back to article Self-driving cars safer in sunlight, twilight another story

Data from more than 2,000 self-driving vehicles has contributed to a study concluding they may be safer than humans in some conditions, and potentially more dangerous in others. A paper published in Nature Communications this week found that autonomous vehicles are less likely to be involved in accidents than humans in …

  1. Androgynous Cupboard Silver badge

    Same problem for us meatbaga

    Twilight has always been the killing hour on the roads. I have a large bump in my scapula courtesy of a man in a jaguar who didn’t see me as the sun was low behind me. To be fair he did spot me eventually, about the same time I snapped my motorbike in half on his car.

    1. ICL1900-G3 Silver badge

      Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

      Sorry, mate, didn't see you... Now, where have I heard that before?

      1. joe bixflics

        Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

        Probably nowhere outside the UK.

    2. Frankly

      Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

      Likewise, currently nursing some broken bones after a cycling "Sorry mate, I didn't see you" incident a few weeks ago, Half an hour before lighting up time (though I was displaying flashing front and rear lights). Perhaps a self-drive would have seen me and not hit me?

      1. werdsmith Silver badge

        Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

        As a motorcyclist, always worth knowing where the sun when considering the view from other vehicles.

        1. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

          Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

          And as as pedestrian. Try not to step in front of a driver who is being blinded by a setting sun.

      2. Spazturtle Silver badge

        Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

        Get a bottle light for the middle of your bike, they make you much more visible.

        1. John Robson Silver badge

          Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

          The issue isn't visibility - it's attention

    3. Charlie Clark Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Same problem for us meatbaga

      Yes, the switch from cone to rod vision is tricky for many, which is why some people used yellow tinted driving glasses to increase contrast in such situations. In addition, having had my retina scanned, I've been told that my eyesight will be particularly poor at twilight. Luckily for my fellow humans, I rarely drive. I am about on the bike a lot but then there's usually more time to react.

  2. Pascal Monett Silver badge
    Trollface

    "it's safe to say there have been at least some improvement in the past 24 months"

    That is so reassuring.

    It's almost as reassuring as hearing that the royal executioner has got marginally more effective at chopping heads off in one try.

    Look, I'm the first one to realize that Real Life is a bitch for computers to handle, but we can try and not fill our roads with unreliable software-driven multi-ton chunks of metal added to unreliable multi-ton chunks of metal driven by wetware idiots ? Until the software-driven version is actually safe to let loose ?

    Yes, I recognize that that increases the research costs exponentially.

    I don't care.

    1. b0llchit Silver badge
      Alert

      Re: "it's safe to say there have been at least some improvement in the past 24 months"

      Think of all of the people making money off of those "unreliable {meatbag,software}-driven multi-ton chunks of metal"the children!

    2. John Robson Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: "it's safe to say there have been at least some improvement in the past 24 months"

      Can we maybe stop the unreliable wetware until that's safe to let loose?

    3. Filippo Silver badge

      Re: "it's safe to say there have been at least some improvement in the past 24 months"

      I get the sentiment. That said...

      If "safe" turns out to not be achievable - as is most likely - I would happily accept "safer than human drivers", a much lower bar (though not one that has been reached yet).

    4. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: "it's safe to say there have been at least some improvement in the past 24 months"

      Wrt comment title: an assumption based on belief not a statement of fact.

      As the study only includes data up to 2022, we now have a basis on which to assess whether there really has been any advance. Let’s hope these researchers get a load of new funding to do just that.

  3. Herring`

    If I had any money to invest

    It wouldn't be going to Ark Investment Management

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: If I had any money to invest

      Tesla stock was the greatest opportunity in AI and the automaker would build the most advanced autonomous driving software available

      J Jonah Jameson laugh.jpg.

  4. Whiznot

    Cars can't safely drive themselves

    Studies like this one have almost no value. The whole concept of self driving is fatally flawed. Driving requires a thinking driver and machines can't think. Human reflexes and attention span aren't sound enough to correct self driving errors when they inevitably happen.

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

      > Studies like this one have almost no value.

      The value of studies such as this one is that they are a reality check on those who dream the dream and don’t appreciate it’s a dream and not reality.

      Self driving cars nice idea but largely pointless.

      1. John Robson Silver badge

        Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

        "Self driving cars nice idea but largely pointless."

        Replace self driving cars with wheelchairs in your mind and decide if they're still useless. I mean they're alot less usable than walking, but some people can't do that.

        And there are a substantial number of people who can't drive, and many more who shouldn't.

        1. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

          Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

          People in wheelchairs can drive just fine! I've knows several in my life. One of them routinely took his 4-wheel drive truck out mudding and off roading! As a passenger it was a most terrifying experience watching a man do this with only his hands but once you get over the initial shock you gelt quite safe with him.

          An able-bodied person who "can't drive" is someone who will not learn. Someone who is so debilitated that absolutely cannot drive doesn't need to be in a self-driving car either. Not until the car is fully sentient and aware and can make sound reasonable judgement on any arising situation.

          1. John Robson Silver badge

            Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

            Erm - Massive tangent - makes me think that my post must be ambiguous in a way I still can't see.

            The car doesn't need to be "sentient", it just needs to be as safe as a typical human (which I'd argue is actually a relatively low bar).

            (PS - you now "know" one more wheelchair user who also drives.)

            1. Alan Brown Silver badge

              Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

              This is the most valid point.

              Once car AI reaches that stage, insurace acturies will drive most meatsacks out from behind the wheel by way of rapidly increasing premiums unless a "special advanced certification" is held - and regularly renewed

              1. John Robson Silver badge

                Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

                ""special advanced certification" is held - and regularly renewed"

                That should be what a driving license is anyway.

        2. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge

          Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

          Have I ever mentioned I had my toe fractured by a wheelchair user running over my foot?

          And not even an apology as I hopped about in agony.

          1. John Robson Silver badge

            Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

            I presume a power chair?

            Normally I'd expect you to be apologising... not because you should, but because it seems to be the norm. Doesn't matter what happens, people apologise when they notice me. If I'm sitting looking at something, making a decision, people slightly further up the aisle of a supermarket will spot me and suddenly jump out of the way and apologise... Despite me not moving, or looking in their direction.

            If it wasn't so funny it could be annoying.

      2. LybsterRoy Silver badge

        Re: Cars can't safely drive themselves

        I have to disagree with you

        -- The value of studies such as this one --

        is that it keeps the researchers in a paid job

  5. tiggity Silver badge

    Lower self driving accidents in some scenarios

    Do we know if some of that is due to other road users clocking its a self driving car & keeping more clear of it than they would a human driver?

    Many drivers behaviour alters based on (often seemingly stereotypical interpretations of) the vehicles & drivers they see *

    * Assuming you drive a car that would be feasible for a newly qualified driver to have (i.e. not a high powered, expensive insurance thing) in the UK whack on some green "P" (probationary) plates.

    Lots of other road users will assume you are a newly qualified driver and behave far more "aggressively" (in driving behaviour terms) to you than they would if you had no plates - that's the case even though you may have years of driving and so show no novice traits in how you are driving.

    1. Nifty

      Re: Lower self driving accidents in some scenarios

      The opposite is true. Thinking of the compo.

    2. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

      Re: Lower self driving accidents in some scenarios

      "Many drivers behavior alters based on (often seemingly stereotypical interpretations of) the vehicles & drivers they see *

      You are making the flawed assumption that they actually see you. As someone who drives a small, low to the ground, black car, I can assure you they do not! In the time I have owned and driven this car I have gained a new appreciation for the plight of motorcycle riders, any thought of owning and riding one is completely gone from my mind.

      So now we need to believe that a machine's sensors can detect a low small car whose color is nearly identical to the road surface while travelling at speeds that require split second decisions.

    3. The Organ Grinder's Monkey

      Re: Lower self driving accidents in some scenarios

      On a related note, several studies have suggested that motorists behave differently around cyclists depending on whether the cyclist is wearing a helmet or not. Generally that was leaving less room when passing, but also passing at higher speed, following more closely etc.

  6. Dan 55 Silver badge

    This depends entirely on the hardware

    There's a quote in the paper which says "recent innovations in visual algorithms, coupled with the combined use of cameras, LIDAR, GNSS, and RADAR sensors" but it doesn't seem to take account of Tesla's hardware going backwards. Before they had lidar and radar, now they don't. They'd need to break the results down by hardware to be able to see which cards with which hardware don't work well in twilight.

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: This depends entirely on the hardware

      Yes it does beg the question as to just what is wrong with the hardware as to why twilight is causing problems when I expect everything worked just fine under “laboratory” low light test conditions.

      1. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

        Re: This depends entirely on the hardware

        The biggest problem with twilight is direct sunlight. If you live in an area with flat topography, like here in Florida, where I live, these times are hazardous even for people. The sun can be directly in your eyes, literally blinding you. I assume the same is true for sensors. Then you have to take into account that other, human, drivers are experiencing the same thing and may do something unexpected. Can machine make that judgement?

  7. Luiz Abdala Silver badge

    Only Tesla relies exclusively on cameras.

    Last I heard, only Tesla cars are prone to the same error mode as humans, relying on cameras and crashing after dusk, (most probably).

    Everybody else uses LIDAR, infrared, all things that work regardless of fog or environment lighting. Considering the waymo news below:

    https://www.theregister.com/2024/06/12/waymo_software_recall/?td=readmore

    ... the best solution is to add both cameras and Lidar if you really want an autonomous vehicle. They waymo thingamabob did not see a pole that a camera would have picked up...

  8. DS999 Silver badge

    Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

    Doesn't require autonomous driving. That's basically enhanced cruise control and lane keeping, which most new cars have, at least as an option. So I'm not impressed if that's the only things an "autonomous driving" vehicle is better than me at. Those are the things that get humans, but because of boredom or distraction, not because machines are inherently better at the task itself.

    Yeah you still need to be ready to stop or steer the non-autonomous car with enhanced cruise control and lane keeping because it won't be able to handle it if an accident occurs right in front of you, but I wouldn't trust an autonomous driving car to know what to do if an accident occurred right in front of it either - or for that matter trust it to even grasp exactly what is happening in front of it. It has a faster reaction time than us meatbags but I'll wager humans still have a faster comprehension time in most cases.

    1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

      "but I'll wager humans still have a faster comprehension time in most cases."

      I think it's very much as you say. Take, for example, slow moving traffic filtering into a single lane due to roadworks. There are so many variables from the entitled pricks who won't let anyone in to the polite drivers who filter as per the rules of the road. And often it's not just the placement of the vehicle concerned, but their manner of movement, whether someone flashes their headlights to let you in, eye contact, polite thank you waves or the clear expression of some angry twat whose wife didn't give him any last night. Those and many other visual cues add up to what is really a complex negotiation and decision making process which the human brain can comprehend almost in an instant, most of which no computer can even detect, let alone take into account. On the other hand, if all the cars in that filtering queue were self-driving, it would probably go much more smoothly, but that is as likely to happen in the near future as all the current manual drivers following the rules properly!

      1. DS999 Silver badge

        Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

        I'm less worried about situations like that where eye contact and politeness (or lack of) rule. The self driving cars would be like encountering a car with a guy driving who is wearing sunglasses and just looking straight ahead and ignoring the other drivers. You might not be able to tell what he plans to do, or if he's waiting for you to merge or whatever, but it isn't likely to cause an accident if you're wrong. At most it will be some momentary confusion and a bit of extra delay.

        I'm thinking about stuff like the car in front of you decides to move into the passing lane, but misses that there is a car already occupying that space and makes contact then swerves wildly away at the realization and loses control and hits another car. And/or the car that was hit overreacts and swerves. I don't believe that a self driving car is going to be able to interpret that situation correctly, while a human will immediately know "there's an accident happening ahead" and while we don't always react properly (since it is to some extent a guessing game as you don't know what the drivers in front / next to you are going to do next) at least you have a surge of adrenalin that focuses your attention and if you're an experienced driver have a pretty good chance of, if not entirely avoiding becoming part of the accident yourself, at least insuring you limit your injuries and don't make things worse for those around you.

        The way that self driving cars "learn" can work great for stuff where people repeat the same actions over and over, like stopping at red lights, turning from the proper lane, etc. Where they get confused is when someone does something against their learning, like a guy who realizes "oh crap I wanted to turn left" and turns left out of the right lane. Now imagine how confused they get when an accident like I described happens in front. They won't see that many of those, plus they are all different, so they can't learn from it. When something like that happens in front of us we don't use our experience in seeing that exact same scenario play out dozens of times before to get out of it because it is something we've never seen before, we use our intuition about how others will react to determine how we should react in that particular and unique situation.

        1. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

          I'm thinking about stuff like the car in front of you decides to move into the passing lane, but misses that there is a car already occupying that space and makes contact then swerves wildly away at the realization and loses control and hits another car. And/or the car that was hit overreacts and swerves. I don't believe that a self driving car is going to be able to interpret that situation correctly,

          This will apply to roads where there are self driving cars sharing the roads with older human driven cars. In a world with only self driving cars, under normal circumstances the self driving cars will always be able to sense the car in the other lane and not attempt to move over. They have no blind spot.

          In my car the dash will flash and the car will scream if I was to attempt such a move. It has an orange glow in the wing mirror that indicates a vehicle in the blind spot, for those that are too lazy to check their blind spot. Eventually all cars will have such devices, whether self driven or not.

          I believe that the solution to self driving is to adapt the road infrastructure a bit, rather than trying to make robots use roads designed for humans, bring the roads to the robots, somewhat bring them together (I don't want to say "meet in the middle".....

          And also have the local traffic talk to each other so there is no reaction, just notification and negotiation.

          1. PB90210 Silver badge

            Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

            " the car will scream"

            No, that's your passengers...

            That "orange glow in the wing mirror"... that'll be the other car exploding

          2. LybsterRoy Silver badge

            Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

            -- for those that are too lazy to check their blind spot --

            How do you chack a BLIND spot?

            1. werdsmith Silver badge

              Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

              You turn your head and look over your shoulder, like you are taught to do on the very first driving lesson.

              1. LybsterRoy Silver badge

                Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

                -- you turn your head and look over your shoulder --

                I remember doing that for reversing, I'm not sure the instructor mentioned it for when driving in heavy traffic or doing 80 along the motorway

            2. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

              Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

              If you properly adjust your mirrors, in 90% of cars you will not have a blind spot.

              While stationary, find an object that is at the outer edge of your rear-view mirror, then adjust the side mirror so that object is at the inner edge of that mirror. Repeat for the other side.

              If you learned to drive with your side mirrors pointed down the side of the vehicle it will take time to get used to this new configuration, you also need to trust your rear-view mirror. You will see other cars right up to the point where they become visible in your side mirror.

              1. DS999 Silver badge

                Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

                Yep, and the best place to get your mirrors properly set is a partially occupied parking lot. You can drive slowly alongside other cars at the spacing you typically are on a multi-lane road and get it adjusted so that a little before a car is no longer visible in your rear view mirror it is visible in your side mirror, and a little before it is no longer visible in your side mirror it is visible in your peripheral vision out of the side window when looking forward (or if not at least easily visible outside your side windows with a quick glance)

                Then make sure to set that position in memory, so that if someone else drives your car who believes in the dumb way of setting side mirrors where you can see the side of your car all the way down to the end that you can easily reset them to the proper position you painstakingly set in that parking lot.

      2. Fursty Ferret

        Re: Staying in your lane and maintaining speed of traffic

        What is interesting is that how much of it is almost subliminal. Occasionally I find my Tesla refuses to pass a slower-moving vehicle in the next lane. Almost invariably when I've taken over to accelerate past them a quick glance across shows the driver on their phone. The slight drifting and weaving in the lane is almost unnoticeable to me, but is obviously triggering something in its tiny brain.

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

  9. david 12 Silver badge

    0.5 times less common

    So, twice as likely?

  10. The man with a spanner Bronze badge

    Summarising

    So, auto drive systems can do the relativly easy things a bit better than humans but do the more difficult and higher risk activities worse than their masters.

    Easy tasks acheived, difficult stuff still to be done.

    1. David Hicklin Silver badge

      Re: Summarising

      My thoughts exactly, as mentioned above the more advanced cruise controls that slow you down and maintains a safe distance when traffic bunches up are all that is needed, heck I would even welcome a mandatory feature that prevents tailgating.

      Auto braking less so as I read of many cases where a car stops for no apparent reason which makes it a danger to those drivers around it who would not be expecting you to suddenly stop on an open road.

      Lane control is often more annoying and most people I know turn it off, all you need is something to stop you pulling out on someone like those wing mirror indicators.

  11. Bebu
    Windows

    It's the kangaroos mate...

    Yesterday the same research was quoted with local spin on the AU national broadcaster ABC self driving cars kangaroo research

    The hours of dawn and dusk are when these marsupials ffaff about near roads - they are the dumbest creatures on two legs (H.sapiens excepted.) The article stated that the car computer had difficulty predicting the next move of the 'roo - not surprising the creature itself has no idea either.

    A decent calibre Gatling gun mounted under the bonnet might be an effective remedy.

    The major point of the ABC story was that FSD vehicles are eagerly anticipated by those who suffer from disabilities that prevent their driving themselves.

    The story considered the technical problems and current legislative requirements.

    But there is also a moral or ethical aspect the community and legislatures would need to consider.

    Currently if you are in charge of a vehicle (even when computer assisted or on cruise control) you are responsible, at least in the first instance, for any injuries or damage the vehicle might inflict.

    Now hypothetically if Helen Keller, who was both deaf and blind, got into her FSD vehicle alone and directed her vehicle to her destination, and in the course of the journey the vehicle collided with a mother and child on a pedestrian crossing - who is responsible? Elon Musk? (Yes, of course, but unfortunately you can only hang him once.)

    The whole question is arguably in the same class as autonymous weapons.

    If FSD vehicles were to become ubiquitous I shouldn't bother with a Gatling gun but go for an anti-tank weapon. :)

    1. SomeRandom1

      Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

      Lets assume that the car manufacturer is held responsible in that case - who would receive the punishment? Would it be the car manufacturer, or one of the multitude of component manufacturers that were used in the construction of the vehicle?

      If it is the car manufacturer, would they even receive punishment? Every day we see $trillion software companies churn out products which they know have vulnerabilities. But when the end user is hacked there is no repercussion for the software company - yeah they have their get-out-of-jail T&C's, but there's no motivation for the software company to actually create quality software. It's up to the end user to deal with.

      I imagine the same will happen with FSD - the person behind the wheel or registered keeper will receive "justice". Or perhaps simply being in the car makes you culpable.

      1. I am the liquor

        Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

        It has been suggested that autonomous robots of this sort should be made "legal persons". Which does not mean they have human rights, as some wilfully misinterpreted it. It means they'd be like companies, in that a court could find them negligent or culpable for some wrongdoing, even if there isn't an individual human who is personally responsible. So if an accident is found to be the "car's fault", the insurer covering the car pays out.

        In this scenario there is motivation for the car manufacturer, but it's indirect: if their car is running people over all the time, it'll be too expensive to insure and customers won't buy it.

        The alternative would be to try to hold the manufacturer directly responsible, but then you've got to show that the manufacturer was negligent. Now you're looking at their development processes and internal decisions, a much more expensive and difficult court case than simply showing that the actions of the car were substandard. Given that large companies have a greater advantage over the individual victim in difficult and expensive court cases, it's not clear that this would motivate them any better than the indirect approach.

        1. Cliffwilliams44 Silver badge

          Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

          And so, we have the situation that is no different than with humans.

          The self-driving car kills a man's wife and child. The owner of the self-driving car carries the legal minimal liability insurance, $20K in the US. The insurance company dutifully pays the minimum and nothing more. The father has uninsured/underinsured coverage for say $50K (This is rather expensive in the US) Are the man's loved ones only worth $70K?

          While you can't get blood out of a stone, with a human driver you can sue the human. Even if they don't have a lot of money, you can saddle them with a judgement that is likely to hang over them for much of their life. Forcing them to make payments. This fact (or fear) makes a majority of drivers realize they need to be careful on the road. The machine has no such knowledge or fear, it cares not what might happen in the future, because once it is destroyed, it ceases to exist, not that it cares about that either.

          We have already seen what self-driving passenger aircraft has achieved with the recent problems at Boeing! The absolute idiocy that someone decided that the machine was better at operating the aircraft than the human to the point where the human was prevented from overriding the machine. Is that the next evolution of the self-driving car? Will it take many deaths before these "geniuses" realize the errors of their thinking?

          1. I am the liquor

            Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

            I think the US has a very different problem in this area compared to other countries. Cover for $20K of third-party liability is next to no insurance at all. Clearly, the system described above can't work unless you require cars to be covered by an effective level of insurance.

            In Europe, the minimum limit of liability is €1.2m per victim for injury, and €1.2m per claim for property damage. In the UK, all car insurance carries unlimited cover for third-party injury.

            This is possible because the insurer is only exposed to compensatory damages, i.e. the actual cost of the repairs, loss of earnings, medical bills etc. (and those medical bills are limited by universal healthcare systems). European courts generally don't award punitive damages, unlike in the US where they're potentially unlimited and awarded on the whims of juries.

    2. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

      The hours of dawn and dusk are when these marsupials ffaff about near roads - they are the dumbest creatures on two legs (H.sapiens excepted.) The article stated that the car computer had difficulty predicting the next move of the 'roo - not surprising the creature itself has no idea either.

      Unpredictable animals are a problem for us all.

      My motorcycling encounter with a deer, on the side of the road (offside) I slowed expecting it to bolt across, and it did.

      So, I decided to go behind it, which was a mistake because it was already across the road but panicked and turn back just as I passed. So there was a collision.

      I was pleased to see the deer run off without lameness. I never did fix the scratches on the bike.

      With hindsight, probably best to come to a near stop until the deer had gone out of sight, but as a motorcyclist I am wary of traffic behind so, no idea what the self drive would do. Probably no worse than I did.

    3. Filippo Silver badge

      Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

      I would not be surprised if it turns out that the legal and liability aspects of FSD turn out to be even harder than the technical aspects.

    4. James O'Shea Silver badge

      Re: It's the kangaroos mate...

      Bah. No guns, mate. Just get a bull bar/roo bar. https://c8.alamy.com/comp/B5FE40/roo-bars-B5FE40.jpg

      We have lots of vehicles, not all of them police vehicles, (here's a Statie with ramming bars https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/af2767d1692cba4ea6a76d59963eaf487117a14d/c=0-17-550-328/local/-/media/2017/06/27/FortMyers/FortMyers/636341439233079950-FHP1.jpg?width=3200&height=1680&fit=crop) fitted with similar items here in Deepest South Florida. The are necessary, given the presence of gators, deer, bears, and (especially!) Florida Man. Give Me Ramming Speed!

  12. graeme leggett Silver badge

    From the paper in question

    " For both AVs and HDVs, the most frequent pre-accident movement is proceeding straight. It is observed that 56% of AV accidents and 58% of HDV accidents occur under this specific condition"

    and " 79% of rear-end accidents involve HDV hitting ADS,"

    The paper suggests that if anything in these cases the ADS is reacting quicker than the human driving the car behind.

    Which made me think that instead of getting a three car crash when the car at front stops suddenly is hit by the next and that by the one behind it, the first car brakes (for some reason), the autonomous slams on the brakes and stops short but is still hit by the car following it....?

    1. werdsmith Silver badge

      Re: From the paper in question

      the autonomous slams on the brakes and stops short but is still hit by the car following it....?

      In some future scenario, the braking action of the first car is signalled remotely directly to the computer in the following cars and they all slow down together.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: From the paper in question

        Assuming 5G coverage and all vehicles on the same mobile network and control centre and all GPS’s agree they are actually following each other, otherwise expect a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction to unexpectedly hit their brakes.

        Just thinking realworld…

        1. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: From the paper in question

          I would have expected local area comms direct between vehicles, not depending on networks unless there were augmentation services alongside the roads to eliminate latency.

      2. Zack Mollusc

        Re: From the paper in question

        Ideally the signalling would be in an 'open-source' kind of format so that it is easily recognised by all. If the signals were in a form that humans could detect, that would be even better. Maybe a bright purple light positioned so that it shone towards the following traffic and was triggered by the decelleration of the vehicle it was mounted on.

        That is my suggestion: an AI system continuously monitoring the vehicle's velocity via gps, lidar, cameras, gyroscopes ,magnetometers and ouiji boards so that it can detect when the brakes are applied and light up a bright purple light or lights on the rear of the vehicle to inform other road users, robotic and human, of the braking manouver. Simple but effective.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: From the paper in question

          > Ideally the signalling would be in an 'open-source' kind of format

          Needs to be international Standard enforced by law; open-source doesn’t mean used and understood by everyone.

          > Maybe a bright purple light positioned so that it shone towards the following traffic and was triggered by the deceleration of the vehicle it was mounted on.

          Typical techie! :) reinvent the wheel…

          Most vehicles these days have at least 3 rear facing red lights that come on when the brakes are applied.

          However, I get the point about deceleration, perhaps solved by a quick flash of the (red) brake lights. It is often sufficient to get many tailgaters to draw back…

      3. David Hicklin Silver badge

        Re: From the paper in question

        >> In some future scenario, the braking action of the first car is signalled remotely directly to the computer in the following cars and they all slow down together.

        But but but....that requires the self driving systems to co-operate with each other,,,,unthinkable !

        As I mention elsewhere, what is needed is a means of stopping tailgating so that other cars behind have a chance to react and stop. Still amazes me that have crawled past the wreckage of a multiple car shunt on a motorway that 5 minutes later cars are bumper to bumper again......and keep on jumping into my gap that I have left so that I can stop!

  13. Agincourt and Crecy!
    Alert

    Ethics?

    Regardless of how efficient the hardware is, the question of how the Trolley Problem is addressed in programming autonomous operating remains.

  14. ITMA Silver badge
    Devil

    So, self driving vehicles are flummoxed when they enter.... The Twilight Zone.

    You are about to enter another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land of imagination - as a self driving vehicle mows you down.

  15. Adrian 4

    training data

    They only work in sunny California. New training data needed for the rest of the world.

  16. Paul 195

    Reading between the lines

    It looks like self-driving cars are better at avoiding the kind of fender benders that happen in traffic where one vehicle runs into the back of another. That's great, but those are also the accidents that generally carry low risk of death or injury. It looks like they are far worse at avoiding the kind of accidents in more complex scenarios, and those are often the ones where someone gets hurt. Nearly twice as bad as people according to the research.

    Please don't let these things loose on the roads in British and European towns and cities which are full of "complex scenarios" and far harder to navigate than typical US style grids where pedestrians are only legally allowed to cross the road in certain places. The accumulation of training data has already cost several lives in the US.

    1. David Hicklin Silver badge

      Re: Reading between the lines

      >. Please don't let these things loose on the roads in British and European towns and cities

      Good luck negotiating the roads around my town, constant roadworks, diversions, painted white spots for roundabouts, potholes .... Ah the Great British Pothole...how are they going to cope with them? Just stop there quivering with fear ??

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Twilight and push bikes on the road aren't a great combo. Being narrow (and treated like vermin by maybe 25% of car users), anything obfuscating visibility any further is a deathtrap.

    Still, admitting the difficulties on the part of self driving systems is the first step towards doing something about them. Cars without human drivers will (largely) make things safer for other modes of transport.

  18. spacecadet66 Silver badge

    > Improving autonomous vehicle performance in such conditions might involve "advanced sensors, robust algorithms, and smart design considerations."

    The exact spot where someone on the team insisted they talk about possible solutions but everyone else cut it back to the most tokenistic handwave possible.

  19. Randy Hudson

    0.2 times less likely?

    Why not just say 80%

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Wait, there's self driving cars on the actual roads?

    Already? I didn't think it was allowed yet.

    Don't think it's allowed in the UK at least. Didn't realise some other countries had actually allowed it...

  21. Philo T Farnsworth Silver badge

    This is clearly a case of. . .

    Autodämmerung.

    1. James O'Shea Silver badge

      Re: This is clearly a case of. . .

      Carmageddon.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    No problem!

    That's great (if you want a car that drives straight down the road during the middle of the day and doesn't turn corners).

    I can really see that catching on.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like