Skip to main content

IAM RoadSmart welcomes US study on benefits of humans and new vehicles working together

UK independent road safety charity IAM RoadSmart has welcomed a new white paper which it says supports its statement that we will not gain the full safety benefits of self-driving cars until every car on the road is connected to each other. Until then, IAM RoadSmart believes that the human mind holds the edge, until such point that connected cars actually ‘talk’ to each other and predict what is happening over the horizon. According to the white paper, Sensor Fusion: A Comparison of Sensing Capabilities of
August 17, 2017 Read time: 3 mins

UK independent road safety charity IAM RoadSmart has welcomed a new white paper which it says supports its statement that we will not gain the full safety benefits of self-driving cars until every car on the road is connected to each other. Until then, IAM RoadSmart believes that the human mind holds the edge, until such point that connected cars actually ‘talk’ to each other and predict what is happening over the horizon.

According to the white paper, Sensor Fusion: A Comparison of Sensing Capabilities of Human Drivers and Highly Automated Vehicles, written by Brandon Schottle of the 5594 University of Michigan, machines/computers are generally well suited to perform tasks like driving, especially in regard to reaction time (speed), power output and control, consistency, and multichannel information processing. Human drivers still generally maintain an advantage in terms of reasoning, perception, and sensing when driving.

He added: “While no single sensor completely equals human sensing capabilities, some offer capabilities not possible for a human driver.

“In the short to medium term AV [autonomous vehicle] sensing systems will still be critical for detection of any road user or roadway obstacle that is not detected and shared by connected vehicles which is where the human brain comes in.”

Schottle pointed out a number of circumstances in which both human capability and a connected vehicle’s perception can be compromised – thus increasing the need for each party to work together – such as extreme weather, excessive dirt or physical obstructions, darkness or low illumination, large physical obstructions and dense traffic.

The report also pointed out where the human brain wins out over a vehicle’s ‘brain’; it said in the areas of memory, reasoning, sensing and perception, human involvement is both desirable and advantageous.

Neil Greig, IAM RoadSmart director of policy and research, said: “The ultimate win-win situation is a place where information from each vehicle is shared with the vehicles around it; add that to human experience born from a lifetime of ‘trial and error’ and you have the ideal double-act to spot crashes before they happen.”

Back in March, IAM RoadSmart warned that cars with growing levels of autonomy could make motorists lazy and over reliant on gadgets – with far reaching implications for the potential reduction of people killed and seriously injured on the roads.

Greig said at the time: “When it comes to driverless cars, IAM RoadSmart members are not keen to give up full control. The implications for future driver competence and training as we become more reliant on technology are still far from clear.”

The House of Lords Science and Technology Committee report Connected and Autonomous Vehicles: The future? echoed this view, stating: “Autonomous cars could have negative implications for drivers' competence, making drivers complacent and overly reliant on technology. This is of particular concern in emergency situations, where a driver may react slowly to taking back control of a vehicle.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Foundation funds research for informed campaigning
    April 29, 2015
    ITS International talks to Professor Stephen Glaister, director of the transport research and lobbying organisation, the RAC Foundation. It is through the eyes of an economist that Professor Stephen Glaister, emeritus professor of transport and infrastructure at Imperial College London and director of the RAC Foundation, views current and future transport problems. Having spent 30 years at the London School of Economics and another 10 at Imperial, the move to the RAC Foundation was a radical departure from
  • Car drivers misled and endangered by words like ‘autonomous’
    June 13, 2018
    Carmakers using the word ‘autonomous’ are lulling UK drivers into a false sense of security, says a new report. The warning from Thatcham Research and the Association of British Insurers (ABI) follows reports of drivers crashing because they are over-reliant on technology that is not fully autonomous. The partnership is now calling for manufacturers and legislators to clarify the capability of vehicles sold with technology that does some driving on behalf of motorists. Thatcham’s latest paper, Assi
  • Autonomous driving – what can we really expect?
    June 6, 2016
    Dave Marples of Technolution BV looks beyond the hype to the practical implementation of autonomous vehicles. Having looked at the development of this sector for some time, I am concerned about the current state of autonomous driving development as engineering (and marketing) have run way ahead of the wider systemic, and legislative, requirements to support an autonomous future.
  • IAM responds to illegal phone use study
    February 26, 2015
    The UK’s Institute of Advanced Motorists has responded to the Department for Transport study carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) into the prevalence of illegal mobile phone use while driving, saying that the results are disappointing but not at all surprising. The figures show that, in 2014, 1.1 per cent of drivers in England and Scotland were observed holding a phone in their hand with a further 0.5 per cent observed holding the phone to their ear, equating to more than 470,000 motorists