-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Working on Driver Monitoring System
- Thread starter DDotJ
- Start date
Dolemite
is my name
Yeah I think it’s gonna be time to stop buying new cars soon.
and this is good why?
Remember if people cannot trick they system they will just turn off ADAS when they need to get distracted, is this what you want?
MarcG
Active Member
Maybe it's good for Tesla's PR department "hey look there are a lot fewer accidents when AP is on"
Oh wait, they don't have that anymore..
Maybe I am in the minority, but I usually turn the ADAS *on* when I need to get distracted...
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Taking a purely holistic view, you are completely correct: it should not be possible with an L2 system, otherwise why bother with any form of driver monitoring.
But there is an argument for giving the driver a grace period. Should I be allowed enough time to hand something to a passenger in the back seat, or should I try to do that without lane keeping active, assuming nowhere to pull over and the passenger is having a complete toddler meltdown?
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Sure. There is detection and there is policy after detecting inattention. In general the current system allows brief inattention, but is that because of its current limits?
Assume you do have a system that detects instantly most sources of distraction. Do you act right away? How long a grace period, compared to the current grace period?
As was suggested earlier here, does it make sense to disable AP or put people in AP jail? Would it make more sense to go into a state of heightened vigilance, with lowered thresholds for all sorts of spurious or low confidence detections, with blaring alarms at the least provocation? That would allow continued use of the automated system with all of the benefits, but in a more annoying way that perhaps mitigates some of the dangers of using an incapable system in such a situation. (Of course, this will still create an incentive for people to avoid detection by the system, but perhaps less than AP jail.)
What is "safe enough" depends on the capabilities of the system of course. But using the ADAS, as you point out, in the cases of distraction or when you "must" take care of something, is likely safer than not. Prevents veering out of a lane if you go to pick something up you dropped, etc., with a much higher chance of preventing a serious incident, and only a small increased risk of encountering a situation outside the capability of the system.
However, I'd note that the gore point and the tractor-trailer underrun fatalities that have occurred with the ADAS system engaged have only taken a few seconds of inattention. So those things will still happen with such a proposed system. The questions are: 1) Do the benefits outweigh the risks? 2) Can the mode of operation of the ADAS be altered to provide much higher false positive rates in the case of inattention, and try to "cover" some of these cases that are on the edge of the capabilities of the system? 3) Maybe they could strengthen the lane keeping or other features (with an appropriate alarm) in the case of inattention.
Of course, any alarms, etc., would have to be done carefully - if the detection system has any false positives that would be super annoying.
It'll be interesting to see how the balance is struck. Increased capabilities for detection of inattention may force companies to think about these tradeoffs. Note that in the EU they're going to require monitoring even WITHOUT ADAS. I'm not sure what sort of "penalty" (if any) there will be for those systems.
This would be a great improvement. I have had FSD Beta for over a year. For the first year no strikes. In the last month two strikes with one left. In both cases I was attentive to the road ahead. In both cases I saw no white flashing light and did not hear anything until the load red signal came on disconnecting my FSD. In the most recent case, I was stopping at a light. Any new system would be better than the guess work being used by Tesla now.
To be honest, I would be pissed off if the car started disabling features due to driver monitoring.
We also have a Subaru and it’s become a nanny mobile. You can’t do anything while the car is moving, even reply to text messages using voice. Hell, the car won’t even read the texts messages while the car is moving.
I’ve little interest in driver monitoring. Hell, I have the interior camera covered with a shutter at the moment.
We also have a Subaru and it’s become a nanny mobile. You can’t do anything while the car is moving, even reply to text messages using voice. Hell, the car won’t even read the texts messages while the car is moving.
I’ve little interest in driver monitoring. Hell, I have the interior camera covered with a shutter at the moment.
sleepydoc
Well-Known Member
We have a Subaru and have no problems replying to text messages. Are you using CarPlay?
One thing I find curious in these discussions is the assumption that driver attention checks are mostly necessary when an ADAS system is engaged. After all, shouldn't you be paying at least as much attention (arguably more) when driving manually? Sure, you can argue that drivers are more likely to lapse in attention when an ADAS is engaged, but so what? Many (most?) accidents are caused by driver inattention.
I'm bracing myself for the politicians who lock onto this idea and the mandating of always-on driver attention systems legislation.
CyberGus
Not Just a Member
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I think driver monitoring systems are required in the EU.One thing I find curious in these discussions is the assumption that driver attention checks are mostly necessary when an ADAS system is engaged. After all, shouldn't you be paying at least as much attention (arguably more) when driving manually? Sure, you can argue that drivers are more likely to lapse in attention when an ADAS is engaged, but so what? Many (most?) accidents are caused by driver inattention.
I'm bracing myself for the politicians who lock onto this idea and the mandating of always-on driver attention systems legislation.
EU to require speed limiters, driver monitors in new cars from 2022
Speed limiters are promised to reduce road deaths by 20 percent.
www.cnet.com
It seems like it depends on the system. It looks to me like FSD Beta requires more attention but Autopilot requires less to achieve the same level of safety as manual driving. Of course how much people actually pay attention is a function of the system.
sleepydoc
Well-Known Member
It depends on where you're driving but FSD beta definitely needs more attention than AP. For highway driving, I've found AP to be close to perfect, but the job is orders of magnitude easier. FSD is dealing with city roads, county roads, stoplights, yields, merging traffic, turns, lane changes, turn lanes, etc.
It's just like I told my kids when they were learning to drive - highway driving is the easiest and a parking lot is the hardest!
In general these systems are of dubious value imho as they dont actually measure attention at all (which is a purely mental function) they measure physical posture and attempt to deduce attention from those measurements. I'm quite sure someone blankly staring into space straight ahead would be passed as "ok" by such as system whereas someone who is attentive but glancing around would be dinged.I think driver monitoring systems are required in the EU.
EU to require speed limiters, driver monitors in new cars from 2022
Speed limiters are promised to reduce road deaths by 20 percent.
It seems like it depends on the system. It looks to me like FSD Beta requires more attention but Autopilot requires less to achieve the same level of safety as manual driving. Of course how much people actually pay attention is a function of the system.
sleepydoc
Well-Known Member
ask any 7th grade teacher - staring ahead is not synonymous with attention!
I've definitely gotten nagged when I was looking around and glancing attention. I've also had several occasions when I was looking ahead, noticed an alert only to look down and be told 'pay attention to the road!'
Because it's a bottomless pit. If you really want to reduce accidents to zero that's easy .. just ban ALL driving. Basically any system that tries to force drivers to be "better" drivers is going to fail because the very drivers that ARE bad are going to game the system somehow, leaving the rest of us to pay the tax of the system with no real advantage to anyone.
Remember the Davey Safety Lamp? Invented to save lives in coal mines by preventing explosions from naked flames (in the 19th century). It caused MORE deaths because all that happened was the mine owners figured they could now send miners into even MORE dangerous call seams thanks to the lamp!
It is possible to look for eye and head movements to indicate some engagement with the road. And, at least the system knows that the driver is not interacting with a cell phone.
Similar threads
- Poll
