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.”

Location Based Systems

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • IAM warns of dangers of in-car technology distractions
    April 30, 2015
    The UK Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) has warned that car manufacturers are building high-tech distractions into their new vehicles and have made interiors so comfortable they are being turned into living rooms. IAM chief executive officer Sarah Sillars said efforts to reduce distraction factors for motorists are being undone by the relentless pace of technology and eagerness of car makers to pack more gadgets onto dashboards. She said the main areas of concern were highly sophisticated satellite-
    Read More
  • ITS benefits escape public
    June 8, 2015
    John Kendall considers the public’s awareness of the benefits of ITS. While the results of developing ITS technology may be clear to readers of ITS International, there is far less evidence that drivers have any appreciation of what the technology is doing for them. So how aware are drivers of the developments that are designed to make their journeys less congested and safer?
    Read More
  • Assessing the potential of in-vehicle enforcement systems
    December 4, 2012
    Jason Barnes considers the social and ethical ramifications of using in-vehicle safety technologies to fulfil enforcement functions. Although policy documents often imply close correlation between enforcement, compliance and safety – in part, as a counter to accusations that enforcement is rather more concerned with revenue generation – there is a noticeable reluctance among policy makers and auto manufacturers to exploit in-vehicle safety systems for enforcement applications. From a technical perspective t
    Read More
  • Substantial savings from smarter street lighting
    February 25, 2015
    As authorities strive to reduce expenditure and carbon emissions, Colin Sowman looks at some of the smart ways of managing street lighting while containing costs and maintaining safety. Street lighting can account for 40% of an authority’s energy consumption. So, faced with the need to reduce outgoings, some authorities are looking for smart ways of managing street lighting or even turning off swathes of street lights in the small hours. Back in 2008 the E-street Initiative report concluded that authorities
    Read More

Highlighted Content