SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the do-you-remember-your-stopping-distances? dept.
Einstein once said, "Put your hand on a hot stove for a minute, and it seems like an hour. Sit with a pretty girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. THAT'S relativity."
So 5-8 seconds seems like a (relatively) short amount of time. But, is it enough to safely take back control of a self-driving car and negotiate a road hazard? And if the driver is given less time, is it better or worse? Researchers at Stanford attempted to find out:
In this study, we observed how participants (N=27) in a driving simulator performed after they were subjected to an emergency loss of automation. We tested three transition time conditions, with an unstructured transition of vehicle control occurring 2 seconds, 5 seconds, or 8 seconds before the participants encountered a road hazard that required the drivers' intervention.
Few drivers in the 2 second condition were able to safely negotiate the road hazard situation, while the majority of drivers in 5 or 8 second conditions were able to navigate the hazard safely.
Although the participants in the current study were not performing secondary tasks while the car was driving, the 2 second condition appeared to be insufficient. The participants did not perform well and liked the car less. Additionally, participants' comfort in the car was also lower in the 2 second condition. Hence, it is recommended to give warnings or relinquish control more than 2 seconds in advance. While not necessarily the minimum required time, 5 second condition from a critical event appeared to be sufficient for drivers to perform the take over successfully and negotiate the problem. While the results of this study indicated that there was a minimum amount of time needed for transition of control, this was true when the drivers only monitored the car's activity and did not perform secondary tasks. It is possible that these results can change if the drivers are occupied with other activities.
Full research paper available here.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Monday August 10 2015, @09:55AM
There's some point to moderate automation. Cruise control works well, for example.
Personally, I've had a couple of close calls with cruise control.
Whereas approaching, say a stationary queue of traffic ahead, I normally ease off the throttle and then brake to a comfortable and "perfect" stop without even thinking about it, practically by instinct, with cruise I find I need to think more consciously about when to knock it off, and did not get it comfortably right at first. Now, after those experiences, I knock off the cruise as soon as there is any sign of a possible need to slow ahead, including above a certain density of traffic, long before any need to brake appears. I wonder about other people using cruise though.
I have heard stories about 1950's Cadillacs (the first with cruise control?), when cars had bench front seats, of drivers sitting sideways with legs up along the seat, back against the door, steering with their left hand. There is also a story in the UK of a guy who used to drive his Morris 8, which had a throttle that could be set, sitting on the roof, legs down through the open sunroof, steering with his feet. [Ref : "Signalman's Morning" by Adrian Vaughan].