Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAre We There Yet? Autonomous System Safety and Sensor Accuracy vs. ADAS Complexity
(Note: Free article, but registration required)
Are We There Yet? Autonomous System Safety and Sensor Accuracy vs. ADAS Complexity
http://www.automotive-iq.com/chassis-systems/articles/are-we-there-yet-autonomous-system-safety-and-sensor-accuracy-vs-adas
Contributor: Graham Heeps | Posted: 10/10/2016
The fatal accident involving Teslas semi-autonomous Autopilot technology has heightened public awareness of the safety implications of handing vehicle control to sensors and software. What are specialist suppliers doing to ensure that, as greater numbers of sensors and additional processing complexity is built into vehicles, the risk of accidents is decreased, not increased?
A robust system begins with robust sensors, according to Louay Eldada, the CEO of LiDAR supplier Quanergy, whose S3 product will go into production with Sensata at the end of 2016, ahead of potential vehicle launches a couple of years down the road. He identifies the need for physical robustness in the sensor in the case of Quanergy, a solid-state LiDAR scanner thats good for more than 100,000 hours of operation as well as robustness in the information it supplies. Like others, hes convinced that the addition of LiDAR to the sensor mix will deliver the accuracy needed for greater levels of vehicle autonomy.
When you generate an object list thats refreshed maybe 30 or 50 times per second, every one of those objects has to be correct, he says. You cannot have false positives or false negatives, which are equally bad.
~ snip ~
The idea of dual or triple redundancy using independent sensing technologies for automated driving, or at least two in the long term for the most robust automated emergency braking (AEB) system, will give us the opportunity to eliminate as many false positives as possible, adds Andy Whydell, director of product planning for Global Electronics at ZF TRW. In the case of a two-sensor system for AEB, we can tailor our algorithms based on parameters such as vehicle speed and the detected object. I might choose to be more aggressive if my camera detects a pedestrian stepping out in front of me at low speed, for example. Even with only one input, I might start a response, maybe a brake pre-fill or a first-level braking, while I wait for a second sensor to confirm, because any speed reduction will give a direct benefit if a pedestrian is really there.
~ snip ~
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 309 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Are We There Yet? Autonomous System Safety and Sensor Accuracy vs. ADAS Complexity (Original Post)
FrodosPet
Oct 2016
OP
FrodosPet
(5,169 posts)1. So will we ever see the day when cars can boast 100% sensor certainty?
~ snip ~
Quanergys Eldada says that 100% certainty is unrealistic but nor does it matter. Nothing in life is 100%, he reasons. The question becomes, how many 9s do you have? Right now, video and radar-based systems do not even have a 90% rate of [detection] accuracy. With LiDAR, we assess that today we are at 99.99%. We believe we can add many more 9s over time, as we invest more. The number of accidents will never be zero, but the key thing is that the number will be reduced over time by improving the systems.
~ snip ~