I don't expect any automated driving system to actually reach full level 5.

[enemji]

Level 5 means you can use automated driving everywhere for everything.

Any human with common sense knows this is impossible unless all the vehicles on the road are communicating with each other. In other words, they are all running on an electronic train track.

Till then, only fools will believe it is possible.

 

[diplomat33]

These are not objective requirements. They are specification paragraph headings. I suspect that the SAE has not defined the conditions yet because nobody is close to certifying an L5 system. Defining what it means to operate wherever human is expected to do so will be very difficult. For example, required snow must include snow fall rates, wind conditions for those rates, snowflake size, potentially snow temperature (wet snow vs. dry snow), snow depth in the road (once again with wet and dry definitions), slush, snowbank sizes and positions, ruts etc. Probably much more that doesn't come to mind. And that's just for snow.

ODD stands for Operational Design Domain. It is a list of domains, not absolute requirements, that a self-driving system can operate in. So I gave you a valid ODD. For example, city streets is in the ODD of FSD beta since it let's you activate FSD beta on city streets. Waymo told the CPUC that their ODD is geofence, all road types, day and night, speeds from 0 to 65 mph, rain and fog because that is the list of domains where Waymo operates their driverless ride-hailing service.

L5 ODD is the domains where the L5 can be used. The SAE says that the L5 ODD should be the same as a typical human driver. Typical human drivers are not geofenced, can drive on all road types, can drive in day or night, can drive up to the speed limit, can drive in rain, fog or snow (to varying degrees of success). So these domains should also be in the L5 ODD. In other words, SAE is saying that L5 should not be geofenced, should attempt to drive in day and night, should attempt to drive on all road types, should attempt to drive in rain, fog and snow. This is in contrast to L4 which has a design limit on its ODD. L4 can be geofenced, can only be designed for certain roads, can be limited to a certain speed limit, cannot be allowed to drive unsupervised in rain etc...

I would also point out that in the US, we rely on self-certification for AVs. So the SAE would not certify L5. It is up to the manufacturers to self-certify their AVs. So in theory, if Tesla removed driver supervision, they could self-certify FSD as L5 since it can be used everywhere. Of course, they would need to assume liability and regulators might challenge that certification.

Side note: older drivers or drivers with a medical condition that limits their ODD would be like "L4" since they have a limited ODD that is less than your typical human driver. So we can think of your typical human driver as L5 and then some human drivers who have a limited ODD, as L4.

BTW, why did you exclude dirt roads? There are many people who live along dirt roads. Are they not eligible for L5 vehicles in your world?

I guess it depends if you consider dirt roads to be real roads. J3016 just says "on road" only. I think that usually means paved roads so I excluded dirt roads. SAE says off roading is not part of the L5 ODD. At what point does a dirt road become off roading? I've certainly driven on some dirt paths that did not qualify as a road. LOL.

But that is why you define the ODD, so that consumers know what to expect from the AV. If the AV can drive on dirt roads, then add dirt roads to the ODD. And then people living by dirt roads can use the AV on their dirt roads. If dirt roads are not part of the ODD, then people living by dirt roads will know that they need to switch back to manual driving when they reach the dirt road part of their route.

I'm really not picking on you. I just see so many claims about L5 here that I was wondering if the L5 ODD was defined as something other than an asymptotic driving goal.

I do think that L5 is an asymptotic driving goal. Right now, we have L4 since AVs have a very limited ODD. But that ODD will get bigger over time. So I think L4 will get closer and closer to L5. I suspect we will see lots of different L4 systems, with different size ODDs. Some L4 might have an ODD that is very big, almost like L5 but not quite L5. I doubt we will see actual L5. I think the liability risks and the effort required will be too high that it won't be worth it, especially if a "big ODD" L4 can give you the same result. But it is possible that L4 might get close enough to the ODD of L5, that people will just start calling it L5. So basically the question might be, how big does the L4 ODD have to be before we just call it L5?

 

[Kablooie]

It seems to me that the defined 5 levels don't fit FSD very well. FSD is essentially performing at L5 levels because there are no limitations to where or when it drives and it handles most situations with no human intervention. But since it is unfinished software there are conditions that it doesn't handle well at the moment and requires human intervention, which sounds more like L3 or L4. The fact it requires full time monitoring to catch any unmanaged situations puts it in L2 category. FSD is kind of a mix of all the levels instead of progressing neatly along the defined progression.

 

[enemji]

for every ambiguous situation, and there are plenty, how is L5 supposed to react to the action of another vehicle with L5? If both believe they are correct, who gets the right of way? If both believe the other has the right of way, who takes the first action?

 

[diplomat33]

for every ambiguous situation, and there are plenty, how is L5 supposed to react to the action of another vehicle with L5? If both believe they are correct, who gets the right of way? If both believe the other has the right of way, who takes the first action?

We saw a similar situation with 2 Waymos. Both Waymos seemed unsure who had the right of way. But after some confusion, one Waymo eventually cut in front of the other Waymo.

 

[JulienW]

It seems to me that the defined 5 levels don't fit FSD very well. FSD is essentially performing at L5 levels because there are no limitations to where or when it drives and it handles most situations with no human intervention. But since it is unfinished software there are conditions that it doesn't handle well at the moment and requires human intervention, which sounds more like L3 or L4. The fact it requires full time monitoring to catch any unmanaged situations puts it in L2 category. FSD is kind of a mix of all the levels instead of progressing neatly along the defined progression.

It is not a mix of Levels and is the exact definition of what L2 is.

 

[bradtem]

Again, there is little point of arguing "what is L5" because no leading self-driving team cares about it, or is trying to make it. It was made up by people not building self-driving cars, it is of no particular importance.

Now, you can have debates about what service area a car might work in or what they call the ODD. But the answer is "Something commercially viable." That's the goal all teams have, to make something that customers will buy. Nobody cares what "level" it is or whether it does the particular things that some OEM engineers who are not serious self-driving developers put into a document.

 

[Kablooie]

Again, there is little point of arguing "what is L5" because no leading self-driving team cares about it, or is trying to make it. It was made up by people not building self-driving cars, it is of no particular importance.

Now, you can have debates about what service area a car might work in or what they call the ODD. But the answer is "Something commercially viable." That's the goal all teams have, to make something that customers will buy. Nobody cares what "level" it is or whether it does the particular things that some OEM engineers who are not serious self-driving developers put into a document.

I agree.The rating system was a start at trying to organize thoughts about autonomous driving but things are not necessarily progressing that way. Since it's a new, unfinished technology, it will follow it's own path and not be constrained by this rating system.

 

[Yelobird]

Level 5 means you can use automated driving everywhere for everything.
I posit that full level 5 automation will never be achieved because I had a situation years ago that I doubt any automation could manage.

My 12 year old daughter was angry because of an argument, late at night, and decided to run away. She started walking down the street with determination. I decided to follow her in my car to make sure nothing bad happened to her. I let her walk, perhaps 100 feet ahead, while I drove slowly to watch her. I followed her down a highway, several neighborhood streets and a main shopping street. She noticed me following but continued walking until a police car pulled me over to question why I was stalking a young girl. When my daughter noticed she came over and I explained the situation. The policeman laughed, my daughter got in the car and we drove home.

I don't expect any automated driving system to be able to manage a situation like this. It would have to read my mind to understand what you I wanted to do.

You lost me at “watching 12 year old daughter walk down a highway late at night”. Sounds more like a parenting problem then an FSD issue.

 

[Max Spaghetti]

L5 ODD would not require:
- off roads
- dirt roads

Living in Australia, the line between "off roads" and "dirt roads" is probably a bit vague. But plenty of "typical human drivers" drive and live on dirt roads, so there is no way you could argue a system is Level 5 if it's ODD excluded dirt roads. We even have dirt roads inside urban boundaries in this country. Even "off roads", depending on your definition, will possibly include thousands of km of access tracks through National Parks, which I would expect to be within the ODD of a Level 5 Cybertruck at least - because a "typical human driver" with a 4x4 would typically use those tracks.

Objectively, I think the L5 ODD would require the following:
- All interstate highways, major and minor state roads, rural roads, arterial roads, city streets, residential streets in the given market where L5 is sold. (ex: all paved roads in the US if L5 is only sold in the US)
- Parking lots

What about your driveway at home?
What about manoeuvring into your garage?
Typical human driver does this.

What about sitting in In-n-Out lines that snake around the block?

Yep! Typical human driver does this.

I guess it depends if you consider dirt roads to be real roads.

Haha! You wouldn't be saying that if you lived on a dirt road...

But I think your final point is very valid.

Car makers probably don't give too hoots about the difference between Level 4 and 5, and Level 5 may become an irrelevant goal (at least in the medium term).

Car maker 1 sells a Level 4 car with an ODD of "no dirt roads", and car maker 2 sells a Level 4 car with an ODD that includes dirt roads. Fine - you buy the vehicle that suits your intended purpose and everyone is happy.

But if you have a car from car maker 1, and then try to navigate to an address on a dirt road, it will either tell you "unable" (true Level 4 operating within it's ODD), or it will revert to Level 3 mode and let you know that you are going to actually have a licensed driver in the driver seat ready to take over when you run out of tarmac.

 

[diplomat33]

Living in Australia, the line between "off roads" and "dirt roads" is probably a bit vague. But plenty of "typical human drivers" drive and live on dirt roads, so there is no way you could argue a system is Level 5 if it's ODD excluded dirt roads. We even have dirt roads inside urban boundaries in this country. Even "off roads", depending on your definition, will possibly include thousands of km of access tracks through National Parks, which I would expect to be within the ODD of a Level 5 Cybertruck at least - because a "typical human driver" with a 4x4 would typically use those tracks.


What about your driveway at home?
What about manoeuvring into your garage?
Typical human driver does this.

Yep! Typical human driver does this.

Haha! You wouldn't be saying that if you lived on a dirt road...

But I think your final point is very valid.

Car makers probably don't give too hoots about the difference between Level 4 and 5, and Level 5 may become an irrelevant goal (at least in the medium term).

Car maker 1 sells a Level 4 car with an ODD of "no dirt roads", and car maker 2 sells a Level 4 car with an ODD that includes dirt roads. Fine - you buy the vehicle that suits your intended purpose and everyone is happy.

But if you have a car from car maker 1, and then try to navigate to an address on a dirt road, it will either tell you "unable" (true Level 4 operating within it's ODD), or it will revert to Level 3 mode and let you know that you are going to actually have a licensed driver in the driver seat ready to take over when you run out of tarmac.

Thanks for the response. I would suggest that maybe the ODD of L5 varies by country. Remember that J3016 does say that the ODD can be limited by business or legal constraints. For example, you can have L5 for the US only or Europe only or Australia only. Certainly, in a place like Australia where the typical human driver might drive on dirt roads a lot, it would make sense for the L5 ODD to include dirt roads. There are places like India where all the roads are dirt roads. So since the SAE defines L5 ODD based on where a typical human drives, it would makes sense if the L5 ODD were different by countries. Forgive me if I am being too US centric in my world view.

I believe your driveway would be included in the L5 ODD. But I don't know if your garage would need to be. The L5 car could park in your driveway. Would it really drop down to L4 if it parked in your driveway instead of parking in your garage? That seems silly to me.

 

[Kablooie]

Thanks for the response. I would suggest that maybe the ODD of L5 varies by country. Remember that J3016 does say that the ODD can be limited by business or legal constraints. For example, you can have L5 for the US only or Europe only or Australia only. Certainly, in a place like Australia where the typical human driver might drive on dirt roads a lot, it would make sense for the L5 ODD to include dirt roads. There are places like India where all the roads are dirt roads. So since the SAE defines L5 ODD based on where a typical human drives, it would makes sense if the L5 ODD were different by countries. Forgive me if I am being too US centric in my world view.

I believe your driveway would be included in the L5 ODD. But I don't know if your garage would need to be. The L5 car could park in your driveway. Would it really drop down to L4 if it parked in your driveway instead of parking in your garage? That seems silly to me.

Tesla will have to get millions of videos from each country they want to introduce FSD to. The system will have to be retrained with all the various road regulations, signage and driving conditions. If lots of teslas drive on dirt roads in Oz, it will probably be trained with that data so, in time, FSD should be able to do the same.

 

[Max Spaghetti]

Tesla will have to get millions of videos from each country they want to introduce FSD to. The system will have to be retrained with all the various road regulations, signage and driving conditions. If lots of teslas drive on dirt roads in Oz, it will probably be trained with that data so, in time, FSD should be able to do the same.

Yes, they've had people employed to drive vehicles around here since about last August allegedly training/testing v12 - likewise in other countries.

I don't suspect many of them will have been driving on dirt roads though!

The dirt road comment was more directed at the definition of Level 5 if that is the ultimate goal.

V12 is a Level 2 ADAS so I doubt they would be looking at too many edge cases at this point in time.

---

I was reflecting further on the difference between Level 3 and 4. What they have in common is a limited ODD. Where they differ is the requirement to (a) have a licensed driver in the driver seat; and (b) actually have physical controls in the vehicle.

A robotaxi will need to be at minimum Level 4, because they can't expect the paying passenger to get into the driver seat and takeover if the ODD is breached (or needs to be to get to destination).

But a private vehicle can have exactly the same ODD as the Level 4 vehicle above, but be sold as Level 3. It is then multipurpose - it can robotaxi within the ODD (e.g. take the kids to school, or bring dad home after 1 too many drinks, or drive grand-dad around since he lost his eyesight and driver's licence). It can also be driven outside the ODD provided a licensed driver is available, so can take those dirt roads to the campground on the weekend.

Unless grand-dad lives on a dirt road, this would be a very useful vehicle, and an example of an answer to the question "do we really need Level 5?"

 

[diplomat33]

Waymo's co-CEO, Dolgov was asked in a recent interview about a roadmap to L5 or whether L4 is enough. He basically gave the same answer I gave that L5 is not needed and that it is just a matter of expanding L4 until it is close enough to L5.

Here is his answer:

Yeah, honestly I don't love the level 5 tag. It's like you can drive everywhere in all conditions. Like, humans are not capable of that, right? There are some conditions where you won't drive, right? So, I guess, I think the more practical question is, like, what is the expansion of the L4 capabilities? And clearly what we have today is L4 and it's good enough to cover, say, San Francisco, New York, LA, Austin, right? And go internationally. And then it's just going to expand, expand, expand. And at some point, I think it's going to become indistinguishable from level five. And you know, today we operate on low speed roads, high speed roads, fog, rain, dust, some hail, snow is not quite there yet, so that's going to be one of the expansions.

 

[enemji]

Waymo's co-CEO, Dolgov was asked in a recent interview about a roadmap to L5 or whether L4 is enough. He basically gave the same answer I gave that L5 is not needed and that it is just a matter of expanding L4 until it is close enough to L5.

Here is his answer:

So L4E , and then L4EE and L4+ are all coming, possibly tending to L5 but never reaching L5.

 

[diplomat33]

So L4E , and then L4EE and L4+ are all coming

Technically, the SAE does not like adding letters to the levels. It is a big no-no in the J3016. It is just L4, not L4+ or L4E.

You basically just need two things to define your autonomous driving system: L4 + ODD. You need to know the system is L4 to know that it can drive without human supervision and then you need to know in what ODD it can drive without human supervision. I think ODD is what consumers will care about the most because it will tell them how useful the L4 is. Maybe companies will create some nomenclature to include ODD, like L4-H means L4 on highways, L4-C means L4 in cities, L4-R means L4 on rural roads etc... But basically, what will matter will be the ODD.

 

[enemji]

Technically, the SAE does not like adding letters to the levels. It is a big no-no in the J3016. It is just L4, not L4+ or L4E.

Understandable but in a country where terrorism levels are expressed in color shades, I wouldn’t be surprised

 

[diplomat33]

Understandable but in a country where terrorism levels are expressed in color shades, I wouldn’t be surprised

In their taxonomy, Mobileye defines 6 ODDs:

I imagine you could use this nomenclature to define various L4 systems. For example, L4-ODD3 would be a L4 system that works from on ramp to off ramp on highways.

 

[ThomasD]

Level 4 may still have to handle Severe Weather unless these vehicles are only used very close to their Depot and can be recalled in just a few minutes.

 

[bradtem]

People don't get that the levels aren't a real thing. I mean they're a real document that was created by NHTSA around 2012 before anybody had deployed anything, then taken over by SAE, which is engineers from the legacy auto industry. They weren't created by the leading teams working on self-driving. So they are just a taxonomy made by people who know cars but wanted to define them in terms of the role of the human driver. The people actually working on the tech don't use the levels document to define what they do or what should be.

So don't fuss about them. Ideally, don't even use them. The later levels documents introduced something that matters much more, what they called the ODD. That's what matters. Where a car can drive without a human. It's not that it's not of interest how humans hand over and take back control in the early vehicles which need that sort of thing, it's just that's a temporary transitional function.