Connect with us

News

Drivers using ‘cooperative steering’ more likely to stay engaged: IIHS

Credit: Tesla Tutorials/YouTube

Published

on

A new study from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has highlighted the potential benefits to “cooperative steering” automated driving systems in keeping drivers engaged.

The study found that the likelihood a driver will remain engaged when driving with partially automated systems is higher when using “cooperative steering,” in which manual movements to the steering wheel don’t disengage the software, according to the study results shared in a press release on Tuesday. Inversely, those using partially automated systems that turn off when drivers use the steering wheel were less likely to take an active role.

“These results suggest that small differences in system design can nudge drivers toward safer habits,” said David Harkey, IIHS President.

This recent study looked at survey responses from 1,260 owners of vehicles from Ford, General Motors (GM), Nissan/Infiniti, and Tesla, who regularly use their partially automated driving systems.

Advertisement

Drivers who are used to partial automation that switches off when they try to share control over the steering were found to be less willing to steer or put their hands on the wheel in circumstances that required steering adjustments, while systems with some degree of manual steering were more likely to help drivers remain engaged with the road and take an active role when road scenarios demanded it.

Those with cooperative systems were ultimately 36 percent more likely than the others to say they would steer to one side of the travel lane when needed.

Drivers with vehicle systems that did offer shared control were 40 to 48 percent less likely than the others to say they would keep their hands off the wheel in situations that would make most drivers nervous, while two other recent IIHS studies showed that even those warned to remain engaged did not often do so.

Systems that remain on when drivers adjust steering include Ford’s BlueCruise system and Nissan/Infiniti’s ProPILOT Assist system, while both GM’s Super Cruise and Tesla’s Autopilot disengaged from lane-centering upon receiving driver steering inputs. While both the systems from Tesla and Nissan required drivers to keep their hands on the steering wheel, Tesla’s upgraded Supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) allows some hands-free driving, and so do the aforementioned Ford and GM systems.

Advertisement

“Those are sizable differences,” said Alexandra Mueller, IIHS Research Scientist and Lead Author of the study. “Although there could be many reasons, one plausible explanation is that systems that switch themselves off whenever the driver steers may make drivers less likely to want to intervene, as it’s a pain to reactivate the system again and again.”

“These findings suggest that cooperative steering may have an implicit influence on how willing drivers are to take action when the situation calls for it, regardless of how they think their system is designed,” Mueller added.

You can see the full study results from the IIHS here.

RELATED: Tesla highlights FSSD safety in edge case test videos

Advertisement

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving Supervised and Cybercab unveil

The news comes weeks after Tesla unveiled its Cybercab robotaxi, which is built without a steering wheel, an accelerator, or brake pedals. It also comes in response to the company’s longtime bet on completely autonomous driving, first through the deployment of its FSD Supervised system, which is eventually expected to unlock an unsupervised version that buyers can use in their own vehicles.

While Tesla’s bet on full autonomy will likely come to fruition in future years, discussions about driver engagement have been ongoing, especially as those using Supervised FSD and other partially automated driving systems have used them in unintended ways that weren’t approved by the manufacturers.

At least for now, driver attention remains an important part of the path to full autonomy, until systems become safe enough to be trusted without supervision. Until then, efforts to keep drivers engaged may prove fruitful, and Tesla and others have taken steps to monitor drivers more closely when they use these systems, in order to ensure full engagement and readiness to regain control of the vehicle when needed.

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement

IIHS tested Tesla Autopilot safeguards: Here’s what they found

Zach is a renewable energy reporter who has been covering electric vehicles since 2020. He grew up in Fremont, California, and he currently lives in Colorado. His work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, KRON4 San Francisco, FOX31 Denver, InsideEVs, CleanTechnica, and many other publications. When he isn't covering Tesla or other EV companies, you can find him writing and performing music, drinking a good cup of coffee, or hanging out with his cats, Banks and Freddie. Reach out at zach@teslarati.com, find him on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Tesla engineers deflected calls from this tech giant’s now-defunct EV project

Published

on

Image Created by Grok

Tesla engineers deflected calls from Apple on a daily basis while the tech giant was developing its now-defunct electric vehicle program, which was known as “Project Titan.”

Back in 2022 and 2023, Apple was developing an EV in a top-secret internal fashion, hoping to launch it by 2028 with a fully autonomous driving suite.

However, Apple bailed on the project in early 2024, as Project Titan abandoned the project in an email to over 2,000 employees. The company had backtracked its expectations for the vehicle on several occasions, initially hoping to launch it with no human driving controls and only with an autonomous driving suite.

Apple canceling its EV has drawn a wide array of reactions across tech

It then planned for a 2028 launch with “limited autonomous driving.” But it seemed to be a bit of a concession at that point; Apple was not prepared to take on industry giants like Tesla.

Wedbush’s Dan Ives noted in a communication to investors that, “The writing was on the wall for Apple with a much different EV landscape forming that would have made this an uphill battle. Most of these Project Titan engineers are now all focused on AI at Apple, which is the right move.”

Apple did all it could to develop a competitive EV that would attract car buyers, including attempting to poach top talent from Tesla.

In a new podcast interview with Tesla CEO Elon Musk, it was revealed that Apple had been calling Tesla engineers nonstop during its development of the now-defunct project. Musk said the engineers “just unplugged their phones.”

Musk said in full:

“They were carpet bombing Tesla with recruiting calls. Engineers just unplugged their phones. Their opening offer without any interview would be double the compensation at Tesla.”

Interestingly, Apple had acquired some ex-Tesla employees for its project, like Senior Director of Engineering Dr. Michael Schwekutsch, who eventually left for Archer Aviation.

Tesla took no legal action against Apple for attempting to poach its employees, as it has with other companies. It came after EV rival Rivian in mid-2020, after stating an “alarming pattern” of poaching employees was noticed.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla to a $100T market cap? Elon Musk’s response may shock you

Published

on

tesla elon musk

There are a lot of Tesla bulls out there who have astronomical expectations for the company, especially as its arm of reach has gone well past automotive and energy and entered artificial intelligence and robotics.

However, some of the most bullish Tesla investors believe the company could become worth $100 trillion, and CEO Elon Musk does not believe that number is completely out of the question, even if it sounds almost ridiculous.

To put that number into perspective, the top ten most valuable companies in the world — NVIDIA, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon, TSMC, Meta, Saudi Aramco, Broadcom, and Tesla — are worth roughly $26 trillion.

Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI

Cathie Wood of ARK Invest believes the number is reasonable considering Tesla’s long-reaching industry ambitions:

“…in the world of AI, what do you have to have to win? You have to have proprietary data, and think about all the proprietary data he has, different kinds of proprietary data. Tesla, the language of the road; Neuralink, multiomics data; nobody else has that data. X, nobody else has that data either. I could see $100 trillion. I think it’s going to happen because of convergence. I think Tesla is the leading candidate [for $100 trillion] for the reason I just said.”

Musk said late last year that all of his companies seem to be “heading toward convergence,” and it’s started to come to fruition. Tesla invested in xAI, as revealed in its Q4 Earnings Shareholder Deck, and SpaceX recently acquired xAI, marking the first step in the potential for a massive umbrella of companies under Musk’s watch.

SpaceX officially acquires xAI, merging rockets with AI expertise

Now that it is happening, it seems Musk is even more enthusiastic about a massive valuation that would swell to nearly four-times the value of the top ten most valuable companies in the world currently, as he said on X, the idea of a $100 trillion valuation is “not impossible.”

Tesla is not just a car company. With its many projects, including the launch of Robotaxi, the progress of the Optimus robot, and its AI ambitions, it has the potential to continue gaining value at an accelerating rate.

Musk’s comments show his confidence in Tesla’s numerous projects, especially as some begin to mature and some head toward their initial stages.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Celebrating SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Tesla Roadster launch, seven years later (Op-Ed)

Seven years later, the question is no longer “What if this works?” It’s “How far does this go?”

Published

on

SpaceX's first Falcon Heavy launch also happened to be a strategic and successful test of Falcon upper stage coast capabilities. (SpaceX)

When Falcon Heavy lifted off in February 2018 with Elon Musk’s personal Tesla Roadster as its payload, SpaceX was at a much different place. So was Tesla. It was unclear whether Falcon Heavy was feasible at all, and Tesla was in the depths of Model 3 production hell.

At the time, Tesla’s market capitalization hovered around $55–60 billion, an amount critics argued was already grossly overvalued. SpaceX, on the other hand, was an aggressive private launch provider known for taking risks that traditional aerospace companies avoided.

The Roadster launch was bold by design. Falcon Heavy’s maiden mission carried no paying payload, no government satellite, just a car drifting past Earth with David Bowie playing in the background. To many, it looked like a stunt. For Elon Musk and the SpaceX team, it was a bold statement: there should be some things in the world that simply inspire people.

Inspire it did, and seven years later, SpaceX and Tesla’s results speak for themselves.

Advertisement
Credit: SpaceX

Today, Tesla is the world’s most valuable automaker, with a market capitalization of roughly $1.54 trillion. The Model Y has become the best-selling car in the world by volume for three consecutive years, a scenario that would have sounded insane in 2018. Tesla has also pushed autonomy to a point where its vehicles can navigate complex real-world environments using vision alone.

And then there is Optimus. What began as a literal man in a suit has evolved into a humanoid robot program that Musk now describes as potential Von Neumann machines: systems capable of building civilizations beyond Earth. Whether that vision takes decades or less, one thing is evident: Tesla is no longer just a car company. It is positioning itself at the intersection of AI, robotics, and manufacturing.

SpaceX’s trajectory has been just as dramatic.

The Falcon 9 has become the undisputed workhorse of the global launch industry, having completed more than 600 missions to date. Of those, SpaceX has successfully landed a Falcon booster more than 560 times. The Falcon 9 flies more often than all other active launch vehicles combined, routinely lifting off multiple times per week.

Falcon Heavy successfully clears the tower after its maiden launch, February 6, 2018. (Tom Cross)

Falcon 9 has ferried astronauts to and from the International Space Station via Crew Dragon, restored U.S. human spaceflight capability, and even stepped in to safely return NASA astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams when circumstances demanded it.

Starlink, once a controversial idea, now dominates the satellite communications industry, providing broadband connectivity across the globe and reshaping how space-based networks are deployed. SpaceX itself, following its merger with xAI, is now valued at roughly $1.25 trillion and is widely expected to pursue what could become the largest IPO in history.

Advertisement

And then there is Starship, Elon Musk’s fully reusable launch system designed not just to reach orbit, but to make humans multiplanetary. In 2018, the idea was still aspirational. Today, it is under active development, flight-tested in public view, and central to NASA’s future lunar plans.

In hindsight, Falcon Heavy’s maiden flight with Elon Musk’s personal Tesla Roadster was never really about a car in space. It was a signal that SpaceX and Tesla were willing to think bigger, move faster, and accept risks others wouldn’t.

The Roadster is still out there, orbiting the Sun. Seven years later, the question is no longer “What if this works?” It’s “How far does this go?”

Advertisement
Continue Reading