How Will A Self Driving Car Make A Decision That Could Save A Life?

There is only one certainty about autonomously driven cars...lawyers will make out well as always.

As well they should with all these manufacturers rushing technology to market before it's thought out.

In theory, an autonomous car can:
(1) Anticipate, identify, and interpret risks better than a human
(2) Know and select a suitable response better than a human
(3) Always be alert, diligent, and 100% on the ball, unlike a human
(4) React to a dangers correctly and much more quickly than a human
(5) Skillfully execute the appropriate response, every time, without failure or error, unlike a human

That's the theory. A well-known saying tells us: In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice, we know there's a world of difference between theory and practice.

The two broad ways of programming an autonomous system, such as aircraft auto-pilot or an autonomous car, is for a programming team to explicitly program in all the conditions (the "IF" statements) and the appropriate responses (the "THEN" statements). This is how virtually all computer programming has been done since day one. The other broad category is a genuine learning system, in which the system actually learns, sort of like a human brain. This is still in its infancy, but it shows promise, especially in the way of knowledge systems of ones that are expected to perform a huge workload based on "fuzzy" rules, rather than a finite and known set of conditions. So far, all autonomous cars are using the first, more primitive, and more limited programming approach.

Note that airplanes have had autopilot and automated systems for decades, and they've constantly been improving. We have automated systems for launching, guiding, and landing rockets and cruise missiles and drones. None of them have operating theaters that are as complex, and require such short reaction times as a common car driving in a city. A general aviation (GA, civilian) aircraft's autopilot, which is much simpler than what's required for an autonomous car, can easily cost over $30,000 (including the instruments and sensors needed to make it work).

As you can tell, I'm not confident that autonomous cars are ready for prime time right now.

TheSteve: Nothing to add Pal.

Butt if economically is profitable for the companies, (they will say that the warranty is expired because you skip a maintenance) therefore the car was working fine and the accident is your fault, they will push to bring the autonomous cars online, also Insurance companies will be happy, lawyers too. and the government will be able to track down every step of your life (cars will not work without positive Identification of the passengers), Steve is right but as always...rich guys will push those cars into our world sooner than later.

Actually - I have something to add to your list

Autonomous cars might have a better chance in world where ALL the cars are also autonomous - but they are not. However - the Autonomous car MUST be programmed to always obey legalities - like for instance - the speed limit. In real life - there are very few who actually do that - most either drive far faster than the speed limit -and some drive much slower than the speed limit. How a computer will decide which one the car coming at it is - is a real problem. In aircraft - there are no "lights"or stop signs - it is unlikely that another nearby plane is traveling in exactly the same airspace - and an 85 year old who might need cataract surgery is unlikely to be the pilot. ALso -there are NO "intersections" and yet autopilot for planes costs more than some cars complete.

Autonomous cars would be a blessing for people who are now too old or too injured/sick to actually drive a car. THey would allow these people to get to their basic necessities without relying on others. AND I suspect that is where they would be most used - although I could also see an autonomous hookup for certain limited access highways for long trips as well. I still caution however - that the advent of autonomous cars will also likely be the advent for speed limits controlled by the street for ALL CARS - among other things. Once the politicians see that this can be done - they will do it.

Actually Tom, there are a huge number of "intersections" in the sky. My job was to make sure that two planes weren't there at the same time and altitude. The "big sky" theory was used for many years (unlikely to have two planes in the same place at the same time), but two airliners colliding over the Grand Canyon in the 1950s changed that mindset.

I agree that if (when) every car is autonomous, it will be relatively simple to ensure safety between multiple cars. That way any unexpected occurrence (such as a child running into the street) can be coordinated between all cars to minimize risk to everyone. But as long as every car cannot talk to every other one, the variables are just immense.

TomM: You have a very valid and powerful point. If we lived in a world in which all cars are autonomous, and they all communicate with each other, then they would in effect create a sort of "brain" or "neural network." We could easily get 10x the number of cars on the same roads because:

...cars would easily allow merging traffic onto highways by being in the most appropriate lane.

...cars would know where they're going, what the traffic conditions are, and how to make best use of that. For example, a car that needs to drive 30 miles on a highway would enter the fast-moving lane and stay there, at a fixed speed, for the duration until it needs to prepare to exit.

...cars could safely draft each other in long trains of vehicles all heading in the same direction. Because all vehicles have total situational awareness, and they're communicating with each other at the speed of light, they could also safely travel at higher speeds.

The downside to this utopian vision is unexpected stuff, like a deer crossing a highway or a tire blow-out. With cars drafting, there is very little margin for error or mechanical differences (e.g., car #8's tires are not it great shape, and so its stopping distance is lengthened).

@TheSteve - I agree with your comments.
I personally spoke with Markus Auerbach, the Head of Audi's Innovation Research dept in San Fran while at the Toronto Autoshow this year. We spoke about Bobbi and Robbi and I learned that although the 2 cars started with the same logic/programming, after all the test drives they were subjected to they both now have unique "thinking". His example was the line each car takes when racing on a track. He stated that Bobbi tries different "lines" to see if it can shave time off the clock.
Learning is an ability that some autonomous cars are capable of and this will definitely evolve in time.
I believe autonomous cars will only succeed when all cars on the road are are able to communicate info between vehicles (within a determined area).

My point was that there are NO intersections with stop signs and yield signs or lights where large amounts of traffic come together regularly. - there may be points where flight plans intersect in the sky - but flight plans must spaced so that a "STOP" is not needed because a plane can't actually do one. So an intersection where two planes come together is NOT a planned event - it is an error. ANd in reality - it happens virtually never.

I believe that autonomous cars will eventually have to receive information from outside the car in order to make all the decisions - so computers will eventually be on the roads with cameras - detecting things they can pass on to the cars. That is also how the government will enforce speed limits - by the road indicating its limit to the car from the outside.

Obviously -the advent of autonomous car technology will save LOTS of lives - the question is whether it will also end the era of the auto enthusiast.

It is clear that excessive speed and driving under the influence are the major causes of accidents and deaths due to them. Obviously - the car will not ever drive under the influence - and it will be limited to the speed limits that the law will allow. I ALSO believe that the government(When autonomous cars do eventually become common) will also REQUIRE other cars to have the technology that will limit their speeds to posted requirements - as a safety feature that you cannot remove or disable. The basis would be that the autonomous cars would be at a disadvantage physically if other cars could go faster. And while this will essentially eliminate a major money stream - speeding tickets would be eliminated - cannot be convicted of DUI when you are not driving etc. THeoretically - insurance bills should also be greatly reduced (Every car will obey the speed limit - and it is likely the car will not allow you to DUI for example).

Lets see - all cars go the same speeds - no significant exception (Maybe for emergency vehicles) - means that the BMW driving experience would be the same as the Yugo - no need to engineer for high speeds, fast acceleration and high speed maneuvers - you won't be doing any. WHy buy a Porsche - when it cannot go faster than a Cruze? THere might be a case for more Luxury - but no reason for a "sports car".

Actually kind of sad. More freedoms lost. It is said that the reason Germans drive at top speed on the unlimited speed autobahns is that it is one of the few places where their lives are not regulated by the government.

Sports cars will become purely frivolous toys. Kind of like, you know, many horses. Used to be basic transportation. Now they are often just a luxury.

Life goes on.

Good trains are better than cars for the day-to-day anyway. If cars are autonomous then they're basically mini trains with as many stops as you care for them to have. I prefer a normal train myself, but in some cities (such as where I live, Columbus OH) it seems like it's too much to ask for.

Autonomous cars responding properly to autonomous fire trucks and ambulances will be cool to see.

As for the whole "making decision to save a life" line, I've decided it's a pretty stupid concern. Actual humans aren't going to do much better, and are certainly no better at acting in a predictable manner at any given time. They'll also screw up (and do screw up) at times when there's no "dilemma" at all.

Zero tolerance for autonomous cars making errors is silly. They just have to do a better-enough job than people. And I suspect they already do.