SAE Levels and Tesla Autonomy definitions

[Knightshade]

Without reading any more replies it boils down easily. Tesla doesn't indorse, state or offer any definition of an SAE Level of what they believe their system could end up being.

Nor would they need to.

They instead describe it being capable of the two requirements the SAE lists for L4.

And do so in a way that would disqualify it from being any lower level than 4.


So the only mysteries left to us are:

Is it intended to be 4 or 5, since they leave out anything in the description that would make that clear.
and
Why a few people have such a hard time accepting facts.


Certainly they might never deliver the system as promised in the pre 3/19 description.

But that system as described is at least L4 based on what they tell us, and what SAE tells us about a system that has those descriptors/features/intent.

 

[Gray Man]

This fiasco is a lot more entertaining as its own thread.

Also:

Tesla doesn't indorse....

I should hope that Tesla does not "indorse" anything...

 

[JulienW]

I should hope that Tesla does not "indorse" anything...

Typo: should be OUTdorse.

 

[powertoold]

This is also straightforward:

Full Self-Driving Capability

This doubles the number of active cameras from four to eight, enabling full self-driving in almost all circumstances, at what we believe will be a probability of safety at least twice as good as the average human driver. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver's seat.....

Title of the description = full self-DRIVING
Paragraph below the title relates to DRIVING
No action required = as it relates to DRIVING

Case closed!

 

[Knightshade]

This is also straightforward:

Full Self-Driving Capability

This doubles the number of active cameras from four to eight, enabling full self-driving in almost all circumstances, at what we believe will be a probability of safety at least twice as good as the average human driver. The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver's seat.....

Title of the description = full self-DRIVING
Paragraph below the title relates to DRIVING
No action required = as it relates to DRIVING

Case closed!

I'm glad you FINALLY realized the description is describing a system that is at least L4- because much of what you emphasized there points that out

 

[powertoold]

I'm glad you FINALLY realized the description is describing a system that is at least L4- because much of what you emphasized there points that out

L4 relates to autonomy.

Driving has nothing to do with autonomy, driving is a task.

No action required = as it relates to DRIVING (the title of the description is Full self-DRIVING, all info below the title can be said to relate to the title).

FSD does all the actions needed for driving. You are supervising / being receptive to take over (which isn't related to the actions of driving).

Tesla partially defines "driving" in the description itself:

Your Tesla will figure out the optimal route, navigate urban streets (even without lane markings), manage complex intersections with traffic lights, stop signs and roundabouts, and handle densely packed freeways with cars moving at high speed.

 

[EVNow]

Nor would they need to.

They instead describe it being capable of the two requirements the SAE lists for L4.

And do so in a way that would disqualify it from being any lower level than 4.


So the only mysteries left to us are:

Is it intended to be 4 or 5, since they leave out anything in the description that would make that clear.
and
Why a few people have such a hard time accepting facts.


Certainly they might never deliver the system as promised in the pre 3/19 description.

But that system as described is at least L4 based on what they tell us, and what SAE tells us about a system that has those descriptors/features/intent.

Levels are stupid - end of story.

 

[JulienW]

Levels are stupid - end of story.

...but laws, courts, regulations and commercial entities (like the car manufactures, insurance companies and attorneys) require reliable and well defined standards by independent organizations like the SAE to base their decisions and actions on. There HAS to be some defining characteristics in order for ANY standards to be implemented and Full Self Driving is no different.

 

[derotam]

So which parts of L4 in the SAE doc were NOT promised by Tesla?

Sorry...I am making technical points here...My point is that just because Tesla talks about autonomy, doesn't mean that they automatically have to be shoehorned into some document that they don't have anything to do with. What happens if that document changes... you might then say that it then just means that we go off what the document DID say when Tesla made their statement...BUT going to the next point of legality...if the document changes and therefor then makes what Tesla's previous statement was illegal...now what?

I'm gonna let you go ahead and google yourself what happens when a company sells a product they know in advance is not legal.

Again sorry I should have been more specific... Not being explicitly legal is different than being illegal. If Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama make a law that carves out a way to make some aspect of what Tesla said about autonomy illegal in regards to a cross country trip, then did Tesla create an illegal product? Just because there is an SAE document doesn't mean the states have to follow those definitions...there are already laws on the books in states that make up their own definitions.

 

[EVNow]

...but laws, courts, regulations and commercial entities (like the car manufactures, insurance companies and attorneys) require reliable and well defined standards by independent organizations like the SAE to base their decisions and actions on. There HAS to be some defining characteristics in order for ANY standards to be implemented and Full Self Driving is no different.

Right - unfortunately SAE levels are not the kind of standards we need.

Any "standard" that doesn't properly define ODD and required disengagement levels is worthless - like that L3 on Honda Legend or the 37 mph on Freeways L3 by Merc. I think we can all make out those are marketing gimmicks rather than something useful.

Without better ODD and quality definitions, SAE levels will be abused by companies.

 

[Knightshade]

Sorry...I am making technical points here...My point is that just because Tesla talks about autonomy, doesn't mean that they automatically have to be shoehorned into some document that they don't have anything to do with. What happens if that document changes... you might then say that it then just means that we go off what the document DID say when Tesla made their statement...BUT going to the next point of legality...if the document changes and therefor then makes what Tesla's previous statement was illegal...now what?

So I get the first part.... where SAE could- though it would make no sense for them to, change say L3 to ALSO not require anything from the person in the drivers seat and suddenly the Tesla description could be L3. But as I say, that wouldn't make any sense for anyone involved because that difference is the fundamental difference between 3 and 4 in the first place.


To be clear though- I'm not saying what Tesla wrote directly translates to "Our system will be at least L4"

I'm saying that as written it describes a system that under SAE rules would have to be classified as at least L4.


If SAE completely scrapped their rules and wrote something totally different that might not be true--- but I can't see any way that makes any sense they might change the rules (they do update them every couple years- but changes tend to be clarifications not wholesale "L4 is now L2 and dogs are now cats!" type stuff.


As to legality- What change could SAE possibly make that would cause Teslas proposed system to be illegal?

Again sorry I should have been more specific... Not being explicitly legal is different than being illegal. If Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee and Alabama make a law that carves out a way to make some aspect of what Tesla said about autonomy illegal in regards to a cross country trip, then did Tesla create an illegal product?

No?

Because something existing is different from using it illegally.

I can legally own a radar detector, for example. But I can not legally operate that radar detector in the state of Virgijnia.

As long as it is disconnected/secured while driving THROUGH virginia that's also legal.

So if for example Virginia banned self-driving Tesla could just geo-lockout the system as you crossed the border into Virginia, and turn it back on as you leave.

Just existing at all, anywhere, is not illegal.

Just because there is an SAE document doesn't mean the states have to follow those definitions...there are already laws on the books in states that make up their own definitions.

Where?

To my knowledge all of the (few) states where self driving is already legal use SAEs terminology or definitions.

Which ones don't if there are such?

L4 relates to autonomy.

Driving has nothing to do with autonomy, driving is a task.

This is fundamentally false.

L4, as with all the levels, relates to the degree of autonomy and the balance of it between the system and the human.


At each higher level, the human has less they need to do.


Not to mention- YOU are the one who kept insisting we pay attention to what TESLA wrote.

Tesla did not write the human will need to take NO ACTION RELATED TO DRIVING.

They wrote the human will need to take NO ACTION PERIOD.

No action required = as it relates to DRIVING

And at L3, while the system is performing the dynamic driving task, the human still has TWO responsibilities as relates to this.

They must be prepared to take over driving if the system prompts them.
AND
They must be ready to take over driving if the system does NOT prompt them but there is some other failure of the system for which they do not recieve an alert.


At L3 the human still needs to be there, and still needs to be responsible for multiple things, on every single drive

L4 is the lowest level where the human does not have to take ANY action at all- even once in a while, let alone on every drive.


Which- again- is what Tesla promised. No action, period, full stop. Not "No action specific to the DDT in the moment" as you are now trying to move the goalposts to.



It's astounding how badly you keep getting every bit of this wrong even after having it repeatedly ecxplained, with direct quotes from the SAE doc you refuse to read showing you are wrong.

Levels are stupid - end of story.

Except that's what the actual laws and regulations are based on.

so you can think they're stupid, but you (and Tesla) still need to use them.

 

[EVNow]

Except that's what the actual laws and regulations are based on.

Which laws ?

Anyway, you don't even get the gist of what I'm saying. SAE is not specific/ tough enough. They also leave a huge gap between L2/L3.

How is this bad for Tesla ? As long as they didn't promise a particular level they are not accountable for that level.

 

[Knightshade]

Which laws ?

The laws in every US state that allows self driving- plus the EU.... actually I'm not aware of ANY jurisdiction with laws on self driving that does NOT use them.

Are you? which ones?

Anyway, you don't even get the gist of what I'm saying. SAE is not specific/ tough enough. They also leave a huge gap between L2/L3.

No, I totally get what you are saying. I agree there's a lot they leave out, that they're super broad and vague in many ways, and are far less useful from a safety regulation perspection than they should be.


I'm just pointing out they are still what the actual regulations are being based on anyway- so the fact they're stupid doesn't change the fact they're the rules.

Thus at any point Tesla wants to remove the human from the system (or even remove them PART of the way like L3) they will need to certify the system at a given SAE level to be in compliance with the law.


And more to the point of the thread, the description of FSD pre 3/19 is, at least, an L4 system by SAE definitions of one.

The post 3/19 FSD is in contrast an L2 system at minimum.

 

[powertoold]

Tesla did not write the human will need to take NO ACTION RELATED TO DRIVING.

They wrote the human will need to take NO ACTION PERIOD.

That's false though. The entire topic of that description including the title relates to DRIVING. It's obviously not related to doing anything else.

We know that the human needs to sit down, put seat belt on, etc. Are you saying the human can be paralyzed, and the car will take the paralyzed human to their destination with no action?

 

[Knightshade]

That's false though.

Except, it's not.

That's literally what Tesla wrote.

The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the drivers seat

If you have to be prepared to take over from the system- both when alerted, and when not alerted (which is true under L3) then the "no action" part is not true.

Thus they are describing an L4 system or better- because that's the lowest level the system does not require any action from the human in the seat.

Again astounding how badly you keep getting this wrong.

 

[powertoold]

If you have to be prepared to take over from the system- both when alerted, and when not alerted (which is true under L3) then the "no action" part is not true.

Except the description doesn't reference the levels. Therefore, you cannot use the levels to pigeonhole the description.

The title of the description is full self driving. The description describes what it means by full self driving. You do not need to take any action for the driving task. The car fully drives itself. What's so hard to understand?

I keep going back to the driving student and teacher. The student is fully driving himself. The teacher takes no actions as it relates to the driving.

 

[Knightshade]

Except the description doesn't reference the levels. Therefore, you cannot use the levels to pigeonhole the description.

Except, you can.

That's literally what the levels are for.

You look at the design intent and capabilities of the system, then you get to classify it at a specific SAE level.

That is how it works

The title of the description is full self driving. The description describes what it means by full self driving

No, it does not.

A happy meal does not cure depression.

A diaper genie does not grant wishes.


The description is the several sentences that describe what it is and how it works

Not the marketing name,


You have been corrected on both of these, multiple times, in this very thread.

it's increasingly hard to believe you're not being intentionally obtuse about these points as you keep repeating them after being corrected over and over.

. You do not need to take any action for the driving task.

You do not need to take ANY action for the system to operate. As tesla outright states.

Which is not true of any system below L4

What's so hard to understand?

I've been asking you that all thread and you keep finding new ways to not understand basic stuff.[/QUOTE]

 

[powertoold]

You do not need to take ANY action for the system to operate. As tesla outright states.

You do.

You need to sit down. You need to make sure the car isn't damaged. Maybe you need to clean the sensors. You need to put on your seat belt. You need to activate or enable the feature. List goes on.

 

[powertoold]

Except, you can.

That's literally what the levels are for.

You look at the design intent and capabilities of the system, then you get to classify it at a specific SAE level.

That is how it works

Your logic on this is wrong. You can only do this with enough information. Unfortunately, with this one sentence. You don't have enough information:

The system is designed to be able to conduct short and long distance trips with no action required by the person in the driver's seat.

From this sentence, you can't discern:
1) what role does the driver play (if any), a role is different than an action
2) who is responsible
3) what tasks does the car do
4) what's the odd
5) is the driver a passenger? If so, why is there a driver's seat designation

 

[Knightshade]

You do.

You need to sit down.

You have ALREADY sat down before the trip starts.

In fact Tesla also told you that

All you will need to do is get in and tell your car where to go

So you didn't read EITHER the SAE doc OR the actual description of FSD while trying to discuss both.

AMAZING STUFF.


Tesla description of no action is during the trip

5) is the driver a passenger? If so, why is there a driver's seat designation

Drivers seat is a legal designation of a physical location. it does not speak to the role of the person in it.

You need to make sure the car isn't damaged.

Again this happens before the trip starts so again not relevant to any of this.

You need to put on your seat belt. List goes on.

Again this is before a trip starts. That said, you CAN drive the car without the belt on- it'll just ding at you. Though I suspect the system won't engage without it in an FSD future- none of which is relevant to the discussion though because again it happens BEFORE the trip starts. SAE doesn't care what happens when the car is in park.



BTW- Since you refuse to actually read the SAE doc, here's some more quotes that clarify how badly you misunderstand what it's even doing.

The terms defined above inform a taxonomy of driving automation consisting of six discrete and mutually exclusive levels
Central to this taxonomy are the respective roles of the (human) user and the driving automation system
in relation to each other. Because changes in the functionality of a driving automation system change the role of the (human) user, they provide a basis for categorizing such system features.

So to be clear, each level defines what actions OVERALL (not just the dynamic driving task) fall on the system versus the human user.
So your insisting anything that is not "driving" does not apply to the SAE levels is fundamentally false and directly contradicted by the SAE document.


Further it describes (on the same page in fact!) the fundamental difference between L3 and L4.'

Whether the driving automation system also performs DDT fallback.

If the HUMAN is PERFORMING the DDT fallback task (which is an action) then it's L3.
Since Tesla tells us no action is required from the human, the system must be L4 or higher.
That's it.

I eagerly await how badly you'll again find a way to totally "misunderstand" all this.