Safety Score

[alexgr]

"You should have known better" is not likely a valid defense against fraud when perpetrated by a sophisticated corporation and executive leadership. The question is will a jury of random Americans be sympathetic to the purchaser of a vehicle or to Tesla and the world's richest individual who's been known exaggerated or untruthful statements and been the subject of SEC violations and fines.

I have always considered the FSD payment as a donation to Tesla that can help to develop new tech for the future. Plus, I enjoy the fun of potentially be a part of the new tech development. Finally, more fun is coming. You should have a special set of mind to willingly pay for non-existing but promised tech, and then have a legal meltdown when the magic doesn't happen on the F-day. Anyway, you don't want me to a juror on your case.

 

[jabloomf1230]

Why should I comply with this absurd new mandate when I can just file a lawsuit or demand arbitration on January 1st when the system does not allow full self-driving on city streets.

I empathize with your plight, but don’t you think that Tesla will enter your Safety Score into evidence if you decide to go to arbitration and beyond?

 

[sids911]

Anyone know how how long do we have to keep up with losing traffic light battles with Priuses? Do we drive like grandmas till the beta is actually delivered to our cars (who knows when that would be!)?

 

[alexgr]

The fact that people are changing their everyday driving habits to get a better score undermines its value as a safety indicator. It would have been better if it was invisible. In the end, it's more of a game than anything else.

YES! I said this already earlier. The immediate access to the Safety Score undermines the very idea of Tesla probing the "normal" driving habits of Tesla owners. I am sorry, but the statistics Mr Musk is going to get will be garbage. Perhaps, the idea is to test the ABILITY of the drivers to drive as "safe" as possible by the SS standards; then the FSD can be dropped into the safest environments. However, I wonder how long we will be able to drive like we do now. Will this lead to some psycho crises and some terrible mistakes after several weeks on the FSD while trying to keep 100 SS?

 

[Microterf]

Elon liked this tweet. I'm assuming that he agrees with the statement, and its just as much a test of willingness to put in the extra effort.

I just realized that TESLA is his pet company, and Neuralink is his primary focus, everything he does at Tesla is just a mental test for Neurolink and we are all his subjects

 

[loquitur]

Watch Kim Paquette’s FSD 10.1 videos posted last weekend on Twitter during low traffic periods. She lives in a town with ancient, narrow roads so FSD is really tested but her videos show how far FSD has to go before it should be routinely used. Musk should be ashamed of himself every time he gives a breathless tout of the latest and greatest FSD beta. Kim’s videos show why wide distribution of FSD beta is probably a bad idea for Tesla. I want it just as you do, but it is far from a finished, safe product and Tesla may walk into a PR nightmare if the product isn’t substantially improved before wide distribution. Hence the goofy safety requirement of a gamed 100 score.

In contrast, AI Driver's coverage of narrow-lane territory in the Berkeley, CA hills (w/ parked cars on windy roads)
shows much to admire, and this will bode well for places like San Francisco. Since autosteer can already be enabled
in places where it doesn't do well (such as SF), a worse version is already widely-distributed.
FSD beta can surely do existing roads better. Having said that, I personally wouldn't care if
city autosteer didn't do turns at intersections at all, unlike FSD NOA beta.

 

[Big Earl]

Anyone know how how long do we have to keep up with losing traffic light battles with Priuses? Do we drive like grandmas till the beta is actually delivered to our cars (who knows when that would be!)?

You can still accelerate as quickly as you want.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Anyone know how how long do we have to keep up with losing traffic light battles with Priuses? Do we drive like grandmas till the beta is actually delivered to our cars (who knows when that would be!)?

Until FSD no longer requires a driver seems to be what Elon is saying. Supposedly by the end of this year but he said that in January and it looks like the schedule has slipped.

 

[CharleyBC]

I have always considered the FSD payment as a donation to Tesla that can help to develop new tech for the future.

I viewed the buying FSD a couple years ago as analogous to buying wine futures. You put money down early for something you don't get yet in the belief that the winery (or car manufacturer) can deliver. It's a vote of confidence. But it's not alway right.

 

[lampcord]

I've heard other owners say it was because of when they were merging onto the freeway (which they were driving manually) that dinged them for the aggressive turning. Try turning on AP (and navigate on AP) once you're about to get onto the freeway.

While that may be the case, I did 44 miles and 42 of them were on interstate with AP engaged. In order for me to hit 9.6% aggressive cornering, I would have had to have been pulling >0.4 G's for 4 miles of that drive! The total distance of getting on and off the highway couldn't have been more than 2 miles and 90% of that was arrow straight. I don't understand this. It's my 5th trip since I pushed 'the button' and it's the first time I've had anything but a perfect score. I'm going on a 90 mile arrow straight drive tonight after traffic has cleared to try to make up for this.

 

[Daniel in SD]

While that may be the case, I did 44 miles and 42 of them were on interstate with AP engaged. In order for me to hit 9.6% aggressive cornering, I would have had to have been pulling >0.4 G's for 4 miles of that drive! The total distance of getting on and off the highway couldn't have been more than 2 miles and 90% of that was arrow straight. I don't understand this. It's my 5th trip since I pushed 'the button' and it's the first time I've had anything but a perfect score. I'm going on a 90 mile arrow straight drive tonight after traffic has cleared to try to make up for this.

It’s 9.6% of the time you spent cornering not 9.6% of the total drive time. You need to do more non aggressive cornering, driving straight won’t help.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

If I happen to be able to get my score back up to 100 (actually back to 99.5), I’m planning to only drive my car selectively for the remainder of the test period.

I guess I have to decide what to do now…I have a score of "100" again (not really 100, but whatever...)

This score is an example of how the main score is not using the values on the same main score page; this set of values results in a score around 99.2. Instead, the mileage-weighted average score is used (as documented by Tesla). Furthermore, it looks like they are rounding the scores to the nearest integer before doing the mileage weighting (a big deal!):
My daily scores:
105 miles, 99 (98.51)
10 miles, 99 (99.05)
32 miles, 100 (100)
51 miles, 100 (99.63)
32 miles, 100 (100)

So, the formula is: ROUND( SUMOVERDAYS(DailyMileage*ROUND(DailyScore))/ TotalMileage )

There's no other way to get the result. The proof is: here are the various ways to do it, with my data:

So basically I'm at 99.2 in reality, and the app is calculating 99.5 for the weighted average (exactly), and is rounding the display to 100. Got really lucky on that first day that I ended up with 99 rather than 98 - that would have really hurt (and in fact it does hurt my actual score).

If anyone sees an error here or some inconsistency, do let me know. I think the calculations are right.

So now we have to have a debate when they open it up to people by score, whether they are going to use the actual score, or the one with all this rounding error. I suppose I should attempt to get my actual score back up to 99.5 or higher.

Anyone figured out if we can go down a hill without triggering hard-braking

Yes you can, but not too steep (below 10% grade would be best), and not too fast. Have to be very careful.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I'm going on a 90 mile arrow straight drive tonight after traffic has cleared to try to make up for this.

Yes, that is exactly the wrong thing to do as @Daniel in SD has pointed out. You need to do a lot of cornering, very carefully. And you have to do it today. It may not actually be very much cornering - just maybe 5-6x as much as what you did on the earlier trip would be enough to crush this to levels that don't matter (would be good to get it below 1.5%, which will bring you above 99.5, which rounds to 100). You want to do it as quickly as possible since your mileage for the day is already high (it sounds like - depends on the driving distance on your other days but in any case those other days were perfect so good to limit the damage here).

Cornering score reduction is one of the trickier ones to optimize away - important to get your cornering force just right; don't want to overdo it! 0.2g isn't that much, but it's not that low either. And 0.4g is not all that high, as it turns out - especially on off-camber and reducing radius turns. Freeway interchanges are not designed like the Indianapolis Speedway.

 

[eli_]

I feel like my cognitive load has increased while driving with this safety score. Like I'm constantly trying to mentally project what my yaw rate is during turns and I'm fixated about what my follow distance is when I'm over 50+ mph. I'm not sure if that's good or bad for safety but it's something.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

you would still get an "unsafe following" ding for doing so, if you weren't on Autopilot doing it.

but the way Tesla detects it here is massively flawed. It should be excluding dynamic situations - merging or "cut-ins".

Someone that habitually tailgates people on the road desperately needs to be given a low safety score, but unavoidable merging scenarios shouldn't NEED to be on Autopilot to mask what shouldn't have been flagged as a fault in the first place.

An appropriate course of action in this scenario, even with no Safety Score, would be to fall back as soon as you see someone signal to get in, to open up as much space as possible. This can improve safety (in heavy traffic it might be impossible or risk irritating those behind you). For the purposes of the score, a cut-in without signaling could hurt you, but usually it is possible to predict when someone is going to cut in to your lane and anticipate it (and open up the gap in advance of the car even moving into your lane). For very fast weaving drivers cutting in front of you, it may be very difficult to avoid an unsafe following event entirely though. If I think that situation may arise, I quickly engage AP to mask the event, if it is safe to do so.

I don't at all understand what it's referring to.

"Unsafe following is the proportion of time where your vehicle’s headway is less than 1.0 seconds relative to the time that your vehicle’s headway is less than 3.0 seconds."

Hesitantly agree, but this is a fun thread

Replying here to your responses in the OFFICIAL BUTTON THREAD here, since it makes more sense to discuss Safety Score topics in the Safety Score thread.

 

[nvx1977]

Anyone know how how long do we have to keep up with losing traffic light battles with Priuses? Do we drive like grandmas till the beta is actually delivered to our cars (who knows when that would be!)?

The priuses around me go really fast. I think they're trying to compensate for something. Some of them border on reckless.

 

[Microterf]

I feel like my cognitive load has increased while driving with this safety score. Like I'm constantly trying to mentally project what my yaw rate is during turns and I'm fixated about what my follow distance is when I'm over 50+ mph. I'm not sure if that's good or bad for safety but it's something.

 

[EVNow]

Yes you can, but not too steep (below 10% grade would be best), and not too fast. Have to be very careful.

Manual speed control or AP with low regen (or does regen even matter with AP) ?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Manual speed control or AP with low regen (or does regen even matter with AP) ?

I use full regen with manual speed control. (On a hill you may want to ensure you don't get to maximum regen though.)

I still have no idea on the masking of AP on surface streets - I don't use AP on surface streets, since it sometimes drives so unnaturally and can dive for a turn lane without warning, it just disrupts my concentration. (There is probably value for it around traffic lights but I have no idea on the masking aspect of it there - plenty of people claim it is masked, plenty of people claim it is not - I tend to believe AP masks such violations even on surface streets, but again, I don't know and until we have the results of a good experiment I'm not going there.)

Anyway, I'm talking about using manual speed control on hills. There's no question that driving on hills is more risky - I've gotten two of my demerits in those situations - one of them was arguably due to inattention though, so it makes sense! The other was a yellow light which was no big deal but apparently just exceeded the threshold. But I've driven plenty of hills without any problems. The higher the speed, the more risky it is, though - just much more likely to have to unexpectedly apply the brakes.

The main thing that helps my score is to never drive over the speed limit on surface streets - allows more time to react, smoothly, and helps with yellow lights. Will also help with the hills. Adds a couple minutes to my commute though.

 

[EVNow]

The main thing that helps my score is to never drive over the speed limit on surface streets - allows more time to react, smoothly, and helps with yellow lights. Will also help with the hills. Adds a couple minutes to my commute though.

That is one of the reasons I actually use AP on city streets. Best way to make sure I'm not speeding (very easy on 25 mph roads).