Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Self-Driving Car Faces Off Against Pro On Thunderhill Racetrack

Posted by Soulskill on from the see-you-on-the-top-gear-track dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Rachel Swaby reports that a self-driving car and a seasoned race-car driver recently faced off at Northern California's three-mile Thunderhill Raceway loop. The autonomous vehicle is a creation from the Center for Automotive Research at Stanford (CARS). 'We tried to model [the self-driving car] after what we've learned from the best race-car drivers,' says Chris Gerdes (who talks more about the development of autonomous cars in this TED talk). So who won? Humans, of course. But only by a few measly seconds. 'What the human drivers do is consistently feel out the limits of the car and push it just a little bit farther,' explained Gerdes. 'When you look at what the car is capable of and what humans achieve, that gap is really actually small.' Because the self-driving car reacts to the track as if it were controlled in real time by a human, a funny thing happens to passengers along for the ride. Initially, when the car accelerates to 115 miles per hour and then brakes just in time to make it around a curve, the person riding shotgun freaks out. But a second lap looks very different. Passengers tend to relax, putting their faith in the automatically spinning wheel. 'We might have a tendency to put too much confidence in it,' cautioned Gerdes. 'Watching people experience it, they'll say, oh, that was flawless.' Gerdes reaction: 'Wait wait! This was developed by a crazy professor and graduate students!'"

14 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. Seconds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seconds aren't "measly" in motorsports. They can decide an entire season championship.

    1. Re:Seconds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Outside the race track, who cares? It is like saying my processor is 1 Mhz better than yours.

    2. Re:Seconds? by jtownatpunk.net · · Score: 5, Funny

      And that would be technically correct. The best kind of correct.

    3. Re:Seconds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Similar to ABS, this has potential for saving John Driver's butt when he gets in over his head.

      Firstly, if all robot cars can successfully drive at the limit of performance, avoidable accidents will cease to occur. Race drivers might be able to dodge a spinning car or deer in the blink of an eye, but John Driver can't.

      Secondly, taking a page right out of ABS's playbook, one of the places human drivers have the most difficulty is variable or unusual conditions, like rain or loose surface (gravel, dirt, etc). Robots, as ABS has proved, are quite valuable in this sort of situation. While they cannot perform at the absolute limit, they can consistently perform close to that limit, while even the most skilled humans can have difficulty performing at the peak in variable or unusual conditions. Rally drivers may do it for a career, but John Driver isn't a rally driver.

    4. Re:Seconds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      But clearly autonomous cars are bad for everyone because of (insert fringe case) where the car can't perform above 98.5%. Also, humans are better at (thing that rarely happens,) so since I think I'm a better than average driver (just like 90% of people think they're above the median,) then this is clearly a failed technology that shouldn't be allowed to be used by anyone.

      Also, I don't use a seatbelt, airbag, or ABS because I'm not fooled into thinking that researchers, engineers, empirical evidence, and years of track record prove that these things make driving more safe. Obviously me, an IT professional, knows better.

    5. Re:Seconds? by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I've done rally racing and I'm pretty damn good at it, and I'd still welcome an AI assist for my daily driving. Would I want it in a race? Probably not just yet, but when I'm driving to a job site I am not racing and would love to have the extra protection.

  2. BRAKE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    brake brake brake brake brake brake

    the word is brake

    1. Re:BRAKE by ozmanjusri · · Score: 5, Funny

      No.

      If "the car accelerates to 115 miles per hour and then breaks" several fragments of it might make it around the corner as TFA suggest, but typically, the larger portions of the broken car will continue in a straight line until deflected or destroyed by a wall.

      In that event, the idea that "Passengers tend to relax, putting their faith in the automatically spinning wheel" seems unlikely, unless we're talking about permanent relaxation and some kind of Tibetan prayer wheel.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    2. Re:BRAKE by David_Hart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In the context of the article, the word used to decelerate when coming into a corner should be "brake" not "break". The traditional use of the word "break" indicates that the car has become "broken" or is damaged in some way.

      While it's true that the saying "make a break for it" indicates taking off in a different direction, there is no connotation of slowing down. In fact, it has the opposite connotation of picking up speed. In the case of cornering, you have to slow the vehicle down or centrifugal force will cause the vehicle to leave the road.

      In this case you would BRAKE going into a corner and you then MAKE A BREAK out of the corner (i.e. quickly picking up speed to try to gain an advantage).

  3. sorry, pedantry by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 5, Funny

    Brakes, not breaks. Maybe it breaks, and that would certainly freak the passenger out, but I sense in this case it brakes. When you're driving at a wall braking lets you do it again, breaking doesn't. Subtle distinction I thought should be pointed out.

    (This post brought to you by the collective might of the Oblivious Flaw In The Headline Committee, newly formed to point out the obvious flaw and thereby negating 50% of the discussion dealing with grammar and spelling.)

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
  4. I can see it now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Turn left
    Turn left
    Turn left
    Kill all humans
    Turn left

  5. Betteridge's Law by Andrio · · Score: 5, Funny

    "In a Race Between a Self-Driving Car and a Pro Race-Car Driver, Who Wins?"

    No.

    --
    The Internet King? I wonder if he could provide faster nudity.
  6. Re:It will win soon by OzPeter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kinda misses the point of a car. Perhaps not a tractor-trailer, but cars are definitely not all that useful without passengers.

    Yes they are.

    • Self driving car drops me off at the front door of where I want to be, and the drives itself off to an automated parking garage
    • Self driving car starts up and drives to the local mechanic for its regular service in the middle of the day when I am working
    • Tell self driving car to head to the local big box store and wait in the loading bay until it receives the latest toy that I ordered online
    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  7. Re:cool by kbob88 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Try this: http://youtu.be/YxHcJTs2Sxk