. Fallback-ready isn't "doing fallback". If you're napping you need more than 10s to take over the OEDR.
Click to expand...

The "10s rule" is for L3, not L4. We are discussing L4. L4 could have a different rule. Remember that with L3, the person cannot fall asleep. So for L3, the human is still awake and alert. 10s should be enough time for L3. For L4, if the human is allowed to fall asleep, then yes, they would need more time than 10s. I agree that the system would need to put the human back into fallback ready mode way before it's time to take over. 10s would not be enough time if the human is allowed to fall asleep.

In theory a person is allowed to fall asleep in L4, but in practice, it is entirely possible that the manufacturer would not allow the human to fall asleep even with L4 if they deemed that it would cause fallback issues for that particular ODD. So in practice, a manufacturer might design a L4 highway system with a driver monitoring system that requires the human to be awake (the human would not need to watch the road or hold the wheel but they would need to be awake) so that they can take over when the L4 reaches the end of the highway ODD. And the system would alert the driver to take over several minutes before the off ramp to make sure that the human is able to take over in time.

spacecoin said:
Also you can't "pull over safely to the side of the road" if you aren't allowed to (like on a highway). This is a real challenge for getting to L4.
Click to expand...

Yeah, so the L4 highway might need to do a little non highway driving in order to find a safe pull over spot just in case. So it is possible that the L4 developer would design the L4 highway to be capable of taking the off ramp and finding a safe place to pull over after the highway. So the L4 might not be designed for city driving but it could do a little non highway driving, enough to pull over in an emergency. So "L4 highway" would not mean that the L4 literally just quits as soon as the highway exits. Or if the L4 highway is not capable of getting off the highway to find a safe pullover, then maybe the developer uses driver monitoring to make sure the human does not fall asleep, to make sure they can take over well before the highway ends.

I think you are getting at the design issues that the manufacturer would have to address when developing an autonomous driving system. They need to look at the ODD and how the system will be used. Just because a system is L4, does not mean it will be designed the same way. So for example, with robotaxis that only do ride-hailing in a geofence, you don't need any human fallback. The human can ride in the back seat and could fall asleep and simply be alerted to wake up when the robotaxi reaches its destination. But if you design L4 for consumer cars that is only designed to do part of a trip, like highways only, then you do need to look at how to do the transition back to the human when the L4 exits the highway ODD, you do need to look at issues like is it safe to let the human fall asleep, how much time to notify the human to take over before exiting the highway ODD, etc... It shows that the same L4 might be designed differently depending on the use case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spacecoin
#275
Barra on Bloomberg just now:
"Independent review with a focus on safety, still a strategic part of GM."

Q: How committed are you on Cruise?
A: Good progress over 8 years. Can perform on a level that's safer than a human. Learnings: Need to be a lot safer than a human, need to work a lot closer with regulators both local and federal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diplomat33
#276
  • Like
Reactions: diplomat33
#277
spacecoin said:
Fine. I'd love to see that being implemented in practice though.
"Please climb into the driver's seat, without touching the wheel". :D

I think if you can do L4 highway there is no reason for handover. Just take an exit and park.
Click to expand...

In the autonews podcast last week, Shashua addresses your question. He says that "eyes off" covers a range of behaviors from texting to sleeping. So some "eyes off" systems might allow you to sleep while others might only you to text while the system is engaged. The driver monitoring system could be used to alert the driver if they engage in unapproved behavior. So for example, if the "eyes off" system only allows you to text but not sleep, them if the DMS detects you are texting, it would do nothing but if it detected you were getting sleepy, it would alert you. It would be up to the manufacturer to clearly define what "eyes off" in their system means for the consumer (ODD, how to use it, what you can do when it is on etc).
 
#279
ThomasD said:
People don't pay attention to driving now. Do they really expect someone who is Texting or on TicTok to pay attention and take over at a moments notice?
Click to expand...
An AI based handover could be based on more than just cabin camera monitoring. There could be a brief interrogation/response sequence, akin to what a boxing referee does to make sure knocked-down boxer is able to continue, or a paramedic doing a triage interview to assess the state of the patient. A kind of automotive Captcha test, combining hands on the wheel and camera image with a voice response or a simple prompt for controls manipulation.

Also, "a moment's notice" is not the general requirement for L4, nor for L3 in a practical implementation. And as has been discussed repeatedly, the L4 vehicle me not actually be designed to hand over control to the occupant(s) at all. In use cases where a handover is expected or possible, the car must be able to achieve the minimum risk condition in case the handover isn't completed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PassingLane
Gave up on Autopilot, is Cruise Control next?
Replies
14
Views
128
AI, Autopilot, & Autonomous/FSD
PassingLane
PassingLane
P
Cruise Control Not Working
Replies
7
Views
191
AI, Autopilot, & Autonomous/FSD
Pacernow
P
A
Double Pull Selection Deactivated with FSD, Cruise Control not available.
Replies
22
Views
1K
AI, Autopilot, & Autonomous/FSD
E90alex
E90alex
diplomat33
  • Article
Make your robotaxi predictions for the 8/8 reveal
Replies
614
Views
13K
AI, Autopilot, & Autonomous/FSD
ThomasD
T
C
Now my car slows when approaching a green light!
Replies
6
Views
205
AI, Autopilot, & Autonomous/FSD
Calliope
C
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu