Connect with us

News

Stanford studies human impact when self-driving car returns control to driver

Published

on

Tesla Autopilot in 'Shadow Mode' will pit human vs computer

Researchers involved with the Stanford University Dynamic Design Lab have completed a study that examines how human drivers respond when an autonomous driving system returns control of a car to them. The Lab’s mission, according to its website, is to “study the design and control of motion, especially as it relates to cars and vehicle safety. Our research blends analytical approaches to vehicle dynamics and control together with experiments in a variety of test vehicles and a healthy appreciation for the talents and demands of human drivers.” The results of the study were published on December 6 in the first edition of the journal Science Robotics.

Holly Russell, lead author of study and former graduate student at the Dynamic Design Lab says, “Many people have been doing research on paying attention and situation awareness. That’s very important. But, in addition, there is this physical change and we need to acknowledge that people’s performance might not be at its peak if they haven’t actively been participating in the driving.”

The report emphasizes that the DDL’s autonomous driving program is its own proprietary system and is not intended to mimic any particular autonomous driving system currently available from any automobile manufacturer, such as Tesla’s Autopilot.

The study found that the period of time known as “the handoff” — when the computer returns control of a car to a human driver — can be an especially risky period, especially if the speed of the vehicle has changed since the last time the person had direct control of the car. The amount of steering input required to accurately control a vehicle varies according to speed. Greater input is needed at slower speeds while less movement of the wheel is required at higher speeds.

People learn over time how to steer accurately at all speeds based on experience. But when some time elapses during which the driver is not directly involved in steering the car, the researchers found that drivers require a brief period of adjustment before they can accurately steer the car again. The greater the speed change while the computer is in control, the more erratic the human drivers were in their steering inputs upon resuming control.

Advertisement

“Even knowing about the change, being able to make a plan and do some explicit motor planning for how to compensate, you still saw a very different steering behavior and compromised performance,” said Lene Harbott, co-author of the research and a research associate in the Revs Program at Stanford.

Handoff From Computer to Human

The testing was done on a closed course. The participants drove for 15 seconds on a course that included a straightaway and a lane change. Then they took their hands off the wheel and the car took over, bringing them back to the start. After familiarizing themselves with the course four times, the researchers altered the steering ratio of the cars at the beginning of the next lap. The changes were designed to mimic the different steering inputs required at different speeds. The drivers then went around the course 10 more times.

Even though they were notified of the changes to the steering ratio, the drivers’ steering maneuvers differed significantly from their paths previous to the modifications during those ten laps. At the end, the steering ratios were returned to the original settings and the drivers drove 6 more laps around the course. Again the researchers found the drivers needed a period of adjustment to accurately steer the cars.

The DDL experiment is very similar to a classic neuroscience experiment that assesses motor adaptation. In one version, participants use a hand control to move a cursor on a screen to specific points. The way the cursor moves in response to their control is adjusted during the experiment and they, in turn, change their movements to make the cursor go where they want it to go.

Just as in the driving test, people who take part in the experiment have to adjust to changes in how the controller moves the cursor. They also must adjust a second time if the original response relationship is restored. People can performed this experiment themselves by adjusting the speed of the cursor on their personal computers.

Advertisement

“Even though there are really substantial differences between these classic experiments and the car trials, you can see this basic phenomena of adaptation and then after-effect of adaptation,” says IIana Nisky, another co-author of the study and a senior lecturer at Ben-Gurion University in Israel “What we learn in the laboratory studies of adaptation in neuroscience actually extends to real life.”

In neuroscience this is explained as a difference between explicit and implicit learning, Nisky explains. Even when a person is aware of a change, their implicit motor control is unaware of what that change means and can only figure out how to react through experience.

Federal and state regulators are currently working on guidelines that will apply to Level 5 autonomous cars. What the Stanford research shows is that until full autonomy becomes a reality, the “hand off” moment will represent a period of special risk, not because of any failing on the part of computers but rather because of limitations inherent in the brains of human drivers.

The best way to protect ourselves from that period of risk is to eliminate the “hand off” period entirely by ceding total control of driving to computers as soon as possible.

Advertisement

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Comments

News

Tesla teases new market entrance with confusing and cryptic message

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla teased its entrance into a new market with a confusing and what appeared to be cryptic message on the social media platform X.

The company has been teasing its entrance into several markets, including Africa, which would be a first, and South America, where it only operates in Chile.

In September, Tesla started creating active job postings for the Colombian market, hinting it would expand its presence in South America and launch in a new country for the first time in two years.

Tesla job postings seem to show next surprise market entry

The jobs were related to various roles, including Associate Sales Manager, Advisors in Sales and Delivery, and Service Technicians. These are all roles that would indicate Tesla is planning to launch a wide-scale effort to sell, manage, and repair vehicles in the market.

Advertisement

Last night, Tesla posted its latest hint, a cryptic video that seems to show the outline of Colombia, teasing its closer than ever to market entry:

This would be the next expansion into a continent where it does not have much of a presence for Tesla. Currently, there are only two Supercharger locations on the entire continent, and they’re both in Chile.

Tesla will obviously need to expand upon this crucial part of the ownership experience to enable a more confident consumer base in South America as a whole. However, it is not impossible, as many other EV charging infrastructures are available, and home charging is always a suitable option for those who have access to it.

Advertisement

Surprisingly, Tesla seems to be more concerned about these middle-market countries as opposed to the larger markets in South America, but that could be by design.

If Tesla were to launch in Brazil initially, it may not be able to handle the uptick in demand, and infrastructure expansion could be more difficult. Brazil may be on its list in the upcoming years, but not as of right now.

@teslarati 🚨🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving and Yap is the best driving experience #tesla #fsd #yapping ♬ I Run – HAVEN.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla expands crucial Supercharging feature for easier access

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Published

on

tesla supercharger
Credit: Tesla

Tesla has expanded a crucial Supercharging feature that helps owners identify stall availability at nearby locations.

Tesla said on Tuesday night that its “Live Availability” feature, which shows EV owners how many stalls are available at a Supercharger station, to Google Maps, a third-party app:

Already offering it in its own vehicles, the Live Availability feature that Teslas have is a helpful feature that helps you choose an appropriate station with plugs that are immediately available.

Advertisement

A number on an icon where the Supercharger is located lets EV drivers know how many stalls are available.

It is a useful tool, especially during hours of congestion. However, it has not been super effective for those who drive non-Tesla EVs, as other OEMs use UI platforms like Google’s Android Auto or Apple’s iOS.

Essentially, when those drivers needed to charge at a Supercharger that enables non-Tesla EVs to plug in, there was a bit more of a gamble. There was no guarantee that a plug would be available, and with no way to see how many are open, it was a risk.

Tesla adding this feature allows people to have a more convenient and easier-to-use experience if they are in a non-Tesla EV. With the already expansive Supercharger Network being available to so many EV owners, there is more congestion than ever.

This new feature makes the entire experience better for all owners, especially as there is more transparency regarding the availability of plugs at Supercharger stalls.

Advertisement

It will be interesting to see if Tesla is able to expand on this new move, as Apple Maps compatibility is an obvious goal of the company’s in the future, we could imagine. In fact, this is one of the first times an Android Auto feature is available to those owners before it became an option for iOS users.

Apple owners tend to get priority with new features within the Tesla App itself.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s Boring Co goes extra hard in Nashville with first rock-crushing TBM

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

Published

on

Credit: The Boring Company/X

The Boring Company is gearing up to tackle one of its toughest projects yet, a new tunnel system beneath Nashville’s notoriously tough limestone terrain. Unlike the soft-soil conditions of Las Vegas and Austin, the Music City Loop will require a “hard-rock” boring machine capable of drilling through dense, erosion-resistant bedrock. 

The Boring Company’s machine for the project is now in final testing.

A boring hard-rock tunneling machine

The Boring Company revealed on X that its new hard-rock TBM can generate up to 4 million pounds of grip force and 1.5 million pounds of maximum thrust load. It also features a 15-filter dust removal system designed to keep operations clean and efficient during excavation even in places where hard rock is present.

Previous Boring Co. projects, including its Loop tunnels in Las Vegas, Austin, and Bastrop, were dug primarily through soft soils. Nashville’s geology, however, poses a different challenge. Boring Company CEO and President Steve Davis mentioned this challenge during the project’s announcement in late July.

“It’s a tough place to tunnel, Nashville. If we were optimizing for the easiest places to tunnel, it would not be here. You have extremely hard rock, like way harder than it should be. It’s an engineering problem that’s fairly easy and straightforward to solve,” Davis said.

Advertisement

Nashville’s limestone terrain

Experts have stated that the city’s subsurface conditions make it one of the more complex tunneling environments in the U.S. The Outer Nashville Basin is composed of cherty Mississippian-age limestone, a strong yet soluble rock that can dissolve over time, creating underground voids and caves, as noted in a report from The Tennessean.

Jakob Walter, the founder and principal engineer of Haushepherd, shared his thoughts on these challenges. “Limestone is generally a stable sedimentary bedrock material with strength parameters that are favorable for tunneling. Limestone is however fairly soluble when compared to other rack materials, and can dissolve over long periods of time when exposed to water. 

“Unexpected encounters with these features while tunneling can result in significant construction delays and potential instability of the excavation. In urban locations, structures at the ground surface should also be constantly monitored with robotic total stations or similar surveying equipment to identify any early signs of movement or distress,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending