Slashdot Mirror


There's Growing Evidence Tesla's Autopilot Handles Lane Dividers Poorly (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Within the past week, two Tesla crashes have been reported while Autopilot was engaged, and both involved a Tesla vehicle slamming into a highway divider. One of the crashes resulted in the death of Walter Huang, a Tesla customer with a Model X. The other crash resulted in minor injuries to the driver, thanks largely to a working highway safety barrier in front of the concrete divider. Ars Technica reports on the growing evidence that Tesla's Autopilot handles lane dividers poorly: "The September crash isn't the only evidence that has emerged that Tesla's Autopilot feature doesn't deal well with highway lane dividers. At least two people have uploaded videos to YouTube showing their Tesla vehicles steering toward concrete barriers. One driver grabbed the wheel to prevent a collision, while the other slammed on the brakes. Tesla argues that this issue doesn't necessarily mean that Autopilot is unsafe. 'Autopilot is intended for use only with a fully attentive driver,' a Tesla spokesperson told KGO-TV. Tesla argues that Autopilot can't prevent all accidents but that it makes accidents less likely. There's some data to back this up. A 2017 study by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that the rate of accidents dropped by 40 percent after the introduction of Autopilot. And Tesla argues that Autopilot-equipped Tesla cars have gone 320 million miles per fatality, much better than the 86 million miles for the average car. These figures don't necessarily settle the debate. That NHTSA figure doesn't break down the severity of crashes -- it's possible that Autopilot prevents relatively minor crashes but is less effective at preventing the most serious crashes. And as some Ars commenters have pointed out, luxury cars generally have fewer fatalities than the average vehicle. So it's possible that Tesla cars' low crash rates have more to do with its wealthy customer base than its Autopilot technology. What we can say, at a minimum, is that there's little evidence that Autopilot makes Tesla drivers less safe. And we can expect Tesla to steadily improve the car's capabilities over time."

11 of 238 comments (clear)

  1. wrong statistic by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You don't want to know how many accidents there were in cars with autopilot, that doesn't matter. What you want to know is miles per accident *with autopilot engaged.* Using the other number is highly misleading.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:wrong statistic by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Given that all cars in the 320 million miles/fatality are modern 5 star safety rated and the cars in the 86 million miles/fatality are average cars, you can't make the the assumption that the correlation between incidents and fatalities are the same for both groups.

      If you want to compare Autopilot cars with non-autopilot cars, the cars you compare it to also should have the same standard safety features:
      automatic emergency braking
      a dozen or so air bags
      stability control
      abs
      5 star impact rating
      front and side collision warnings

      All features that are available on other new vehicles.
      Then it's a fair comparison.

    2. Re:wrong statistic by dmpot · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Also you should compare cars under the similar driving conditions. Currently, autopilots refuse to function in difficult road conditions, while human drivers do.

  2. Sigh, I just don't get it by zippo01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is the point to an autopilot if I have to be fully attentive and ready to take over? I would rather just drive then worry about missing something. This and the are still have to much uncertainty to waist my time with it. Also dammit if i'm going to die in a car, I want it to be my fault and freaking awesome. "He almost made it, if it hadn't been for that ...."

    1. Re:Sigh, I just don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you have to pay attention then autopilot is less than useless. The fact it is in control makes it much more likely you will not be paying attention.

    2. Re:Sigh, I just don't get it by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      1. Safety. Despite the alarmism in TFA, you are safer using Autopilot than driving yourself.

      Why do people keep claiming this as some kind of fact when they don't have any data to back it up? We've been through the flaws of using the "40%" study, which was supposed to compare before AP vs after AP but 2/3 of the cars in the study didn't have any 'before AP' miles. Not to mention other control features were never accounted for such as Auto Steer.

      Tesla with AP may be a lot safer, but we don't have the data to make that declaration. So please stop abusing statistics.

  3. Sounds like a philosophy 101 question by RightwingNutjob · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The intentionally misnamed "autopilot" may reduce the likelihood of wandering out of your well-marked lane in clear conditions at highways speed but every once in a while it'll drive you right into an obstacle. Reminds me of those "push this button and ten people with terminal cancer get cured but two other random people die from a meteor strike" questions taught in philosophy classes with the intent of humbling people who might otherwise believe they can quantify their way through every obstacle.

    1. Re:Sounds like a philosophy 101 question by DatbeDank · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The intentionally misnamed "autopilot"

      I don't know why you think it is misnamed. It is named exactly the same way that aircraft autopilots are. Aircraft autopilots also require an attentive pilot ready to take over, because aircraft autopilots will happily fly the airplane into obstructions, or can fail in a large number of other ways. In fact, "can disable autopilot" is a standard pilot checklist item, and it can be done in half a dozen different ways.

      Seems like the Tesla "autopilot" is named just right.

      I take it you've never flown as a pilot before. No really, it's ok because most people aren't pilots :P

      My roadway is as big as the horizon. My fellow pilots in other planes are several hundred meters if not kilometers away.
      In my car, my fellow drivers are 1.5-2 meters away and my roadway is as big as the city planners decide to make it.

      On larger jets, they have systems that monitor you with transponders and much more. If you're aiming to the ground, the system will shout at you in a Skybus or Boeing jet.

      A few seconds of inattentiveness with autopilot on in a plane won't hurt anyone. Heck I read a book sometimes.
      A few seconds of inattentive in a passenger car (with or without Tesla autopilit) will at best cause a crash or worse kill you.

      Call it cruise control assist and save a few live or call it MuskSense if you want something sexy and to achieve the same thing. Autopilot is just a terrible misnomer for what it really is.

    2. Re:Sounds like a philosophy 101 question by Junta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This all misses the point: the vast majority of people are not pilots, everything they think about 'autopilot' comes from tv shows and media and every thing they deal with that is 'auto' in their lives meaning not having to worry about it.

      Pilots can debate the accuracy of the term given the reality of the situation, but what matters is the lay man's perspective (which is precisely what Tesla is trying to take advantage of).

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  4. If they can't spot a narrow divider... by greenwow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    what about motorcycles? I know BMW's Traffic Jam Assistant doesn't do well with that since I had a BMW 750 rear-end me at about 10 MPH. The guy that hit me says it usually does a great job of going the correct speed in 0-30 MPH traffic here on I-5 in Seattle. I think it didn't see me, but instead saw the dump truck in front of me and then tried to drive through me.

  5. Re:To be fair... by Rei · · Score: 4, Informative

    And the driver who destroyed said barrier was not on autopilot. Normal human error.

    Check out the intersection on Google Maps and you can see what went wrong, both for the human, and for autopilot. The left line is quite distinct. The right line is rather worn. There is no visible crosshatching at all between them. Once a vehicle crosses the fading line, what looks like a "lane" forms around them, seemingly reinforcing that this is an acceptable place to drive. This happens only seconds before the barrier is hit, so there's not that much time to react to the situation. There are no overhead signs, just the road-level sign. In dense traffic, it's not visible until you're in the invalid "lane".

    Any driver, paying attention, will of course not do this. But human drivers' attentions lapse, and that's a mistake that humans can - and recently did - make.

    Concerning Autopilot, there's a big question as to what versions people are running. Walter Huang, at the very least, was almost certainly running the old AP. It's not clear what versions the YouTubers were running. There was a massive AP update that just started rolling out recently that makes a huge difference in quality. To the degree that I'm actually rather concerned about it. The more imperfect the system, the more attention you pay to it. I have worries that with the new system, it's gotten good enough that it's going to cause peoples' attention to lapse. Having to touch (with torque) the wheel at regular intervals helps, but I hope Tesla gets eye tracking in place soon.

    --
    "99 dead duelists of Dios on the wall. 99 dead duelists of Dios! Take one's ring, pass it around..."