Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Australia Has Moved 1.5 Metres, So It's Updating Its Location For Self-Driving Cars (cnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the changing-world dept.

An anonymous reader shares a CNET report: Australia is changing from "down under" to "down under and across a bit". The country is shifting its longitude and latitude to fix a discrepancy with global satellite navigation systems. Government body Geoscience Australia is updating the Geocentric Datum of Australia, the country's national coordinate system, to bring it in line with international data. The reason Australia is slightly out of whack with global systems is that the country moves about 7 centimetres (2.75 inches) per year due to the shifting of tectonic plates. Since 1994, when the data was last recorded, that's added up to a misalignment of about a metre and a half. While that might not seem like much, various new technology requires location data to be pinpoint accurate. Self-driving cars, for example, must have infinitesimally precise location data to avoid accidents. Drones used for package delivery and driverless farming vehicles also require spot-on information.ABC has more details.

25 of 134 comments (clear)

  1. Infinitesimally precise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Self-driving cars, for example, must have infinitesimally precise location data to avoid accidents.

    Somehow I suspect it's a matter of centimeters rather than nanometers. Need less hyperbole and more accuracy!

    1. Re:Infinitesimally precise by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 5, Funny

      Self-driving cars, for example, must have infinitesimally precise location data to avoid accidents.

      Somehow I suspect it's a matter of centimeters rather than nanometers. Need less hyperbole and more accuracy!

      Good collar, Pedant Police, but move over now. I'm with the Pedant FBI. I'm taking charge of this investigation.

      Nanometers may be small, but they're not infinitely small, which is what infinitesimal means. They're barely even any closer to infinitely small than centimeters. Also, we wanted to be more precise here, not less, so what you'd really want in this situation is infinite precision, not infinitesimal precision.

      Let's keep it pedantic out there, citizens.

    2. Re:Infinitesimally precise by s_p_oneil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, self-driving cars don't need any location information at all to avoid accidents.

      It's not like a GPS can tell them if a light they're approaching is red or green, if there's a car in front of them, or if that hypothetical car is currently slamming on its brakes. It can give them an idea of where to turn, but it can't tell them if there's a pedestrian, a car, a wall, a lake, a big gaping sinkhole in the road, a flooded section, or something like that in the spot where it wants them to turn.

    3. Re:Infinitesimally precise by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      And, they don't use GPS to avoid accidents. That would be... totally insane. That's just a "wow"-level stupidity to dump out while trying to explain something.

      * (Yes, I used stupidity as a noun. Get over it, it's an open language.)

    4. Re:Infinitesimally precise by Pseudonymous+Powers · · Score: 4, Funny

      Come to think about it, I first heard about planking videos as a fad in Australia. I wonder if they might get us started with Plancking videos next.

      If there is any such trend, it will likely be too small to measure.

    5. Re:Infinitesimally precise by spacepimp · · Score: 2

      The algorithms collectively used in autonomous vehicles lacking in GPS or in addition to it are called SLAM. Simultaneous localization and mapping is defined as follows: In robotic mapping, simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) is the computational problem of constructing or updating a map of an unknown environment while simultaneously keeping track of an agent's location within it.

      The equations are designed to calculate the responses of the vehicle or object as it moves through an unknown environment. Without understanding of the cirtical point of origin the vehicle has no information with which to base its decision tree upon. The core of autonomy without GPS needs to understand the motion/inertia of itself to coordinate a response to a changing environment. There is no SLAM that localization is not critical to.

    6. Re:Infinitesimally precise by tchdab1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      i will keep this in mind the next time I drive to Australia. I'd hate to miss it entirely.

    7. Re:Infinitesimally precise by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2

      Australia is moving about 2 nanometers per second. Fingernails grow at a rate of about 1 nanometer per second. So Australia is moving pretty fast.

  2. No they do not by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but when driving I do not have "infinitesimally accurate location data". I have eyes and ears, I and use them to not get in accidents. Turns out that many things on roads are not fixed at all and may appear or disappear at any time...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  3. I always knew by OlRickDawson · · Score: 5, Funny

    I always knew they were a little off

    --
    Ol' Rick Dawson had a farm EIEIO
  4. Self-driving cars doesn't need pinpoint GPS data. by Morpf · · Score: 5, Informative

    If it was the case we would be in deep trouble considering the typical error in GPS. That is the reason why other sensors like LIDAR and cameras are also used. GPS is for having a general clue where you are, and 1,5 m accuracy would be plenty for that.

    Slashdot editing...

  5. Does this mean by npslider · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does this mean that Apple Maps is now correct? I'm tired of seeing so many Kangaroo's drive off into the Ocean because they relied too heavily on the Maps app.

  6. Dude... by ktakki · · Score: 2

    ...where's my continent?

    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
  7. womp rats by kimvette · · Score: 4, Funny

    I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home. They're not much bigger than two meters. But, now I miss because GPS is off.

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    1. Re:womp rats by kimvette · · Score: 2

      Kid, I've flown from one side of this galaxy to the other. I've seen a lot of strange stuff, but I've never seen anything to make me believe there's one all-powerful Force controlling everything. There's no mystical energy field that controls my destiny. It's all a lot of simple tricks and nonsense.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  8. Re:Beacons? by Goldenhawk · · Score: 4, Informative

    Already done. It's called Ground Based Augmentation System (GBAS).
    http://www.faa.gov/about/offic...

    There's also a system called WAAS, Wide Area Augmentation System, and others.
    http://www.novatel.com/an-intr...

    A short description (I know, TLDR...) is that ground-based transmitters broadcast an error signal - the difference between received data and the actual known surveyed position. Any properly-equipped receiver uses this signal to offset its GPS-measured position accordingly.

    My Garmin GPS that I got back in 2005 used the WAAS system. It's been around for quite some time.

    --
    --Brandon / Split Infinity Music

  9. Re:Real estate law by NiteMair · · Score: 2

    Surveyors start with known markers, and use angles and distance to find property borders... as has been done for hundreds of years.

    GPS is a modern invention, and pretty nifty, but it doesn't dictate property lines by law for historical reasons.

  10. Re:"infinitesimally precise location data " my ars by Aighearach · · Score: 2

    As long as you have a map, there are roads.

    If you don't have a map, it might be debatable.

  11. Re:"infinitesimally precise location data " my ars by npslider · · Score: 2

    It is 2016... roads, we do not need roads!

  12. Actually... by Immerman · · Score: 2

    Actually, they're the ones standing still, it's the rest of the world that's moved.

    In all seriousness though, does anyone know what the GPS system itself uses as a reference point to correct for system drift?

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    1. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.unoosa.org/pdf/icg/2012/template/WGS_84.pdf

      WGS84

  13. Re: GPS position accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Geoscience Australia, where I work, is implementing a updated but fixed Coordinate Reference System pegged at the year 2020 called Geodetic Datum of Austrlai (GDA2020) which removes drift error accumulated since GDA94, after which time a time component will be added to all coordinates so that GDA2020 will be the last update as the time component will cater for continued drift.

  14. Deeeep and Trooouuuubling Questions! (Ahem) by Dogtanian · · Score: 2

    Nanometers may be small, but they're not infinitely small, which is what infinitesimal means. They're barely even any closer to infinitely small than centimeters.

    Well, FWIW, *both* of them are infinitely larger than infinitesimal despite the fact that nanometres are closer. So does this mean that the "infinity" between centimetres and infinitesimal is larger than the infinity between nanometres and infinitesimal? Hmmmmmm......

    Also, imagine a line of people standing single-file, extending infinitely in both directions. There are, of course, an infinite number of people. Now, imagine each of these people is joined by a partner. Are there twice as many people now? Does this mean there are "2 x infinity" people? But surely you can't do that to infinity. Er...

    After your noodle has been baked in the oven at gas mark 5 for 45 minutes, remove and place on a wire tray to cool down. (^_^)

    Spoiler; I'm not a mathematician, and don't have the answers, I'm just throwing this out here for amusement. Though I guess someone who knows more about this than I do could explain it if they could be arsed. :-)

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    1. Re:Deeeep and Trooouuuubling Questions! (Ahem) by legRoom · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also, imagine a line of people standing single-file, extending infinitely in both directions. There are, of course, an infinite number of people. Now, imagine each of these people is joined by a partner. Are there twice as many people now? Does this mean there are "2 x infinity" people? But surely you can't do that to infinity. Er...

      Spoiler; I'm not a mathematician, and don't have the answers, I'm just throwing this out here for amusement. Though I guess someone who knows more about this than I do could explain it

      Modern mathematics recognizes the existence of different "sizes" of infinity, but they don't follow the standard rules of arithmetic. The basic idea is not complicated: anyone who can grasp intermediate algebra should be able to understand it, eventually. (I'm sure that my explanation won't be good enough for a lot of people though; try searching YouTube for "Hillbert's Hotel paradox", maybe.)

      However, the infinite is far outside our everyday experience, so a bit of vocabulary from higher math will make it a lot easier to discuss the examples which follow:

      set - an unordered collection of unique elements. Elements can be numbers, names, other sets, or whatever. Duplicate elements are not allowed: the number 53 (for example) is either in a particular set, or it is not; the set cannot contain two "copies" of 53, or anything like that.

      cardinality - this is the "size" of a set. Two sets have the same cardinality if and only if their members can be put in one-to-one correspondence. For sets with a finite number of elements, such as the set of letters in the English alphabet, the cardinality is simply the number of elements in the set: 26, in this case. This is easily proven by simply associating a number with each letter (A => 1, B => 2, C => 3, ...).

      Where things get interesting, is when we try to compare the sizes of two infinite sets, such as the set of all even numbers (0, 2, 4, 6, ...) versus the set of all whole numbers (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, ...). We cannot simply count the number of elements using finite whole numbers. Instead, we must use transfinite cardinal numbers. To understand what those are, consider some classic examples:

      Hillbert's Paradox of the Grand Hotel
      Imagine that Hillbert's Hotel has an infinite number of rooms, every one of which is occupied by exactly one person. The rooms are each numbered with a sign on the door: 1, 2, 3, 4, ...

      Question: A new guest arrives, and asks the host for a private room. Can the host provide him with a room without doubling anyone up, or kicking anyone out of the hotel?

      Answer: Surprisingly, yes he can! Here's one way he could do so: the host gets on the public address system and instructs every guest to pack his bags, leave his room, look at the number on the door, add one to it, and move into the room with that new number. So, the guy in room #1 moves into #2, the guy in #2 moves into #3, and so on.

      At a finite hotel, this could never work: whoever was in the last room would be kicked out, with no higher numbered room to move into. However, in Hillbert's infinite hotel there is no last room, and so there is no problem. Everyone moves over by one room, and the new guest moves into room #1.

      Conclusion: infinity + 1 = infinity.

      Question: Suppose that the neighbouring Cantor's Infinite Hotel (same setup) needs to be fumigated (or nuked from orbit) because it is infested with an infinite number of cockroaches. The manager of Cantor's Hotel asks the host of Hilbert's Hotel if he can temporarily accommodate an infinite crowd of additio

  15. Re:GPS position accuracy by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 2

    You update the stations position :D

    And that you do with star observations, like we do since 8000 years.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.