Self Driving Uber Fatality
Self Driving Uber Fatality
(OP)
San Francisco Chronicle
As noted in the article, this was inevitable. We do not yet know the cause. It raises questions.
It is claimed that 95% of accidents are caused by driver error. Are accidents spread fairly evenly across the driver community, or are a few drivers responsible for most accidents? If the latter is true, it creates the possibility that there is a large group of human drivers who are better than a robot can ever be. If you see a pedestrian or cyclist moving erratically along the side of your road, do you slow to pass them? I am very cautious when I pass a stopped bus because I cannot see what is going on in front. We can see patterns, and anticipate outcomes.
Are we all going to have to be taught how to behave when approached by a robot car. Bright clothing at night helps human drivers. Perhaps tiny retro-reflectors sewn to our clothing will help robot LiDARs see us. Can we add codes to erratic, unpredictable things like children andd pets? Pedestrians and bicycles eliminate any possibility that the robots can operate on their own right of way.
Who is responsible if the robot car you are in causes a serious accident? If the robot car manufacturer is responsible, you will not be permitted to own or maintain the car. This is a very different eco-system from what we have now, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Personal automobiles spend about 95% (quick guesstimate on my part) parked. This is not a good use of thousands of dollars of capital.
As noted in the article, this was inevitable. We do not yet know the cause. It raises questions.
It is claimed that 95% of accidents are caused by driver error. Are accidents spread fairly evenly across the driver community, or are a few drivers responsible for most accidents? If the latter is true, it creates the possibility that there is a large group of human drivers who are better than a robot can ever be. If you see a pedestrian or cyclist moving erratically along the side of your road, do you slow to pass them? I am very cautious when I pass a stopped bus because I cannot see what is going on in front. We can see patterns, and anticipate outcomes.
Are we all going to have to be taught how to behave when approached by a robot car. Bright clothing at night helps human drivers. Perhaps tiny retro-reflectors sewn to our clothing will help robot LiDARs see us. Can we add codes to erratic, unpredictable things like children andd pets? Pedestrians and bicycles eliminate any possibility that the robots can operate on their own right of way.
Who is responsible if the robot car you are in causes a serious accident? If the robot car manufacturer is responsible, you will not be permitted to own or maintain the car. This is a very different eco-system from what we have now, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Personal automobiles spend about 95% (quick guesstimate on my part) parked. This is not a good use of thousands of dollars of capital.
--
JHG





RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Accident rates per mile driven are biased highly towards new drivers (the stats are complex), young drivers, and old drivers. Men are about 50% more likely to crash than women.
"Perhaps tiny retro-reflectors sewn to our clothing will help robot LiDARs see us."
Perhaps, a more promising path is to detect your cell phone.
"Who is responsible if the robot car you are in causes a serious accident? If the robot car manufacturer is responsible, you will not be permitted to own or maintain the car. "
All the main manufacturers for L4 cars have announced they are liable and will self insure, and that current legislation is adequate. I suspect your second sentence is wrong in detail (somebody somewhere will buy an L4 AV) but going in the right direction.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
We all know someone that we don't want to be in the same vehicle with ...
I suspect that automated drivers may be better than the worst drivers, possibly even at today's technology level, but are not even remotely close to the best drivers and may never be.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
To me, it seems that these autonomous cars do fairly well when reacting to something that is going to collide with them or they are going to collide into. But, they seem to be missing some or all of the "this could become dangerous so I should proceed with caution" programming. You could call it lacking prudence maybe? From what the reports have said so far, it sounds like the car decided to proceed at full speed close enough to this woman that it could not react when she changed paths towards it. The Tesla death demonstrated this as one of the faults too, trying to shoot the space between the truck and trailer wheels at full speed.
The car should have slowed and/or moved further away from the woman, even if she was proceeding in a direction that did not indicate she was going to cross into the path of the car.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It won't get tired, bored, distracted, angry, aggressive, in a hurry, or any of the hundred other things ordinary drivers do. Probably already better than, say, 50% of drivers out there now.
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The Luck curve is if you just take the average crash rate (20.3%) and do the usual probability on it. Not a whole lot different to the underlying data.
Obviously many meat drivers never have an (injury/fatality) accident in their half a million miles of driving in their lifetime. So accident free meat drivers are a hard target to beat, since they have a perfect record.
So I'd rather look at averages.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
also has some interesting stuff
I like this graph. What it is saying is that if you have had 0 or 1 crashes in the previous 6 years, there is a 5% chance of having a crash in the next year. If you've had 5 crashes in the previous 6 years, there's a 25% chance you'll have another crash in the next year.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I know the area in question and it's quite possible that she emerged from the median from behind brush or trees leaving little or no time for a driver (human or not) to react.
Link
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Hmmm. The lane to my right is ending (or is obstructed up ahead). I should allow for vehicles in that lane to merge with the lane that I'm in, by matching speed with them and aligning myself with a space between those vehicles so that the merge can be done without conflict.
Hmmm. I'm approaching a traffic signal. It just turned yellow. My rear view mirror is filled with dump truck. I'm going through this intersection even if it's a wee smidge into the red by the time I get there.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I've heard this defense several times and I really really don't like it. Yes if the person jumped out in front of the car from behind a bush that's one thing, but this suggestion that autonomous cars can't be expected to stop for pedestrians who aren't at cross-walks does the case for autonomous vehicles no favours.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
We do not understand the algorithms used with these autonomous cars. We anticipate that people will cross at crosswalks. We anticipate they will be less likely to cross elsewhere.
A big advantage of LiDAR is that it provides its own light source and ought to detect stuff even in complete darkness. I wonder just how rapidly LiDAR detects everything. I have over thirty years experience with LiDAR. It does a finite number of scans per second. Will it detect and make sense of an object moving somewhere other than along the anticipated track?
Dodging a LiDAR equipped vehicle is not the same thing as dodging a vehicle driven by a human.
I slow right down when I pass groups of pedestrians, especially children, when I drive down narrow lanes and in parking lots. How will a robot anticipate threats like this, and how well behaved will humans be when they are following this robot as it tries to interpret threats?
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Yeah, you do, I do, but plenty of people don't. Don't get me wrong, the tech has got a ways to go. It'll get better, human drivers will not. My experience is, the cars get better and better, the drivers get worse and worse.
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
There are a certain number of pedestrians killed each year.
And various autonomous cars get in a certain number of miles each year.
Just based on the miles, how many pedestrians would expect to have been killed by autonomous cars?
By the way, how do we know this was an accident, anyway? Isn't that car "autonomous"? It could very well have been intentional.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The news reports say she was walking and pushing the bike, and if that is true then she wasn't travelling particularly fast.
The right side of the SUV has the damage so the woman most likely came from the right side into the path of the SUV. If she came from the median on the left then she crossed almost 4 traffic lanes before the SUV hit her which certainly goes against any claims that she suddenly stepped in front of the SUV.
It also appears the accident occurred across from the second leg of the X in the median just past the road drains in the right side curb. Since the ground is rough and hilly past the sidewalk in that area, I find it hard to believe the woman was travelling perpendicular to the roadway or outside the sidewalk before entering the roadway. That location also has a sidewalk and a bike lane between any vegetation and any excuse saying she jumped out from behind a bush doesn't hold much water.
My expectation is that she was travelling southbound on the sidewalk or in the bike lane and then turned to her right to cross to that X path going across the median. Crossing Mill Ave completely and heading into the parking lots or below the overpass on the west side would be as likely a general direction of travel as any.
An alert and aware driver would know the path of someone coming southbound on that sidewalk might turn towards that path through the median.
How much foot and bike traffic is in that area? Would regular drivers of that section of roadway specifically watch for bikes or people on foot crossing at the ends of those X paths?
On another note, that X path "to nowhere" through the median appears to be one dumb road feature. It has no useful function except to dangerously tempt people to shortcut across Mill Ave.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I don't know what proportion of crashes result in pedestrian deaths, I don't know how much that 4 per million has changed since 1990 (quite a lot actually), but what I do see is that the numbers aren't immediately screaming that prototype AVs are just randomly mowing down people right, left and centre.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Greg - No the cars are not displaying any signs of being particularly dangerous. But they should do much better than a human, especially in conditions that make driving more difficult. We'll likely never see the detailed report on the accident, but from what I have see so far it appears this accident could have been avoided if the right precautions were taken as the car approached the woman.
From the video in the news reports, belongings were on the ground approximately above the "N Mill Ave" in this street view
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Assume for a moment that the pedestrian in this case was visible, while still walking on the median.
A human driver might have been able to make some assumptions about those circumstances - seeing what is probably a homeless person, in the median, at 10PM, and therefore assume that they're perhaps somewhat less predictable than normal. So an attentive and cautious human driver might either slow down or perhaps even change lanes if possible. Mental alarm bells should be ringing, because of the context.
To help make this point crystal clear: an attentive human driver would certainly take extreme caution if they saw a toddler or small child wandering around in the center median, within a few steps of the lane, not firmly holding hands with a parent. In such an extreme example, one would probably even turn on the 4-way flashers, stop, rescue the child, call the police, etc. Would an autonomous vehicle have any such inkling of the increased risks? Do autonomous vehicles understand 'children', 'holding hands with a parent' and 'not trying to wriggle away', or 'the homeless' yet? It seems not.
It's going to be a very long time before autonomous vehicles have any common sense about the real world. And without such common sense, they'll inevitably get them themselves into accidents of a different sort than would a cautious human driver.
At this point the proponents are forced to abandon any overhyped claims about an AI-driven "Accident-Free" Utopia. (Yes, such ridiculous claims have been made; perhaps from the sidelines and/or marketing departments.)
The more rational proponents can retreat to statistical comparisons, and claim autonomous superiority once the lines cross. While such a comparison is reasonable, it still leaves a vast legal and regulatory quagmire to be sorted out.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Your link explicitly describes the problem I was noting. The LiDAR's range and resolution are not sufficient for cars travelling at highway speeds. Think through what the LiDAR or video camera has to do. It has to recognize the object. It has to recognize that this is the same object it saw 100ms ago and that it has moved. If the object is moving steadily, the robot can conclude it will continue to move steadily. Can the robot detect erratic movement or even someone's head turning to indicate a sudden change of direction, possibly in front of the robot?
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Autonomous Cars may indeed lead to much more Car Sharing, so these quite separate and distinct topics are related.
[To be clear, referring here to Car Sharing (alone, one by one) not Ride Sharing (i.e. car pool).]
It's worth noting that Car Sharing inherently increases total distance driven, road usage, traffic, energy (fuel) expended, and wear and tear. Applies to Taxicabs, Uber services, or any future autonomous fleets wandering around.
Because (A-to-B) + (C-to-D) < (A-to-B) + (B-to-C) + (C-to-D), where (B-to-C) is the 'extra' movement.
Nobody ever seems to think about that. Which is annoying considering how obvious it is. At best, there's some hand waving about future efficiencies somehow compensating for the extra distance.
The distance ratio could probably be determined by asking Taxi or Uber drivers about their total working mileage per year versus how much of that is 'paid' mileage. It would presumably vary by location. Hopefully it's more efficient than 50%, and it can't be 100%; so I'd guess it's about 75%.
Yes, there are many obvious upsides of Car Sharing; but they're well known.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I also did not account for heavy usage of automobiles at rush hour, when maybe half of them are on the road.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Likewise, it's likely the LIDAR on the Uber detected the victim well before the impact, but essentially forgot the detection once a new set of detections were acquired.
We used to have a guy that worked on tracking algorithms, and when queried about why the tracker had clearly ignored a previous detected target, he stated, "Oh, I only use data from the current frame for detections."
A human driver, having detected a pedestrian might pay more attention than normal to insure that the they can avoid the consequences of the pedestrian doing something silly, which the victim did. If I see a pedestrian too close to the road edge, I will sometimes change lanes to be further away, just in case.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Does this account for young drivers doing most of the driving?
Dik
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
If the robot cannot maintain context information, then it cannot determine the direction and velocity of whatever object it sees. I noticed this this morning with my car GPS. It does not know what direction I am pointed in until I start moving.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Based on the reports, I thought that the Tesla had failed to even see the truck due to a lack of contrast against the sky. It had been mentioned that the Tesla had utterly failed to brake before, during, and even after the crash. It was a fairly comprehensive failure, seeming to do precisely nothing correctly.
Perhaps the findings have changed since I last saw it.
Old curse: "May you live during interesting times."
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Exactly, and the instant you stop, it forgets the direction as well.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It only works with painted lane markings that are clearly visible.
It doesn't recognize guardrails, unmarked roadways, painted lines that are worn down or obscured by dust or dirt or damaged/repaired pavement. If there is a visible transition in the pavement that is separate from the painted lane marking (e.g. in construction zones where the temporary lane position doesn't correspond with what it's meant to be by design) it sometimes sees the wrong one and false-triggers. It gets confused on curves. It gets confused in roundabouts. If I intentionally shift to the side of a clearly marked lane for a rational purpose - e.g. to be further away from a vehicle that appears errant or is throwing off wind-buffeting, or to smooth out an errant lane marking - it beeps because it doesn't realize that what I'm doing has a purpose. I haven't tried it in rain at night when the shine from the rain makes lane markings hard to distinguish.
In other words, it works only in situations where it isn't needed, and it hardly ever works in situations where it might serve some purpose.
I've had other rental cars that have blind-spot warning systems (this one doesn't have that) and they don't detect something coming up from behind in the adjacent lane at a significant speed difference. They don't look far enough behind. IIRC the Germans criticised Tesla's autopilot for that ... and in a situation where you're doing 130 km/h and the car coming up from behind is legally doing 230 km/h, that's pretty important.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The claim was that the sides of the trailer were white, and confused the image processor. But, it order for the side of the trailer to get that far into the field of view of the camera, the tractor had to have passed through the field of view, so the image processor must have "seen" the tractor, but didn't worry that it couldn't see the trailer.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Look at 11foot8.com. Which just nailed a 'secret military' truck. Even humans stink at this and that's with warning signs, flashing lights, and every other option available to deflect the stupid from hitting a bridge that is older than most people. And people wonder why military equipment costs so much.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Dan - Owner
http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
A.I. sometimes means Artificial Imbecile.
We'd all be safer if the decision makers kept this in mind.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I think that the woman would have been more visible if the headlamps were off and the amplification of the image higher.
Not helping is what looks like a black jacket and low levels of lighting from local streetlamps. Also it's not helping that neither the driver nor the pedestrian seems engaged with the situation.
I don't know if an alert driver would have done much better. Even though I know where the victim will be, until less than 1/2 second from impact I can't make out any evidence of her. There was no lighting behind her that was being eclipsed as she went across the road; not even from retro-reflective striping paint on the road.
I expect the NTSB will be interested in this and I look forward to a report as to why the Lidar and radar sensors specifically failed to detect her. There should have been plenty of time for several cycles. It wouldn't even require target path prediction.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It looks like she crossed between areas lit by streetlights. I wonder how well cameras respond to changes in light level. Our (human) eyes cope way better at changing light levels than digital cameras. This may be part of learning to walk in the vicinity of robot vehicles.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
"Schiefgehen wird, was schiefgehen kann" - das Murphygesetz
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The LIDAR should be able to detect obstacles out to well past 200 ft, so it had to have detected the person at least 2.5 seconds before the person was visible in the video. This is a major fubar in the systems engineering.
The Uber should also have a radar, which should also have detected the person.
This is again a context issue, since even a non-moving obstacle in what should have been an unoccupied lane is a major deviation from normality. Moreover, given the range and the obvious motion of the person, the sensors should have been able to easily determine that there was going to be an intersection in trajectories.
The Uber supposedly has a "camera array," and at least some of them should have been configured for low-light.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The LiDAR does not require ambient light. Then again, there is a huge confict between resolution and scan rate. I think Elon Musk may be right about LiDAR.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Below is something like what the lidar should have seen. I think Musk is crazy. Humans get into accidents precisely because they don't have enough bandwidth and detection capability; this is where lidar or radar could trivially provide additional sensing and processing capability. Hypothetically, the video is what a human driver might have been able to see, but lidar would have and should have detected the pedestrian and provided warning that something was in the adjacent lane coming up. Had it been working correctly, it should have also determined that the anomaly was moving toward the car's own lane.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
That video makes the incident very damning against uber. The car totally failed in detecting an object that was clear visible to it's sensors and was crossing into it's path for some time before the impact occurred. I'd guess she would have been on the road and easily detectable for 4-5 seconds before the impact happened which is lots of time for the car to react.
Feet appear in the video maybe 1.5 seconds before the collision. At 38mph, that is about 85 feet. I've never been in a Volvo with HID projector lights, but I've been in other cars with them and the low beams project enough light to make objects in front of the car visible to a distance that is much greater than 85'. So, I would say the camera taking that video suffers from a contrast limitation limiting the visible distance compared to what a human could see.
I'd bet a driver who was paying attention and is capable of steering avoidance instead of just freaking out and slamming on the brakes could have avoided her. The autonomous driving system should have easily avoided her too.
Blaming the sensors is a non-starter. If that accident was caused by sensor limitations, then better sensing must be developed for these cars.
Musk's argument is hinged on that fact that it's an expensive sensor so the system will be much cheaper without it.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Just because it could be cheaper doesn't mean that it's the right answer, particularly if it winds up being no better than a human with terrible night vision.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The first graph is per million miles so yes I think that it does account for the higher annual mileage of younger drivers.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
My supposition is that most miles driven have either no pedestrians present at all or have only secondary opportunities. One might argue about places like downtown Manhattan where in some areas and times pedestrians would be trapped if they were to never step into traffic lanes, but they are cognizant that drivers are less likely to yield, but that is more of a parking lot situation than a driving one.
In the following it seems to me that the largest factor is pedestrian behavior. Buses are probably very high because they are attractants and dispersants of pedestrians; lots of people on foot nearby and operate in the lane alongside sidewalks. Heavy trucks are probably low because they don't operate near pedestrians (example: fewer people near warehouses) and pedestrians can easily identify them.
(reformatted from http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/11/4/232 , says is based on 2002 US DOT statistics)
(Edit: RR = Relative Rate)
Passenger cars and light trucks (vans, pickups, and sport utility vehicles) accounted for 46.1% and 39.1%, respectively, of the 4875 deaths, with the remainder split among motorcycles, buses, and heavy trucks.
Compared with cars, the RR of killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile was
7.97 (95% CI 6.33 to 10.04) for buses;
1.93 (95% CI 1.30 to 2.86) for motorcycles;
1.45 (95% CI 1.37 to 1.55) for light trucks, and
0.96 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.18) for heavy trucks.
Compared with cars,
buses were 11.85 times (95% CI 6.07 to 23.12) and
motorcycles were 3.77 times (95% CI 1.40 to 10.20)
more likely per mile to kill children 0–14 years old.
Buses were 16.70 times (95% CI 7.30 to 38.19) more likely to kill adults age 85 or older than were cars.
The risk of killing a pedestrian per vehicle mile traveled in an urban area was 1.57 times (95% CI 1.47 to 1.67) the risk in a rural area.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Take your digital camera out and try shooting in limited light. Film emulsion, CCDs, and CMOSs do not have the bandwidth of a human eye. That woman was invisible to the camera until the last split second. She would not have been invisible to the driver if he had kept his head up.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Just this morning, I was on the same road where this accident happened- the car in front of me drifted over the lane divider line and stayed there for close to a quarter mile. Too busy texting to even realize that they were taking up 2 lanes.
I have been driving in the area they have been testing these vehicles for many months. I was skeptical when they started doing this, but I have never seen one make what I would consider a dangerous maneuver.
The more we hear about the Tempe accident, the more it sounds like it was probably the pedestrian's fault. There are many large bushes along this stretch of road, it seems likely that the sensors didn't even know the pedestrian was there until it was too late. One of the scariest moment I had while diving (only a couple miles from this site), was when a mountain biker darted out from behind some bushes while I was driving the speed limit. He came to a quick stop and almost went over his handle bars just a few feet in front of me. There was no warning that he was approaching (he was not on a trail)- and I would have had no chance of stopping if he had continued into traffic.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
btw, the safety driver was a woman. But, this is not your, or my, digital camera; any intensified camera with IR cut filter removed can see in starlight alone. Moreover, even the tiny bit of light from the headlights would be more than enough for even a moderately intensified camera, or even an HDR camera. It's unimaginable that the engineers wouldn't have at least run HDR, which is even available on cell phones, specifically for this type of use case. HDR, when properly implemented, substantially outperforms the instantaneous dynamic range of the human eyeball. The headlights could clearly illuminate adjacent lanes out to at least 100 ft, so HDR should have picked up the pedestrian in video camera.
And, since this is NOT a Tesla, the lidar, as was pointed out earlier, doesn't need any ambient light. If Uber had depended on using just that video for collision avoidance, they should have never gotten authorization for full autonomous driving, and they should be rightly sued for every penny a good lawyer can get from them.
I'm not even sure what you mean by bandwidth; the human eyeball has about a 150 millisecond averaging time, which is why it's typically happy with 24-fps imagery, while even a cheap Epson camera can do 200 frames a second. The pedestrian was WALKING, not running, not riding, a bicycle across the road, so bandwidth isn't even that relevant.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The pedestrian is clearly not looking, so to that extent, they could have avoided the incident, but, again, the pedestrian wasn't moving fast, and the only issue, aside from not paying attention, is that they crossed in the worst possible spot in the section of the road, right past where the street light actually lights the pavement. Moreover, they were in the left hand lane, not hiding behind bushes. The car failed miserably in a number of ways in a foreseeable use-case. The pedestrian's feet are clearly visible within the car's lane at about 50 ft from the point of impact. The car should have been braking or swerving well before the impact. Had the car reacted at all in the half-second before the impact, there might a reasonable argument, but it didn't react, even when the pedestrian was fully illuminated by the headlights.
btw, video such as what is posed on the web, doesn't come close to displaying the true dynamic range of even the cheapest camera. There's almost nothing on the market that doesn't digitize at least 12 bits/color, but most video formats are 8-bit/color. And not to mention that display video uses AGC, which suppresses detail that might otherwise be clearly visible. It's certainly in Uber's financial interest to NOT show what the cameras probably did see.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
That vehicle had LIDAR. It should have seen the bike and person regardless. But anything reflective like those shoes or bicycle reflectors would have been screaming at that sensor.
It most likely is a breakdown in processing and programming. Even with our limited vision relative to LIDAR, we can differentiate between a couple of mylar potato chip bags blowing across the road and a pair of tennis shoes. Good drivers even have muscle memory that automatically takes over to avoid those collisions. We can't see animals for anything at night. But those that drive amongst them know that two beady little specs of light low to the shoulder mean to focus our attention if we don't want want to kill someone's pet; and that two beady specs of light at chest height mean to slow down immediately if we don't want to wind up in the body shop.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
So long as it's not the one in Florida.
As an example of what HDR can do, right now, the first image is comparable to what's in the video, but the camera probably saw something like the second image, and this is without headlights. Note that the second image specifically remaps the dynamic range of the HDR into a standard display dynamic range. I think the Uber's cameras should have seen what this second image looks like, and not what's in the video on YouTube.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I now agree that the lidar should have seen her.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
----------------------------------------
The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Professional Engineer (ME, NH, MA) Structural Engineer (IL)
American Concrete Industries
https://www.facebook.com/AmericanConcrete/
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The issue here might be the maximum effective contrast ratio.
The human eye is typically much better than cameras to start, *and* can also dart about and quickly peek into the shadows. In the real world, I sometimes hold my hand up to block an overly-bright street lamp, so I can better see into a dark area.
The regulators may have to impose some basic Vision Tests on new self-driving vehicles.
Investigators should consider this when reviewing the video. They might need to ask the next questions:
- How come your cameras couldn't see the pedestrian?
- Who specified the inappropriate cameras?
- Who is your System Safety Engineer?
edit: But if "Uber uses LIDAR and radar sensors...", then it may not be a primary issue.RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I have to ask, would this type of car drive at full speed in fog? Most sane humans would not drive full speed if their vision was impaired.
Also are there any tests of these cars in areas where the roads may not be in the best conditions?
It appears the driving might only be in good conditions, so as to improve reliability numbers.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Another problem with LiDAR is that when there are a lot of them, they will be seeing each other's signals. This would not have been a problem with this accident on a fairly lonely road, but imagine moving through a downtown intersection.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
----------------------------------------
The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I have a feeling, but nothing more, that the issue here wasn't whether the pedestrian and bicycle were detected, but that the underlying logic chose to ignore it.
If there is a pothole, or a bump, or a painted road marking, or a small piece of debris, lying on the road directly in front of the car, you don't want the self-driving logic to slam on the brakes or take drastic evasive action.
Somehow the system has to distinguish between something it needs to avoid, and something it can safely ignore and drive over or through.
Select wrongly ... and a situation like this one happens.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Thanks. That was the term I was looking for.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
IRstuff - I didn't say you were blaming the sensors. I was just making a general observation that that any excuse about her not being detectable is complete BS. You and I are both on the same page believing this was a complete and utter fail for the AI system.
As I already pointed out, the distance where she becomes visible is much closer than the distance I can see when behind the wheel. So the camera that was filming that video definitely had a contrast issue and did not show what a human could see. It very much works in Uber's favor, at least for the people who are clueless about the capabilities of the camera used to film that video and/or the capabilities of the sensor package being used by the AI driving the car.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The issue with the bush theory is that it's in the car's lane for at least one second (from the time the feet are visible to the time of impact), and no warnings, no detections, and no braking occurs.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Here is the link to where she was hit. https://goo.gl/maps/9qhLm8pJhcE2
She had the potential to be seen for over 300' from where the Volvo came out from under the overpass. The second picture is the streetview from that vantage point.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Oh will they end up scrambling each other's vision? Like everyone shinign torches in each otehrs face?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Alternately, one could imagine using something like programmable quantum cascade lasers with unique wavelengths.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I wonder what this log would show in this case? I would be willing to bet that the woman + bike was detected by the sensors, but for whatever reason was not attributed to be a threat to be avoided? Perhaps she looked like a motorbike merging from the left into the lane in front of the car, and thus did not need to be avoided?
I wonder what decision is made when it is 'too late' to avoid a threat in a safe manner? Do you prioritise occupant safety (e.g. avoid sudden / dangerous braking which might result in a pile up) or do you prioritise pedestrian safety (and do absolutely anything possible to slow down before hitting them, even if this might escalate into a pileup)?
The video of the 'person behind the wheel' is shocking. The amount of inattention she is paying is criminal.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The Tesla decided the truck trailer which was in the path of it's windshield was not a concern since it was classified as an overhead sign and signs don't move and cars are supposed to be able to drive under them....
The most likely cause was her being classified wrong caused the "AI" to decide she wasn't a threat the car could hit. Being classified as a motorcycle travelling the same direction and changing into the same lane doesn't make much sense from the point that the car was rapidly approaching it, and it should brake or otherwise to try to avoid any another vehicle it is rapidly approaching. Being classified as an object that the car is not supposed to be able to hit makes more sense than a wrong one that moves and that it could hit.
The weather report for Tempe last Sunday says the winds were gusting to 26 mph. Was the foliage on the sides of the road blowing around enough to confuse the "AI"?
We can all speculate, but we'll only find out what really went wrong if/when Uber releases any findings on the accident.
Spartan5 - yes, I already posted a link to the street view pretty much pointing out the spot it happened even before the video was released. So, I'm quite aware of the location and street configuration. The evidence so far makes it quite clear there was lots of time for detection and she didn't abruptly dart into the cars path, so something else went wrong.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Dik
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
LiDAR fires a laser. A few
micronanoseconds after the laser fires, the receiver sees what is called the t0 blast. The LiDAR electronics start counting, waiting for the signal to bounce off something and reflect back into the receiver lens. The receiver probably will have a narrow band interference filter that excludes all light that is not within say 2nm of the laser signal. LiDARs now are fairly rare. That 905nm signal you are detecting almost certainly is yours. If fifty cars all have LiDAR, that signal almost certainly is not yours. You have no way to make sense of the other signals. There is not enough bandwidth to give each vehicle its own laser wavelength, even if this were practical in cost sensitive production.The company I worked for was developing airborne LiDARs that flew high enough, and ran at high enough laser pulse rates that the lasers were firing before the previous pulse came back from the ground. There were all sorts of tricky electronics for dealing with that. Of course, this would not be a problem for a car approaching woman pushing a bicycle across the highway. LiDAR scanners are a whole lot of fun
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Dik
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The design beamwidth of a lidar might be on the order of 1.5 mrad, which is less than 0.1 deg. lidars need to be scanned to cover the 50 deg or so of frontage, so the receivers are aligned with and have fields of view (5 mrad-ish) comparable to the beamwidths. There needs to be a larger receiver FOV than beamwidth to allow for physical misalignment and TOF during the scan. Opposing lidar beam on own receiver will be very, given the small beamwidths and FOVs, and masking by other cars. But, such events are essentially non-events in the sense that the strength of the signals are likely to saturate the receivers.
Returns from cars going in the same direction are likewise relatively rare, as there also masking by other cars, and the limited time and angles over which a Lambertian return can actually get into the FOV of a receiver. Nevertheless, the interference can be mitigated by a pulse-coding scheme with a matched filter receiver. Additional mitigators could be varying the pulse energy as a function of traffic congestion, since having a car 20 ft in front of you means that firing the lidar to find a 100-m distant target is not realistic.
Additionally, the collision avoidance processor needs to maintain a 3D database of detected objects, and generate trajectories as required, and apply a fading memory to kill of older and no longer relevant objects.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Also found this interesting snippet:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transpor...
Dan - Owner
http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It's a comprehensive failure.
IEEE Spectrum
Screen capture cropped:
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Would the car automatically do this? Or would it have kept on going?
Can an AI be ticketed for hit and run?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Note the pavers in the median on the left side. Just off the picture is a no walking sign the city posted in that area. I gather this must have been a problem even before this incident.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Another dash cam still from that exact spot:
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Uber shot themselves in the foot with their video, because the better video shows that TWO sensor systems failed to operate correctly; the video cameras should have been capable of seeing the pedestrian, and simple change detection would have detected the lateral motion into the car's lane and the lidar likewise should have detected the pedestrian from double or triple that distance.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Eyeballing the resolution and range the LiDAR was functioning it seems hard to believe that it would not have picked up a pedestrian several seconds before impact.
Here however is an old blog on the subject https://recast.ai/blog/the-era-of-smart-cars-focus...
"The most common errors for detectors are:
detecting tree leaves or traffic lights in background as pedestrian
detecting the same person twice
not detecting small persons
not detecting cyclists"
oo er.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
US football receivers running at their fastest would seem to be a plausible upper bound for "pedestrians" at about 28 ft/s. This would suggest that the lidar needs to have a frame rate on the order of 5 to 10 Hz to be able to correlate runners as single targets moving at a high rate. Slow targets might be the senior citizen in front of me in the supermarket, moving at about 0.5 ft/s. Usually, the big challenge isn't the targets, it's the obscurations, such as when a slow moving target walks behind a wall or billboard. A conventional tracker might get fooled into thinking the target came to stop at the leading edge of the obscuration and decide not to look for the target to re-emerge on the far side of the obscuration. Faster targets are less problematic with obscurations, but they aren't problem free.
Lidars have one serious limitation that makes the processing so difficult, and that's shadows, i.e., the areas behind objects that block further transmission of the laser and where pedestrians tend to suddenly emerge into traffic.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
This is different to the Tesla invisible truck problem because the Tesla system lacks a LiDAR, so it has to have good visual analysis.
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
And it failed miserably at that. Change detection should have detected the sudden presence of a "overhead sign," and that alone should have been an issue. The fact that the "overhead sign" went below the clearance level of the car and it didn't conclude that was a problem, is a problem. The fact that it failed to detect the wheels and undercarriage of the truck as anomalies is also a problem.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
At least we can be thankful that Uber is such a model corporate citizen with no history of ethical misfires. They've always acted in accordance with only the highest moral principles. So we can rest assured that they'll fully cooperate, honestly and openly.
--
One of the mistakes that newbie or bad drivers can make is looking for obstacles ahead. The correct logic is to look for empty road ahead. (The wording here is a simplification, but I trust that the point is clear.)
Perhaps autonomous vehicles should be subjected to a blinding Sudden Fog Bank Test. Or a Blind Curve (with too generous speed limit) Test. Such testing should be complete with a brick wall final exam.
I'm not sure that this 'safe driving logic' point is related to what happened here. Although it seems to have driven straight into a non-empty road.
So far this accident seems inexplicable. Explanations offered so far are not merely 'lessons learned', but massive failures.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
However, I'm struggling with how trivial this scenario ought to have been. This is like worrying about a kindergartener running well, when they seem to have failed to tie their shoelaces.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The above statement that drivers (whether human or otherwise) should be aiming for empty road is an extremely important one. It's still not without its share of headaches.
Does a pothole disqualify empty road? A little pothole? A big one? A sinkhole? Where's the threshold between stopping/swerving and driving over or through it?
Does a piece of paper ahead disqualify empty road? A small piece of debris? A truck tire tread? A squirrel? A cat? A dog? A small deer? A moose? A small human? A big one? Where's the threshold? You do not want self driving cars dodging a plastic bag or stopping in a traffic lane of a motorway.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
But, now that you know that they're going to want to game the system, there are other approaches to the problem, such as demanding source code and program memory inspection, or randomly selected scenarios. Even now, we demand that we can arbitrarily build executables in a traceable fashion, simply so that we can avoid other silly problems like repeatable builds.
The smog tests are absurdly simple compared the tests required of a target detection and tracking system.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It's one thing to look for a logic fault when a programmed system has a repeatable flaw and you have a clue where to look. "Oh crap, we have an OR rather than an AND between these two logic rungs." (been there!) It's quite another to have millions, possibly billions, of lines of code laid out with the task "Find all the problems with this."
How many times do you get "Windows Update" ...
Random test scenarios would have to be part of the picture, but it is the nature of statistics that they will not find every flaw.
Self-driving cars are essentially going through random test scenarios right now. This random test scenario found a bug.
And for those saying "this shouldn't be happening in public", I don't disagree, but at the same time, in controlled test scenarios, probably that pedestrian wouldn't have pushed that bicycle across the road in that manner under those lighting conditions.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Historically, AI has been 'an indoor cat', assigned to finite problems within defined problem spaces. Now it's being taken outdoors, where the problem space is unbounded. I expect that it will soon be realized that "AI Outdoors is VERY hard."
There's also the issue of sensors. It's hard to appear intelligent if you're oblivious to what's going on around you. Autonomous vehicles should have microphones to hear the sirens of emergency vehicles, but nobody seems to have thought of even that obvious example. Smoke, vibrations, sudden banging noises, screams of terror from the passengers, etc.; all should be inputs. Successful AI Outdoors will need a large range of sensors.
Given the wildly optimistic naivety, these sorts of accidents are not surprising. They'll continue, and lives and billions will be lost.
I expect that it'll be a bit like Fermat's Last Theorem. Yes, Wiles' [edited] 129-page solution certainly would not fit in the margin. When Autonomous Vehicles are finally fully sorted out (10+ years from now), they'll look back and then realize how the problem was so much bigger than they expected.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
I wonder what the frame rate of Lidar is? Being mechanically scanned (laser and spinning mirrors), I assume it's slow.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
See www.velodynelidar.com/lidar/products/manual/HDL-64...
One characteristic that I expected but did not find is the beam divergence.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
"To debug that by looking at source code would be a herculean task at minimum."
The first thing to do is to start with the recorded data and processor logs. Since they are in the testing phase, there should be copious amounts of both. If the data log is empty, heads will roll.
Note that we were referring to acceptance tests, not engineering tests. The engineering tests are performed by the supplier, and should involve a progression of tests starting at the smallest software module, and then progressing to ensembles of modules. Acceptance tests are not intended to exhaustively test functionality, just like IIHS or DOT tests only test specific things, which were gamed by VW and others. But, one can demand, justifiably, that a testing authority have access to the code, and witness the programming of such code, and tested with a series of random scenarios.
The HDL-64 has 0.4-deg vertical resolution and almost exactly 2-mrad horizontal resolution at 5-Hz frame rate, so at 20-m range, it would have 0.04-m horizontal resolution, which means there were something like 205 lidar returns from the pedestrian every 0.2 seconds at the instant her feet were visibly illuminated by the headlights. At that frame rate, even if she were moving at 4 mph, there would have been minimal horizontal separation between successive lidar return clusters. It should have been trivial for the object processor to determine that there was a moving object about to get hit by the car. Consider that in the 1.2 seconds from that point, there should have been at least 6 complete frames, and more than 1230 lidar returns from the pedestrian (actually way more, since the range was decreasing), it should have been impossible for the object processor to ignore that pedestrian.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
In this case, for a vision based system, given that we're apparently talking about a time interval of only about 2 or 3 seconds and neither was obviously turning, both motions are going to be effectively linear.
And the scale of the "point of impact" doesn't really help much except in the final too-late fraction of a second.
Greg touched on an interesting point for vision systems. A lack of apparent relative motion for objects on a collision course. At least until it's perhaps too late.
Vision systems would perhaps benefit from widely spaced cameras, indicating placement on the outside mirror housings.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Next cab off the rank (haha) is the radar system. Do these vehicles have them and what is the spec?
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Many other questions but did the Uber stop and call 911 after running over the pedestrian?
It is hard enough to make chemical plants safe but at least they are not moving down the road at 70 mph. On the other, I think there are many things from the various safety analysis that are done in chemical plants that could be applied to these robot cars.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
A couple of quotes from this article: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-uber-pedestr...
"Also on Monday, the auto-parts maker that supplied the radar and camera on the Volvo SUV that struck and killed the woman last week said Uber had disabled the standard collision-avoidance technology in the vehicle.
"'We don't want people to be confused or think it was a failure of the technology that we supply for Volvo, because that's not the case,' Zach Peterson, a spokesman for Aptiv, said by phone. The Volvo XC90's standard advanced driver-assistance system 'has nothing to do' with the Uber test vehicle's autonomous driving system, he said.
"Aptiv is speaking up for its technology to avoid being tainted by the fatality involving Uber, which may have been following standard practice by disabling other tech as it develops and tests its own autonomous driving system. Experts who saw video of the Uber crash pointed to apparent failures in Uber's sensor system, which failed to stop or slow the car as 49-year-old Elaine Herzberg crossed a street pushing a bicycle."
And
"Meanwhile, a top executive for the maker of sensors used on the self-driving Uber vehicle said she was 'baffled' as to why the tech-outfitted vehicle failed to recognize a pedestrian crossing the street and hit the brakes.
"Marta Thoma Hall, president of Velodyne Lidar Inc., maker of the special laser radar that helps an autonomous car "see" its surroundings, said the company doesn't believe its technology failed. But she's surprised the car didn't detect Herzberg.
"'Certainly, our Lidar is capable of clearly imaging Elaine and her bicycle in this situation,' Thoma Hall wrote in an email. 'However, our Lidar doesn't make the decision to put on the brakes or get out of her way.
"'In addition to Lidar, autonomous systems typically have several sensors, including camera and radar to make decisions," she wrote. "We don't know what sensors were on the Uber car that evening, if they were working, or how they were being used.'"
And meanwhile, an interesting take on the whole situation:
https://jalopnik.com/uber-has-no-damn-business-tes...
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The jalopnik article is basically a rant, and however, or whatever, the writer feels about its business practice should not be confused with whether its technology is sound.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It's hard to be enthusiastic about trusting my life to that.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Prior to this, I certainly would not have had any doubts about the performance of the sensors, given that scenario. Even a competitor was able use the crappy video released by the police to detect the pedestrian and the bicycle at the first instant they were fully within the headlight illumination; obviously, there could be gaming of that for other reasons.
I know what I would have flowed down as requirements for the sensors, and at that range, the probability of detection would be essentially be 99.9999%, since I would have required at least 99% probability of detection at 300 ft for a pedestrian. That would be 5 seconds for a car at 40 mph, and that would mean at least 25 frames in which the pedestrian was detected. The number of lidar pixels declaring detections would have been in the hundreds.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
EDIT: On second read, this could be an issue with the writer/editor. Perhaps what she meant was her system does not have the control (i.e., "say-so") to put on the brakes, rather than "my system didn't recognize the danger". Difficult to say the way the article is written.
Dan - Owner
http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
The sensors are sensors, not processors.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
An extreme case here is that Velodyne's LiDAR reported an image to the robot driver, and then reported a new image a tenth of a second later. The robot then identifies obstacles and moving objects. A LiDAR will have an on-board computer and should be possible to design one that identifies, tracks and reports objects. This may make it more difficult to integrate the output of multiple LiDARs and cameras.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Not by design. At the root, a lidar collects a cloud of returns that simply contain range, azimuth, and elevation. A processor might be included that places the returns in their proper place in the world. Almost no lidars do target recognition, that is the province of the system processor, that integrates the radar and video data into the decision making.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/03/28/uber_self...
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-selfdrivi...
----------------------------------------
The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
That's nonsense, I have no doubt that Uber allowed the police to have the video specifically to sway the public into thinking that the accident was unavoidable. The cited article about the settlement exactly describes what Uber had hoped people would think; "when the headlights suddenly illuminated Herzberg in front of the SUV." The person who was thinking on their feet and released that video is going to get a huge bonus at Christmas time.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
One of my theories is that the camera contrast ratio was not sufficient to transition from dark areas to fully lit areas. People are posting stuff here that shows that cameras are available that have the contrast ratio. That is not good for Uber.
--
JHG
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
a) it even needed a high contrast resolution
b) there was even a high contrast situation
The other dash cam videos show that a high contrast situation didn't even exist, so I'm tempted to think that Uber released video that was purposely altered in contrast to make it appear as it the accident was unavoidable. BUT, it wasn't because the radar and lidar which were supposedly installed on this car don't require ambient light at all, i.e., had there been total darkness, the pedestrian should still have been detectable. Had there been a searchlight blinding the camera, the accident ought not have occurred.
The fact that people are lamenting the video is a strong indication of how big a bonus the person at Uber who released the video will be getting this year.
The video is completely and totally irrelevant to the collision that the car ought to avoided with ease.
TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies forum1529: Translation Assistance for Engineers Entire Forum list http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
It could be said the video shows the backup driver might not have been able to react, but I'm not buying that the backup driver could only we what that video shows. The glances the backup driver was giving might be indicative of how far she could see ahead, maybe not clearly but still with some visibility.
By the reports it didn't seem like much time elapsed between the crash and the police viewing the video.
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
BBC: Tesla in fatal California crash was on Autopilot
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
RE: Self Driving Uber Fatality
Rather than attempting the impossible with AI, if the the LIDAR, etc. were incorporated into regular automobiles, so that drivers could "see" what is not illuminated by the headlights,that would actually improve safety. Especially if such systems were incorporated as a heads-up display, showing the objects where they are from the driver's perspective. Some already have thermal imaging, but there is so much more that could be done.