When do you think the Tesla Full Self Driving software will reach Level 5 autonomy?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Full Self Driving Level 5 Autonomy
- Thread starter hypersonic
- Start date
By the end of 2021. Extremely confident. There are no major problems to be solved. Just edge cases.
Tam
Well-Known Member
I used to be optimistic about the 10/2016 announcement but since then, I realize I am in the fog in regard to Tesla hardware and software.
Level 5 was just a goal at that time. As time goes on, Tesla would adjust hardware and software toward that goal. We don't know what the software and hardware are like until it's time to change out.
It's just like when, in 2017, Elon Musk announced will circle the moon by 2018 with 2 private civilians launched by the new Falcon Heavy Rocket. As time goes on, the hardware is no longer the "new" Falcon Heavy Rocket and now it's 2021 and the trip hasn't happened just yet.
The goal stays the same but the future hardware and software not known at the beginning keep changing. It's a moving target!
DanCar
Active Member
There are different definitions of what is level 5. One definition is that it can do everything a human can, including receiving verbal commands from a police officer. That isn't going to happen this decade. Level 3 and 4 either of which will be awesome will happen this decade. Level 3 perhaps in a couple years, we had a poll about that not long ago. Level 4 I'm thinking 2025 is a good estimate.
The other definition of level 5 is what is intended by the manufacturer. That is what is defined by the SAE standard. By that definition level 5 has been reached already, since Elon has stated so.
The other definition of level 5 is what is intended by the manufacturer. That is what is defined by the SAE standard. By that definition level 5 has been reached already, since Elon has stated so.
pilotSteve
Active Member
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
This is not accurate. There are not different definitions of L5. The SAE only has 1 definition of L5:
"The sustained and unconditional (i.e., not ODD-specific) performance by an ADS of the entire DDT and DDT fallback without any expectation that a user will respond to a request to intervene. "
The SAE also provides a nice example of L5:
"A vehicle with an ADS that, once programmed with a destination, is capable of operating the vehicle through out complete trips on public roadways, regardless of the starting and end points or intervening road, traffic, and weather conditions."
That's L5. There is no other definition.
What you are referring to is this sentence from the SAE:
"Levels are assigned, rather than measured, and reflect the design intent for the driving automation system feature as defined by its manufacturer."
The SAE explains what they mean:
"As a practical matter, it is not possible to describe or specify a complete test or set of tests which can be applied to a given ADS feature to conclusively identify or verify its level of driving automation. The level assignment rather expresses the design intention for the feature and as such tells potential users or other interested parties that the feature can be expected to function such that the roles of the user versus the driving automation system while the feature is engaged are consistent with the assigned level, as defined in this document. The level assignment is typically based on the manufacturer’s knowledge of the feature’s/system’s design, development, and testing, which inform the level assignment."
I think that passage is clear that the manufacturer is not inventing their own definition. Quite the contrary! They are merely assigning a level based on how their autonomous driving system matches up with the SAE definition. Note the bold part: the manufacturer assigns a level as a way of communicating what the system is capable of. So by saying "my system is L4 or my system is L5", the manufacturer is telling the public what they can expect from the system." based on the SAE definitions, not based on new definitions.
Last edited:
powertoold
Active Member
Are there more details? Like, should the car be able to understand verbal instructions from the police?
Can we please stop arguing about hypotheticals? No-one has the slightest idea when (if ever) we will have true L5 autonomy. Every possibility has been argued in various threads, and guess what? No-one knows.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
From the definition posted there are no details to be had. In fact it explicitly says that there are no set of tests possible to determine what level a car is. If the system doesn't set any limits on what roads/conditions it can be activated (within what human is expected to do and satisfies the other requirements of L4 also), it's L5.
Key difference in SAE document
Level 4: “Permits engagement only within its ODD”
Level 5: “Permits engagement of the ADS under all driver-manageable on-road conditions”
In the situation you lay out, as long as the car has a safe fallback, it still qualifies as L4/L5.
powertoold
Active Member
Level 5 is vague to me. Let's say the weather forecast recommends people to avoid driving (snow storm or whatnot). If the ODD limits car operation in these situations, would it still be level 5?
3 months maybe. 6 months definitely for sure.
Still waiting for my 2018 model 3 to increase in value because I can send it out as a robot taxi.
Still waiting for that FSD coast to coast demo without intervention.
Seriously it will never happen.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
From the SAE definition, if the limitation is the same as what is expected of a human (human not expected to drive in that severe of weather). However if the car refuses to engage even detecting a tiny bit of snow (conditions that humans would be expected to easily be able to drive) it won't be L5.
powertoold
Active Member
I see. Some people interpret level 5 as "as good as the best human."
I'd like to interpret level 5 as "as good as the average human," where the average human is ok at snow, reliable in good weather conditions, etc.
Looking at this discussion about the difficulty of a car achieving self driving makes me wonder how 16 year olds learn to drive so easily. FSD seems to be able to operate the car ok. What it lacks is the ability to make judgments, the experience that people learn from unrelated activities. The a i people may have to have a lot more input into the solution.
powertoold
Active Member
In the USA, you can get a normal driver's license without speaking or understanding English, so understanding / responding to an officer's instructions shouldn't be a requirement for level 5.
Also, if the weather forecast recommends people to avoid driving (snow storm, too much snow, hurricaine, etc.), I wouldn't expect a level 5 car to drive either.
With these in mind, I'd say Tesla will achieve level 5 with average human level reliability by the end of this year, for sure.
Also, if the weather forecast recommends people to avoid driving (snow storm, too much snow, hurricaine, etc.), I wouldn't expect a level 5 car to drive either.
With these in mind, I'd say Tesla will achieve level 5 with average human level reliability by the end of this year, for sure.
diplomat33
Average guy who loves autonomous vehicles
The SAE document does not go into that kind of detail. It does say L5 must be able to do the entire DDT and DDT fall-back with no design limitations on the ODD. It is up to the manufacturer to design their autonomous car to best achieve that definition.
In theory, you could probably have a L5 car that does not understand verbal instructions from the police. It could understand hand gestures instead. Or the L5 could just pull over to the side if it does not understand the police orders. I do think that understanding verbal instructions would definitely make the L5 better.
If you are interested, here is what the SAE says about that:
"“Unconditional/not ODD-specific” means that the ADS can operate the vehicle under all driver-manageable road conditions within its region of the world. This means, for example, that there are no design-based weather, time-of-day, or geographical restrictions on where and when the ADS can operate the vehicle. However, there may be conditions not manageable by a driver in which the ADS would also be unable to complete a given trip (e.g., white-out snow storm, flooded roads, glare ice, etc.) until or unless the adverse conditions clear. At the onset of such unmanageable conditions the ADS would perform the DDT fallback to achieve a minimal risk condition (e.g., by pulling over to the side of the road and waiting for the conditions to change)."
Put simply, L5 cannot have any design restrictions. So if the manufacturer puts a restriction on the car like "it is not allowed to drive in rain/snow", "it is not allowed to drive at night" or "it is not allowed to drive outside this geofenced area" then it is not L5. It is L4. But the SAE does not expect L5 to drive in conditions that are considered dangerous or impossible for humans to drive in.
Similar to human drivers, L5 cars need to be able to make a determination whether it is safe to drive or not. L5 has to be able to pull over on its own when it determines it is not safe to continue. How much snow or how much rain before the car decides to pull over is up to the manufacturer and how they designed their system.
So, L5 might not be good in all rain or snow conditions but as long as the car is designed to drive in rain and snow and can pull over if necessary, then it is L5.
We need to be careful. The SAE levels do not say anything about how good or safe the autonomous car needs to be. Just like there are good human drivers and bad human drivers, some L5 cars may be better or safer than other L5 systems. And human drivers are not homogeneous. The average driver in Boston is probably not the same as the average driver in LA or France or Russia. So requiring that L5 be as good as the average human driver is tricky.
L5 is not about being good or average compared to humans. L5 is simply about the car being able to drive without human intervention and without any arbitrary restrictions on the ODD.
Similar threads
- Poll
