Tesla Full Self Driving Level 5 Autonomy

[DanCar]

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.

I wouldn't underestimate nature's power from billions of years of evolution. Our DNA encodes 5 billion pieces of information and then as we grow information in our brain increases into trillions. Nature won't easily be outdone by a few years of machine learning intelligence.

 

[mikes_fsd]

I wouldn't underestimate nature's power from billions of years of evolution. Our DNA encodes 5 billion pieces of information and then as we grow information in our brain increases into trillions. Nature won't easily be outdone by a few years of machine learning intelligence.

You do not understand evolution nor do you understand machine learning at scale.

 

[Needsdecaf]

By the end of 2021. Extremely confident. There are no major problems to be solved. Just edge cases.

You do realize what full Level 5 entails, correct?

 

[Needsdecaf]

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.

Woah man. There are no different definitions of Level 5. Level 5 is the SAE standard. That's it. That's the only one. Saying "recieving verbal commands from a police officer" has nothing to do whatsoever with the definition of level 5. Level 5 is most definitely NOT "doing everything a human can".

 

[Needsdecaf]

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?

It's not vague. The reason it sounds vague to you is that the descriptions are extremely concrete, extremely specific, and extremely dependent on definitions. I mean no disrespect by this. I'm an engineer, I downloaded the SAE document on Autonomous Classification, and it still took several detailed hours of reading to really wrap my head around it.

To answer your question, no. It would be Level 4. This is really the difference between Level 4 and Level 5. Level 5 does not have restrictions on the ODD. Be they weather, traffic, location, time of day, speed, etc. If the vehicle is not designed to operate the ODD based on any of these conditions, it is Level 4. Not Level 5.

Diplomat33 has definitely read the SAE doc and understands it. It's not really an easy thing to interpret quickly. But the biggest takeaway I can give in a general sense is that there's no room for interpretation, it's all black and white. VERY simplified/ general ways of looking at it PER the SAE's definitions.

The DDT is the Dynamic Driving Task. Basically the act of driving including signaling, turning, starting, stopping, etc.

What's the ODD (Operational Design Domain). Basically, what are the operational areas in which the vehicle can perform the DDT? Are there geographical locations, weather conditions, speed limitations, lighting limitations, type of road limitations, etc.

OEDR - Object and Event Detection and Response. Basically - car sees obstacle / issue. Can it handle 100% of those issues on it's own? If it does, it's level 3 or above. Basically, the car is never going to expect a human driver to have to react to an issue on the road. No "hey there's a deer, I can't figure out what to do ahhhhh, here human take over!".

If the car EVER expects the human in the driver's seat to take over for any OEDR reason, then it's still Level 2.

How you get from level 2 to level 3 is that the car will always be able to handle the OEDR issues. But it's not capable of handling issues to do with the ODD or a system failure. So, if a car is completely autonomous in a certain geocached area, and it's about to leave the area, the human is responsible for taking over. That's called DDT Fallback. The human is responsible for taking over and completing the DDT.

To go from Level 3 to Level 4, the DDT fallback must now pass from a human to the machine. The machine must be completely capable of getting the vehicle to a safe place in the event of the things outlined above. I.E. exiting a geofenced area, entering a different roadway system, changes in lighting or weather, Autonomous system failure, etc. If the vehicle is expected to navigate it's way to a safe place in the event of one of those occuring, then it's a Level 4.

Note, DDT fallback does NOT mean the vehicle completes the trip under any circumstances. It merely means that the vehicle is capable of getting to it's safe space. The SAE defines this as a "Minimal Risk Condition".

So if a vehicle can do this, it's either Level 4 or Level 5.

If a vehicle has only specific ODD's in which it's capable of being the DDT fallback, then it's a Level 4.

If the vehicle is capable of operating in unilmited ODD's, then it's Level 5.

Remember, this doesn't mean it 'gets you home'. You could still have a Level 5 and end up stuck on the side of the road because the system has gone into DDT fallback.

 

[Needsdecaf]

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.

There are no interpretations of Level 5. It either is or it isn't.

The SAE treats it like biological taxonomy. It either is a mammal or it isn't. It's not "mostly like a Mammal, but I'll call it that, even though it is cold blooded".

Your interpretation above using phrases like "as good as" or "reliable" does not have anything to do with the SAE's definitions of the different levels.

 

[powertoold]

To answer your question, no. It would be Level 4. This is really the difference between Level 4 and Level 5. Level 5 does not have restrictions on the ODD. Be they weather, traffic, location, time of day, speed, etc. If the vehicle is not designed to operate the ODD based on any of these conditions, it is Level 4. Not Level 5.

Would you show your source for this?

Are you saying that level 5 should have no ODD whatsoever: hurricaine, snow storm, armageddon?

It seems your statement contradicts diplomat's understanding above: "But the SAE does not expect L5 to drive in conditions that are considered dangerous or impossible for humans to drive in."

 

[DanCar]

Woah man. There are no different definitions of Level 5. Level 5 is the SAE standard. That's it. That's the only one. Saying "recieving verbal commands from a police officer" has nothing to do whatsoever with the definition of level 5. Level 5 is most definitely NOT "doing everything a human can".

Woah man. Ask the original poster what he meant. He did not meant the "manufacturer intent" of SAE level 5. Since he is asking the question you have to understand it based on what he means and thus a different definition. You obviously haven't read the definition. The SAE level 5 says can reasonably drive where a human can. Thus if can't do what a human can driving wise, then it is not level 5.

 

[powertoold]

The SAE level 5 says can reasonably drive where a human can. Thus if can't do what a human can driving wise, then it is not level 5.

SAE needs to tell us what it means by "a human." Is it the best of any human, or the "worst" human capable of holding a driver's license? Or does it have nothing to do with a human at all, but rather whether or not the MFG wants to hold responsibility in case of accident?

Without these details, the definition sucks (has been my opinion for a while now). To me, the SAE definitions don't hold up to engineering rigor.

 

[Matias]

When do you think the Tesla Full Self Driving software will reach Level 5 autonomy?

Not in a foreseeable future in all climates where Tesla is sold. Of course it requires completely new hardware, but even after that I don’t think that Tesla will be level 5 in e.g. heavy snowfall.

Level 5 in temperate climate maybe by 2030 with better hardware.

With current hardware never (e.g. reversing to a cross traffic road is not possible as there is no visibility to sides if B pillar camera is blocked).

 

[powertoold]

Level 5 in temperate climate maybe by 2030.

If it's limited by climate, then it's not level 5.

 

[Matias]

If it's limited by climate, then it's not level 5.

Ok. Then I say “not in a foreseeable future” as I don’t think Tesla is enough interested about snow storm fsd.

 

[Matias]

Tuesday.

This week or next week?

 

[powertoold]

Ok. Then I say “not in a foreseeable future” as I don’t think Tesla is enough interested about snow storm fsd.

It's possible that no car will ever achieve level 5, depending on how you choose to interpret the definition.

For example, let's say Tesla robotaxi works in all the countries it sells cars. People can say it's not level 5 because the service doesn't work everywhere, like North Korea as well.

 

[Matias]

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.

But aren’t drivers by law required to follow police officers traffic instructions?

 

[Matias]

It's possible that no car will ever achieve level 5, depending on how you choose to interpret the definition.

For example, let's say Tesla robotaxi works in all the countries it sells cars. People can say it's not level 5 because the service doesn't work everywhere, like North Korea as well.

Well I’m ready to say it is level 5, if it is level 5 in all the countries where car is officially sold.

 

[powertoold]

But aren’t drivers by law required to follow police officers traffic instructions?

Apparently not verbally because as I said, you don't need to speak or understand English to hold a driver's license in USA.

Well I’m ready to say it is level 5, if it is level 5 in all the countries where car is officially sold.

Therein lies the problem involving all level 5 discussions. Depends on how you interpret it.

 

[Needsdecaf]

Would you show your source for this?

Are you saying that level 5 should have no ODD whatsoever: hurricaine, snow storm, armageddon?

It seems your statement contradicts diplomat's understanding above: "But the SAE does not expect L5 to drive in conditions that are considered dangerous or impossible for humans to drive in."

My source for this is the SAE Paper entitled "J3016, Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice, Taxonomy and Definition for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles". I cannot link it directly, as you have to subscribe to the website to download it. You can do that for free by providing your contact info, which I did, and downloaded it.

J3016: Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems - SAE International

To answer your question, the SAE defines level 5 as having an Unlimited ODD. That does NOT mean that it can operate 100% of the time or complete every DDE. It simply means that the ODD is unlimited, and that the DDT fallback is the system.

Here is what the paper says (yes, I had to type this out as I can't cut / paste from the PDF). It addresses your weather conditions question:

" Level or Category 5 - Full Driving Automation

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

Note 1: "Unconditional/not ODD-specific" means that the ADS can operate the vehicle under all driver-managable road conditions within it's 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)."

PHEW!!!

Woah man. Ask the original poster what he meant. He did not meant the "manufacturer intent" of SAE level 5. Since he is asking the question you have to understand it based on what he means and thus a different definition. You obviously haven't read the definition. The SAE level 5 says can reasonably drive where a human can. Thus if can't do what a human can driving wise, then it is not level 5.

I have 100% read the definition. I have downloaded the paper and read all 35 pages. I'm not going by some table posted somewhere. I literally read all the definitions, all the flowcharts, and all the tables, etc.

There is no "manufacturer intent" of SAE level 5. There are no different definitions. .

You can downvote my responses all you want. Doesn't mean that I'm wrong. I'm literally quoting the SAE paper. There is no subjectiveness to how the levels are classified. It literally says:

"By itself, J3016 imposes no requirements, no confers or implies any judgement in terms of system performance. Therefore while it may be appropriate to state, for example, that a given ADS feature doe not meet the definition of level 4 because it occasionally relies on a remote fallback-ready user to performan the fallback (and is therefore a level 3 feature), it is not appropriate to conclude that the feature in question is therefore 'non-compliant' or 'unsafe'"

Your statement of:

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.

is simply incorrect. It doesn't matter what the manufacturer intends. All that matters is for the system to be capable of doing the items that are required to meet the definition of Level 5, as defined by the SAE. Not the manufacturer.

SAE needs to tell us what it means by "a human." Is it the best of any human, or the "worst" human capable of holding a driver's license? Or does it have nothing to do with a human at all, but rather whether or not the MFG wants to hold responsibility in case of accident?

Without these details, the definition sucks (has been my opinion for a while now). To me, the SAE definitions don't hold up to engineering rigor.

The definitions that are thrown around are lacking context. When you read the whole paper, it makes more sense. And it only makes sense after reading it thoroughly. I can completely understand why if you're only reading chart, or summaries, that it doesn't make sense. It barely makes sense when you read the whole thing!

The SAE definition doesn't get into "best" or "worst" or anything like that.

"3.29 [HUMAN] USER

A general term referencing the human role in driving automation

Note 1: The following 4 terms (1 - driver, 2 - passenger, 3 - DDT fallback-ready user, and 4 - driverless operation dispatcher) describe categories of (human) users.

Note 2: These human categories define roles that do not overlap and may be performed in varying sequences during a given trip."

and specifically:

"3.29.1 [HUMAN] Driver

A User who performs part or all of the DDT and/or DDT fallback for a particular vehicle".


Note that it does not get into at all how well you do these tasks whatsoever. This does not change throughout the paper.

 

[Needsdecaf]

Well I’m ready to say it is level 5, if it is level 5 in all the countries where car is officially sold.

Apparently not verbally because as I said, you don't need to speak or understand English to hold a driver's license in USA.



Therein lies the problem involving all level 5 discussions. Depends on how you interpret it.

Again, if you read the whole document, there's not a lot of interpretation. SAE does address this specific scenario. Short answer, if it's capable of Level 5 wherever it's leagally able to, it's Level 5.

"8.8 Practical Considerations Regarding Level 5

There are technical and practical considerations that mitigate the literal meaning of the stipulation that a level 5 ADS must be capable of 'operating the vehicle on-road anywhere that a typically skilled human driver can reasonably operate a conventional vehicle', which might otherwise be impossible to achieve. For example, an ADS-equipped vehicle that is capable of operating a vehicle on all roads throughout the US, but, for legal or business reasons, cannot operate the vehicle across the border in Canada or Mexico can still be considered level 5, even if geo-fenced to operate only within the US. The rationale for this exception is that the geo-fenced limiation is not due to limitations on the technological capability of the ADS, but rather is due to legal or business constraints, such as legal restrictions in Canada and Mexico/Central America that prohibit level 5 depoloyement, or the inability to make the business case for expansion to those markets"

 

[powertoold]

Again, if you read the whole document, there's not a lot of interpretation.

Cool, I found the document based on your text:

surface vehicle recommended practice - SAE Mobilussaemobilus.sae.org › download

I'll look for the hurricaine / snow storm ODD limitations.