Page 36 - EETimes Europe June 2021
P. 36

36 EE|Times EUROPE

           AV Safety-Report Scorecard Reveals Gaps in Information


             Kodiak is one company professing that higher test mileage does not
           necessarily equal more safety. In its safety report, the company wrote:
           “Of course, this disciplined approach means we will probably never
           log as many test miles as some of our competitors. We see our lower
           mileage count not as a risk but as a sign of our commitment
           to safety.”
             Aurora agrees, writing, “[We] treat real-world testing as a mechanism
           for validating and improving the fidelity of more rapid offline testing.
           This strategy has allowed us to contain the size of our on-road testing
           fleet. We limit the distance our test vehicles travel by pursuing mileage
           quality over quantity; that is, we seek out interesting miles rather than
           just pursuing large quantities of miles.”                                                                  IMAGE: SHUTTERSTOCK

           ‘HEAVY TAIL’
           On the importance of edge-case research, Koopman noted that the
           problem isn’t just about the frequency of surprises — unsafe events —
           that occur in real-world driving and require corrective actions.
             What matters even more is what the population of fixes looks like.   the FAA had grounded the entire Boeing 737 MAX fleet when funda-
           Surprises are all different. If there’s a huge population of problems, it   mental flaws in the design of the MAX’s Maneuvering Characteristics
           will take a very long time to make progress fixing them all, said Koop-  Augmentation System (MCAS) were exposed. “The safety questions
           man. Most likely, you’d never get there.              here are clear, so why the free pass for AV development? It is untenable
             Koopman wrote in his paper:                         for an industry to wail ‘saving lives’ while actually endangering them.
               Creating safe autonomous vehicles will require not only extensive   The political risks are enormous, and the Administration needs to wake
             training and testing against realistic operational scenarios, but   up and show decisive leadership right now.”
             also dealing with uncertainty. The real world can present many   There’s already a precedent. An SAE spokesman noted that “a little
             rare but dangerous events, suggesting that these systems will need   more than a year after” pedestrian Elaine Herzberg was killed by an
             to be robust when encountering novel, unforeseen situations.  Uber test AV, the SAE took action, updating SAE J3018, Guidelines for
                                                                 Safe On-Road Testing of SAE Level 3, 4, and 5 Prototype Automated
               Generalizing from observed road data to hypothesize various   Driving Systems (first published in March 2015). This was “to better
             classes of unusual situations will help. However, a heavy tail dis-  reflect the needs of safe on-road performance testing.”
             tribution of surprises from the real world could make it impossible   The updated J3018 standard “incorporates lessons learned based
             to use a simplistic drive/fail/fix development process to achieve   on accumulated field experience in testing prototype ADS-operated
             acceptable safety.                                  vehicles on public roads and is now compatible with related SAE Inter-
               Autonomous vehicles will need to be robust in handling novelty,   national documents,”the spokeswoman said.
             and will additionally need a way to detect that they are encoun-  In parallel, a year after the fatal Uber accident, an invitation-only
             tering a surprise so that they can remain safe in the face of   auto industry group, the Automated Vehicle Safety Consortium (AVSC),
             uncertainty.                                        started to “document and make publicly available best practices
                                                                 associated with in-vehicle fallback test drivers based on the types of
                                                                 measures and processes the members use,” said Ed Straub, director
           NEW ADMINISTRATION, NEW NHTSA?                        of the SAE Office of Automation. He described the AVSC’s mission as
           NHTSA’s laissez-faire approach to the auto industry is notorious. For   “generating public trust in SAE L4 and L5 autonomous vehicles.” All
           decades, the agency’s interest has squarely aligned with automakers   AVSC members are doing on-road ADS testing for various applications.
           and tech companies.                                     But here’s the thing: When AV companies started seeking permission
             Thus far, the Biden Administration has given no clues about its   from cities and states to test drive AVs on public roads, why didn’t local
           approach to safety issues in autonomous vehicles. Will new Transpor-  regulators demand that AV operators conform to J3018?
           tation Secretary Pete Buttigieg steer NHTSA in a new direction and, for   Straub said, “I can’t speak to the minds of different states and cities.”
           example, make tech companies and carmakers’ AV safety claims more   He speculated that awareness of the standard might not have trickled
           transparent and accountable?                          down to the “right people who could potentially use it as a reference.”
             The agency is reviewing the public comments it collected for   But he also defended the auto industry’s position, saying, “SAE
           the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on auton-  International standards are voluntary and have been for over a hundred
           omous driving systems issued by the previous administration. The   years, unless explicitly cited in regulations such as the FMVSS [Federal
           comment period ended on April 1. An NHTSA spokeswoman told EE   Motor Vehicle Safety Standards].”
           Times in May that the agency might have more to say after it finishes   He pointed out that “the technology and testing associated with
           reviewing the public comments and determining its next steps.  automated driving changes at a pace we haven’t seen before. Because of
             “NHTSA’s regulatory plans for the next 12 months will be published   this, it can be very difficult for open industry standards to keep pace …
           later this spring [as part of] the Semi-Annual Unified Agenda of    Because voluntary industry standards invite all interested stakeholders
           Regulatory Actions,” she said.                        to develop them, they can take a longer time to develop. Regulations
                                                                 that would ‘require’ compliance [like FMVSS] can take even longer.”
           ONE CATASTROPHIC EVENT AWAY                             Seriously, though, what sort of industry spends time and resources
           Many AV industry observers are aware that the fledgling industry is   developing a safety standard for all its members but shows no interest
           only one news event away from the government finally deciding to   in enforcement? How is it that the “rules of the road” apply to every-
           enforce stricter rules.                               body but the people who make the cars? ■
             As Barnden observed, “If an AV test-level vehicle kills a single pedes-
           trian or a child, that leads straight to President Biden.” He noted that   Junko Yoshida recently retired as global editor-in-chief of AspenCore.

           JUNE 2021 | www.eetimes.eu
   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41