Slashdot Mirror


Another Step Towards the Driverless Car

jtogel writes "At Essex, we have for some time been working on automatically learning how to race cars in simulation. It turns out that a combination of evolutionary algorithms and neural networks can learn how to beat all humans in racing games, and also come up with some quite interesting, novel behaviours, which might one day make their way into commercial racing games. While this is simulation, the race is now on for the real thing — we are setting up a competition for AI developers, where the goal is to win a race between model cars on real tracks. As the cars will be around half a meter long, the cost of participating will be a fraction of that for the famous DARPA Grand Challenge, whereas the challenges will be similar in terms of computer vision and AI."

16 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. In case of rapture by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    At least now they won't cause accidents.

    Seriously, this is a technology whose time has come. Persuading elderly drivers to give up their cars is difficult, and the baby boom generation is putting a lot of people in that situation in the next decade or two.

    1. Re:In case of rapture by binarybum · · Score: 5, Funny

      Persuading elderly drivers to give up their cars is difficult

          Have you ever really tried? Sure they get ornery and wave their canes around a bit, but most of them are fairly frail and the task can be completed with ease. Sometimes they're confused and just think you're a valet - these ones will hand you the keys with a smile!

      --
      ôó
    2. Re:In case of rapture by suv4x4 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, this is a technology whose time has come. Persuading elderly drivers to give up their cars is difficult, and the baby boom generation is putting a lot of people in that situation in the next decade or two.

      Not just, consider accident caused by drunk drivers, by drivers fell asleep, careless drivers...

      But don't expect a smooth transition. An "AI" driver could silently save thousands of lives, but the first cases where the AI was the reason for an accident will cause major outcries.

      It's the nature of human beings to react like that.

    3. Re:In case of rapture by stratjakt · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I bet you can't wait to be stuck in a state run home, either.

      You're probably young, so the ageism can be explained.

      I know people in their 80s, perfectly capable of driving, and renewing their license.

      We don't need dorks mandating new technologies to use. We just need the DMV to do it's job, which is to make sure only qualified drivers are qualified to drive.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:In case of rapture by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What we NEED is the same thing pilots do: recurrent training and tests every other year to make sure you're still able to run a vehicle safely: medical, knowledge, and performance tests. You fail, you're out, until you've gotten your skills back into compliance.

      It isn't the middle-aged who oppose this plan.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  2. Re:In case of rapture or old folks driving by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 4, Funny

    Persuading elderly drivers to give up their cars is difficult, and the baby boom generation is putting a lot of people in that situation in the next decade or two.

    I find backing over them works fairly well.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  3. Re:Forza 2 by jtogel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't know much about the techniques underlying Forza 2, but I went over and talked to the guys who worked on Forza 1, and we compared our approaches. At least for the first game, what they are actually using is recorded trajectories on different track segments which are then spliced together at the junctions of segments, so as to create similar-looking behaviours on unseen tracks. The problem here is of course that the new tracks are constrained to being constructed out of the same segments as the driver has already been tested on - there is no generalization. The track designers for Forza simply had to live with this constraint.

    We have ourselves gotten player modelling working fine with evolutionary neural networks, which can generalize, but the Forza team didn't consider these techniques reliable and fast enough in time for the release of the original game. Maybe things have changed with Forza 2.

    There is some information on the Forza AI on http://research.microsoft.com/mlp/forza/, and our approach to modelling is described in http://julian.togelius.com/Togelius2006Making.pdf.

    Note that all this is about modelling behaviour, not about creating new behaviour from scratch; there are some papers on this on my website as well.

  4. Safety vs. Freedom , again. by Original+Replica · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Make it either Opt-In or by Court Order

    Now this, to me, is a very important distiction. What if for this to work well, all the cars have to be computer controlled? What if computer control is then mandated? This is a whole new exciting level of "nanny government". Sure this might be safer in that there would be fewer auto accidents, but do you really want all transportation to be centrally controlled? Sure each car might be autonomous at first, but emergency workers need the ability to remotely turn on off, right? It's for everyone's safety.

    --
    We are all just people.
    1. Re:Safety vs. Freedom , again. by codemachine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are certainly control and privacy issues in automation, as well who is liability in case of an error (which is probably the one thing that won't be overcome - lawyers will never allow it).

      But on the other hand, getting killed in an automobile is much too common, especially given that almost everyone has to travel in one at some point, if not very frequently. Getting around shouldn't be so bloody dangerous considering how ubiquitous it is. Imagine not every having to let drunks choose between being responsible vs driving home drunk. And imagine not ever having to be on the road where some random drunk or incompetent driver, can end your life at any instant, where it is just bad luck that puts you in this spot.

      Automobiles are an outdated and obsolete technology, or at least should be. The problem is coming up with and implementing the "next step" when the current technology is so ingrained into our society and city planning. It is a very non-trivial problem to come up with something better, and another non-trivial problem to "upgrade" to that something better on a live production world.

    2. Re:Safety vs. Freedom , again. by inviolet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Getting around shouldn't be so bloody dangerous considering how ubiquitous it is. Imagine not every having to let drunks choose between being responsible vs driving home drunk. And imagine not ever having to be on the road where some random drunk or incompetent driver, can end your life at any instant, where it is just bad luck that puts you in this spot.

      The safety aspect is definitely a selling point. But that's not the killer app.

      The killer app for AI cars is: traffic throughput. Right now, traffic throughput is limited by our need to leave lots of space in front of our car so that we don't hit the guy in front of us. This creates low throughput through traffic lights because everyone must wait for the person in front of them to move away, before starting to move too. AI would need none of that.

      Ditto for freeway merges and weaves. AI could weave two lanes of cars together with ease... even without central automation or inter-car communication. All that is needed is a sufficiently standardized algorithm or a sufficiently clever computer. Our brains already do the same, even when the "DriveCar.exe" process is set to low priority in favor of a ringing cellphone.

      Can you imagine how fast traffic could move if (to name just one benefit) everyone rolled forward instantly when the light turned green? And if nobody slowed down to rubberneck a roadside accident?

      The implementation problem might solve itself too. Once AI cars prove their mettle, I can imagine that cities will designate more and more lanes as "AI only", with attendant increases in speed limit and throughput. Sort of like how HOV lanes work today. Soon we'll all be clamoring for an AI car in order to get the same benefits.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    3. Re:Safety vs. Freedom , again. by Snart+Barfunz · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just a small point - marketing driverless car software as a 'killer app' - probably a bad idea.

      --
      --- Yx3 = Delilah ---
    4. Re:Safety vs. Freedom , again. by CheeseTroll · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The difference between dying in an auto accident and dying from pneumonia or cancer, is that auto accidents occur without warning, and affect people at *any* age, regardless of their health situation. Was I sad when my grandparents passed away? Of course, but at 90+ years of age, it was hardly what I'd call a tragic death. The same could not be said if my wife or kids were killed in an auto accident.

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
  5. The underlying research by jtogel · · Score: 5, Informative

    If anyone actually is interested in reading the papers discussing the experiments we did (many more than you see in the videos!), most of them are available on my website.

    Some of them are of course better than others. I can recommend this one, about evolving general and specific driving skills, this one about co-evolution, this one about different learning techniques, and this one about modelling human driving and evolving tracks. There are several new ones, including one on physical cars, which are not on the website yet - mail me if you want a preprint!

    All this assuming that anyone actually reads academic papers... sometimes it seems that not even the guy who writes the paper actually reads it. (Not true in my case, of course!)

  6. Not just for older drivers - wives also! by mrbluze · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sitting in a car with my missus driving is much the same as being in a driverless car:

    1. Still get claw marks on all the passenger-side interior handles and the dashboard
    2. Still likely to hit every bird, squash every small furry animal on the road and drive over every cardboard box and bit of metal.
    3. Still get no response or admission of guilt when the car crashes

    Biggest difference is that the thing is more likely to know the way to someplace.

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
  7. Oh great! by codemachine · · Score: 4, Funny

    It is bad enough seeing a steady stream of cars and SUVs with only one person in them streaming out of the downtown at rush hour. Now we're going to have cars out there that aren't even taking anyone anywhere.

    The environmentalists will not be happy with this development!

  8. Driving in the wrong direction by 955301 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone else feel like automating our current transportation is insanity compared to building a new transportation system that actually lends itself to automation?

    Why are we trying so hard to make something designed to be operated by a human computerized so it stays on the road when we can make a road with rails on it?

    --
    You are checking your backups, aren't you?