First L3 Self Driving Car - Audi A8 world premieres in Barcelona

[omarsultan]

I am going to venture that the real difference between L2 and L3 is not the technology.

SAE Autonomous Driving Levels 1 and 2 can be deployed today because they fit within the existing legal, policy and ethical frameworks--you are responsible for you vehicle, nothing changes when you use L1/L2 features. Levels 3 and higher depend on legal, policy and ethical frameworks that do not exists yet, so I don't see them being deployed anytime soon. For example, is $manufacturer going to provide indemnification for their owners if something happens while under system control? If you hit a pedestrian while under system control, will your insurance company cover you--if you are not the driver and simply a passenger, why should they? How does $manufacturer handle the Trolley Problem and how does that sync with local laws?

 

[J1mbo]

And their purpose is also totally different, the A8 is meant to be enjoyed most on the back seat, whereas the Model S isn't.

Hit the nail on the head.

I wonder how many people will spec this option instead of paying for a driver!

 

[R.S]

Hit the nail on the head.

I wonder how many people will spec this option instead of paying for a driver!

At least in the US, where they only sell the long wheelbase version, the car probably comes with an autopilot called Jeff anyways...

 

[R.S]

ING Bank published a report today (adding to quite a few others) stating that electric cars will account for ALL new car sales by 2035. They also said that German automakers are way behind and will have trouble competing.
Electric cars to account for all new vehicle sales in Europe by 2035

Interesting to note that this new state of the art Audi A8 is available in petrol, diesel and a hybrid with a 48 volt battery (about enough to run the sound system and electric seats). They still don't get it.

But that still really isn't the topic here, is it? I appreciate that you are arguing so vehemently for Tesla, but like I said you don't need to. I totally agree with you on everyone going EV and the Germans, well not only the Germans but the whole industry, will need to catch up to Tesla.

On the other hand I also know that Tesla won't satisfy the whole car market and that there are many way worse car companies around. I really wouldn't call Audi, BMW, Daimler, or VW progressive. But they are way better than Subaru, Suzuki, Mazda, Fiat-Chrysler, Ford, Honda, Toyota, or PSA. Basically 50% of the market doesn't even want to talk about EVs, or actively tries to discredit them (Fiat-Chrysler).

But we were talking autonomous cars here and the Audi system looks promising IMO.

 

[mspohr]

But that still really isn't the topic here, is it? I appreciate that you are arguing so vehemently for Tesla, but like I said you don't need to. I totally agree with you on everyone going EV and the Germans, well not only the Germans but the whole industry, will need to catch up to Tesla.

On the other hand I also know that Tesla won't satisfy the whole car market and that there are many way worse car companies around. I really wouldn't call Audi, BMW, Daimler, or VW progressive. But they are way better than Subaru, Suzuki, Mazda, Fiat-Chrysler, Ford, Honda, Toyota, or PSA. Basically 50% of the market doesn't even want to talk about EVs, or actively tries to discredit them (Fiat-Chrysler).

But we were talking autonomous cars here and the Audi system looks promising IMO.

I think the problem is that Audi has introduced a new technology car which is already obsolete based on fossil fuels. Not even sure that their L3 autonomy is anything more than hype since it seems inferior to Tesla, Cadillac and Volvo.

 

[McRat]

I am going to venture that the real difference between L2 and L3 is not the technology.

SAE Autonomous Driving Levels 1 and 2 can be deployed today because they fit within the existing legal, policy and ethical frameworks--you are responsible for you vehicle, nothing changes when you use L1/L2 features. Levels 3 and higher depend on legal, policy and ethical frameworks that do not exists yet, so I don't see them being deployed anytime soon. For example, is $manufacturer going to provide indemnification for their owners if something happens while under system control? If you hit a pedestrian while under system control, will your insurance company cover you--if you are not the driver and simply a passenger, why should they? How does $manufacturer handle the Trolley Problem and how does that sync with local laws?

Today's tort system and criminal justice system solved the Trolley Problem (whether taking action results in a lessor loss of life, but still takes a life).

If you acknowledge a risk to an activity and calculate it (take action kills 1), you are liable. If you ignore the threat entirely, you are less liable.

Examples:

3 automakers. All use the same gasoline storage technology and have the same risk level. One company actually calculates the risk and documents it. That company is liable, the other two were not sued even though the death rates were the same.

2 automakers. Both make RWD cars susceptible to snap oversteer. One acknowledges it, one does not. The one who acknowledges it and tries to reduce it is liable. The other company still makes these rear heavy designs.

I could go on and on.

We almost did not get air bags because of how the US treats the 'trolley problem'. The gov't had to release automakers from liability. Why? Air bags can, and do, kill people during survivable accidents. It's a very, very, low risk, but it's documented, hence the automakers are liable.

Unless the gov't gives protection to automakers, we will probably not see autonomy for quite some time. Because automakers WILL calculate and document risk, and make improvements. Which are admissions of guilt.

 

[croman]

Actually most states have a comparative negligence standard. We don't need to rewrite the law. Its is living breathing and flexible. The Constitution doesn't need to be amended every time someone invents something new, neither do most basic statutes.

With comparative negligence a judge or jury can compare fault among many parties are apportion blame accordingly. Should the driver have done something different or was their reliance on the system reasonable?

Frankly, while Audi may be releasing a very limited number but haven't convinced regulators in Germany (which definitely plays favorites with German companies), then I think its a non-issue. Flimsy excuses like "when its legal" (i.e. FSD for Tesla) indicate the product is not ready and the government is an easy scapegoat for everyone nowadays.

 

[R.S]

I think the problem is that Audi has introduced a new technology car which is already obsolete based on fossil fuels. Not even sure that their L3 autonomy is anything more than hype since it seems inferior to Tesla, Cadillac and Volvo.

There technology isn't based on any fuel source. And if you see it as inferior to Tesla, I wonder what you think AP can do right now.

 

[bjornb]

Looks like it's a relatively low resolution 3 beam unit that should be much cheaper than the 16+ beam ones we have seen in most projects. And from the diagram it suggests it is a panning (145 degree) mirror with no tilt function.

So what kind of details/resolution does this unit provide if you speculate? And since there is no tilt is there only one 'pixel' vertically? It gives us a 145 degree 3D 'slice' of the environment in front of the car?
What is the range/how far does it see? (I may have seen that stated somewhere but didn't find anything now..)

 

[McRat]

Actually most states have a comparative negligence standard. We don't need to rewrite the law. Its is living breathing and flexible. The Constitution doesn't need to be amended every time someone invents something new, neither do most basic statutes.

With comparative negligence a judge or jury can compare fault among many parties are apportion blame accordingly. Should the driver have done something different or was their reliance on the system reasonable?

...

Deep pockets and a partial liability is still huge for an automaker.

Drivers at fault often lack the assets to settle cases, especially when they die during accident. And the families are essentially suing their own estate as the primary at fault party. So the real money comes from the automaker if they have documented the vehicle's risk level.

 

[mspohr]

There technology isn't based on any fuel source. And if you see it as inferior to Tesla, I wonder what you think AP can do right now.

That was my point. A new tech car with old tech fuel is a nonstarter.
My 2015 Tesla can do everything their press release touts up to 90 mph

 

[stopcrazypp]

So what kind of details/resolution does this unit provide if you speculate? And since there is no tilt is there only one 'pixel' vertically? It gives us a 145 degree 3D 'slice' of the environment in front of the car?
What is the range/how far does it see? (I may have seen that stated somewhere but didn't find anything now..)

It operates similar to other rotating lidar where the vertical resolution is provided by separate beams, and the horizontal resolution is provided by the panning/rotating.

Rather than speculation, here's a very similar unit (might even be the same, as the cutout in the PDF looks almost exactly the same design including the mirror/sensor, and data connectors). It's a 145 degree Ibeo Scala lidar (reported to be under $250 made by Valeo)
ibeo Wide Angle Scanning (ScaLa) Sensor | LiDAR | Product
All You Need to Know About Self-Driving Cars from CES - Robotics Trends

Horizontal FOV: 145 degrees, resolution 0.25 degrees (calculate 580 horizontal zones)
Vertical FOV: 3.2 degrees, resolution 0.8 degrees (4 vertical layers)
Sampling is 25Hz
Single scan resolution is 580 H x 4 V = 2320
580 H x 4 V x 25 Hz = 58000 samples per second
Range is 150m for vehicles, 50m for pedestrians.

Velodyne's 16 beam unit (was $8000 in 2014, probably cheaper now)
Horizontal FOV: 360 degrees, 0.1-0.4 degree resolution (calculate 2600-900 horizontal zones)
Vertical FOV: 30 degrees, resolution 2 degrees or Hi-Res version 20 degrees, resolution 1.33 degrees (16 vertical layers)
Sampling is 5-20Hz
Single scan resolution is ~938H (using below specs) x 16V = ~15000 (~6.5x the resolution of the cheaper sensor)
Specified ~300000 samples per second for single return likely using 938 H x 16 V x 20 Hz (~5x of cheaper sensor)
Specified ~600000 samples per second for dual return (for detecting through foliage, gives two samples per "pixel")
Range is 100m
VLP-16
VLP-16 (Puck Hi-Res)

 

[lunitiks]

Allright so this is not the "solid state" lidar type we sometimes hear about?
There's moving laser projectors/mirrors inside that thing?

 

[croman]

50m for pedestrians sounds like why its speed limited to 37mph (though geofence should limit risk the most). 3 seconds sounds like a bit too little time for a heavy non-regen car to 100% stop.

 

[omarsultan]

We almost did not get air bags because of how the US treats the 'trolley problem'. The gov't had to release automakers from liability. Why? Air bags can, and do, kill people during survivable accidents. It's a very, very, low risk, but it's documented, hence the automakers are liable.

Unless the gov't gives protection to automakers, we will probably not see autonomy for quite some time. Because automakers WILL calculate and document risk, and make improvements. Which are admissions of guilt.

I think we are saying the same thing--until the government gives manufacturers air cover, I don't see L3 and above happening. That being said, I am not sure its that simple--I don't see where we have the mechanism in place to establish some of these norms.

If we go back to the trolley problem, I would think there needs to be some agreed upon answer to this. To put this into driving terms: a pedestrian wanders into the road and the car determines there is not enough time to stop in time. The car determines it can swerve to avoid the pedestrian but the car will hit a tree on the side of the road and like cause serious injury to the driver and passengers of the car. Or, same scenario with the wayward pedestrian, but in this case, the L3 car can swerve into the adjacent lane but will likely hit another car and cause damage to it and injury to its occupants. Let's take the pedestrian out of it and have a deer cross the road: hit the deer and risk injury or switch into a ditch and risk injury? What does the car do? If someone gets hurt in the deer scenario, can you argue the car company is still liable because they had a crappy algorithm and it made a poor choice?

Cars don't make ethical choices, they obey rules they are programed into them. So, someone needs to agree on those ethical guidelines and ensure they are unambiguous enough that they can be programmed into a car. Insurance companies also need data and rules to satisfy their actuaries. Without that air cover, I cannot see a car company being willing to be the test case on autonomous driving liability:

"Mr. Smith, did your company knowingly release software that you knew would result in the death of innocent people?"​

But...I don't see the framework in place to make those determinations. Who gets to decide what is ethical behavior for a car? Look at the chaos around healthcare cost-effectiveness panels--can you image the political circus this would become?

 

[bjornb]

It operates similar to other rotating lidar where the vertical resolution is provided by separate beams, and the horizontal resolution is provided by the panning/rotating.

Rather than speculation, here's a very similar unit (might even be the same, as the cutout in the PDF looks almost exactly the same design including the mirror/sensor, and data connectors). It's a 145 degree Ibeo Scala lidar (reported to be under $250 made by Valeo)
ibeo Wide Angle Scanning (ScaLa) Sensor | LiDAR | Product

Thanks, looks very similar to me as well. Also interesting that it offers integrated object tracking and not just a raw image. Wonder if Audi uses the objects supplied or proces the raw image by themselves in the zFas unit..

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Wake me when it's actually available to buy. Until then it's just hype.

How about if it's available to buy, but the SW isn't done?

Does that somehow change it?

Sorry, but I find this entire thing humorous. It doesn't matter that the A8 is a few months away in Germany, and likely a year away in the USA. Because regulatory wise there is a lot to be worked out.

Aside from L3 they are completely different cars with different purposes. So there isn't much need to compare. The A8 not even electric so it's a non-starter for some of us. But, with L3 we have to give credit where credit is due. Where they have a date that it's going to ship (at least in Europe), and that's more than us Tesla people have when it comes to FSD.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Allright so this is not the "solid state" lidar type we sometimes hear about?
There's moving laser projectors/mirrors inside that thing?

Yes, there's a moving mirror inside, you can see the diagram how the mirror rotates. This design has been released for samples since 2014 according to datasheet. The solid state designs suitable for auto use are planning for release this year for samples, so probably still a few years before commercial release.

Note: some of the lidars that claim to be "solid state" also having moving mirrors too, but much smaller (a micro-mirror or an array of them).

 

[woof]

Here's the best solution to the trolley problem I've seen yet. Tesla should incorporate this.

Santero on Twitter

 

[AnxietyRanger]

That is brave on Audi's part. They wouldn't be doing this now without Tesla.

Putting the functionality in the A8 assures the total number of users will be small.

Yes they would.

This is the big misunderstanding regarding Tesla's effects on the autonomous car.

Tesla literally invented the modern BEV. Sure.

But they did NOT invent the modern self-driving car. In fact, Elon Musk is on record as saying Tesla will not take legal responsibility for the car crashing even in the future, while the European car industry has been saying they will for years - and working towards that for years.

The "Jack" you see in the new Audi A8 is a system Audi has been developing and showing in public for the past decade. The first version took up the full trunk, soon ten years ago when Audi first showed it to us. Now in late 2017 is the first time the autonomous system ships in a production car.

It will be artificially limited in the production form, and regulation limited, but in reality it is really the first truly self-driving car on the market and that goal has been there long before Tesla even thought about autonomous. Manufacturer taking responsibility for self-driving has been the plan all along.

Tesla has certainly been a troublemaker in the autonomous scene with their ship first and complete later approach, but they are hardly the pioneer they are in BEVs.