How would you treat a driverless car?

Scenario: Say you're driving down a two-way street and there's a vehicle parked in the opposite lane. The oncoming traffic therefore needs to pull out into your lane to overtake.

What do you do?
Many of us just drive on as we have right of way. But eventually one of us feels charitable and slows down to allow the oncoming car to overtake, giving permission with a quick flash of headlights or a beckoning wave.

Now consider if this oncoming car was a driverless or autonomous vehicle (AV)?
would it be able to understand what you mean when you flash your lights or frantically wave your hands?

Its sensors could decide that it's only safe to overtake when there's no oncoming traffic at all. which on a busy road this may be never, leading to increasingly exasperated passengers and increasingly angry drivers queuing behind.

These safety-first robot cars could become victims of their own politeness and end up being bullied and ignored by aggressive, impatient humans.

This, at any rate, is one of the conclusions to be drawn from research carried out by Dr Chris Tennant of the psychological and behavioural science department at the London School of Economics.

His Europe-wide survey, commissioned by tyre-maker Goodyear, finds that nearly two-thirds of drivers think machines won't have enough commonsense to interact with human drivers.

And more than two-fifths think a robot car would remain stuck behind our hypothetical parked lorry for a long time.

Robot v. human

Driving isn't just about technology and engineering, it's about human interactions and psychology.

"The road is a social space," as Carlos Cipolitti, general director of the Goodyear Innovation Centre in Luxembourg, puts it.

And it is this social aspect that makes many people sceptical about driverless cars.

"If you view the road as a social space, you will consciously negotiate your journey with other drivers. People who like that negotiation process appear to feel less comfortable engaging with AVs than with human drivers," says Mr Tennant in his report.

Of course, humans are always sceptical about new technologies of which they have little experience. That scepticism usually diminishes with usage, however.

And even many sceptics accept that emotionless AVs could cause fewer accidents than we humans, with our propensity to road rage, tiredness and lack of concentration.

A statistic often used out is that human error is responsible for more than 90% of accidents.

But 70% of the 12,000 people Mr Tennant and his team interviewed agreed that: "As a point of principle, humans should be in control of their vehicles."

An an even greater proportion - 80% - thought an autonomous vehicle should always have a steering wheel.

AV pioneer Google - which aims to develop cars without steering wheels - reckons it can meet most of these real-world challenges.

It has already filed patent requests for tech that it claims will be able to identify aggressive or reckless driving and respond to it; and recognise and react to the flashing lights of police cars and emergency services.

In time then, it may well be able to programme its cars to recognise the different meanings of headlight flashes, and interpret the intentions of human drivers by their behaviour.

In the latest Google self-driving car project monthly report, head honcho Dmitri Dolgov says: "Over the last year, we've learned that being a good driver is more than just knowing how to safely navigate around people, [it's also about] knowing how to interact with them."

These interactions are "a delicate social dance", he writes, claiming that Google cars can now "often mimic these social behaviours and communicate our intentions to other drivers, while reading many cues that tell us if we're able to pass, cut in or merge."

Google's test cars have now racked up more than two million fully-autonomous miles of driving on public roads in California, Arizona, Texas and Washington, reporting a handful of minor accidents to the Californian authorities.

Interestingly, quite a few of these accidents have involved human-driven vehicles going into the back of the Google cars, suggesting perhaps that the ultra-cautious robots, with safety as their first priority, are more timid in their approach than we're used to.

Mr Dolgov admits that the self-driving software is not yet ready for commercial release.

Source: BBC

"The driverless car industry is destined to kill more jobs than it creates in Britain"

I came across this interesting article by Mike Rutherford "We need a more realistic approach to driverless cars"

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) has its heart in the right place. But the “voice of the motor industry” needs a more balanced and realistic approach to driverless cars.
It’s so ecstatic about the prospect of them that I’m viewing its figures with extreme caution, if not deep suspicion. Furthermore, some of its opinions relating to Britain’s role in the global driverless vehicle industry seem very ambitious.

 Read More

Google's Driverless Cars Designed to Exceed Speed Limit

Google's self-driving cars are programmed to exceed speed limits by up to 10mph (16km/h), according to the project's lead software engineer.

Google has tested its technology in modified cars

Dmitri Dolgov told Reuters that when surrounding vehicles were breaking the speed limit that going more slowly could actually present a danger and therefore the Google car would accelerate to keep up with thte flow.

Google first announced its driverless car division back in 2010, and has been testing its technology in modified cars built by other manufacturers.These cars have travelled on more than 300,000 miles of open road, (mostly in California).

The UK will be allowing driverless cars on public roads from 2015. Ministers ordered a review of the UK's road regulations to provide appropriate guidelines, these will include the need for self-drive vehicles to comply with safety and traffic laws, and involve changes to the Highway Code.

In May, the US tech firm said it would start building its own self-driving cars.Their electric bubble-shaped vehicles will seat two people, and to begin with they will be limited to 25mph (40km/h) to help ensure safety.

In a separate development on Monday, the White House said it wanted all cars and light trucks to be equipped with technology that could prevent collisions using radio signals which would allow the vehicles to "talk" to each other, and alert drivers to potential accidents

The label "driverless vehicle" actually covers a large range of different concepts. Features such as cruise control, automatic braking, anti-lane drift and self-parking functions already built into many vehicles offer a certain degree of autonomy. However term is generally used to refer to vehicles that take charge of steering, accelerating, indicating and braking during most if not all of a journey between two points, much in the same way aeroplanes can be set to autopilot.

Roads however are much more crowded than the skies, and a range of technologies is being developed to tackle the problem. One of the leading innovations is Lidar (light detection and ranging), a system that measures how lasers bounce off reflective surfaces to capture information about millions of small points surrounding the vehicle every second.

Another complementary technique is "computer vision" - the use of software to make sense of 360-degree images captured by cameras attached to the vehicle, which can warn of pedestrians, cyclists, roadworks and other objects that might be in the vehicle's path.

Autonomous vehicles can also make use of global-positioning system (GPS) location data from satellites, radar, ultrasonic sensors to detect objects close to the car and further sensors to accurately measure the vehicle's orientation and the rotation of its wheels, to help it understand its exact location.

The debate now is whether to allow cars, like the prototype unveiled by Google in May, to abandon controls including a steering wheel and pedals and rely on the vehicle's computer.

Or whether, instead, to allow the machine to drive, but insist a passenger be ready to wrest back control at a moment's notice.