Partial automation in recent vehicles such as Autopilot in Tesla models has been a source of confusion and concern for the insurance industry, government regulators and even early adopter drivers themselves.
Marketing of these vehicles has come under scrutiny, with recent TV commercials for GM Super Cruise showing drivers patting their laps and clapping their hands in time with a song as they move along the highway.
RELATED: GM Cruise designs custom chips at lower cost for self-driving vehicles such as Origin
In fact, partial automation is not full self-driving, as Tesla has often pointed out along with regulators at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is investigating 37 Tesla crashes involving 18 deaths going back to 2016 where systems like Autopilot were suspected of being used. NHTSA has repeatedly reminded the public that no commercially available today can drive itself and every vehicle requires the human driver to be in control at all times; all state laws require the human driver to be responsible for the operation of their vehicles.
The insurance industry also sees a big role for improving vehicle technology and public awareness of how much a driver needs to stay alert and involved with partially automated cars and trucks. Some carmakers already use interior cameras and sensors on steering wheels to observe if drivers have their hands on the wheel, then offer up alerts if they don’t. The question arises if even that technology approach is enough.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety released a survey Tuesday of 600 active users, finding 53% of Cadillac Super Cruise, 42% of Tesla Autopilot and 12% of Nissan/Infiniti ProPILOT Assist “said they were comfortable treating their vehicles as fully self-driving.”
The survey also noted that 40% of users of Autopilot and Super Cruise (both with lockout tech for not paying attention to alerts) reported those systems had at some point switched off while they were driving and would not reactivate.
IIHS President David Harkey said in a statement, “The big picture message here is that the early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technology’s limits.” He also noticed the glaring differences among the drivers of the three different vehicle technologies. “It’s possible that system design and marketing are adding to these misconceptions.”
IIHS noted that none of the current systems is designed to replace a human driver or make it safe for a driver to perform other activities such as eating or sleeping that take their focus away from the road. Track tests and real-world crashes provide “ample evidence that today’s partial automation systems struggle to recognize and react to many common driving situations,” IIHS added. The high level of assistance they offer tempts drivers to turn their attention to other things.
Attention reminders and system lockouts could be implemented more widely to help combat driver distraction in general, said IIHS Research Scientists Alexandra Mueller, lead author of the study. She is also the main architect of the Institute’s upcoming safeguards rating program, first announced in January.
Consumer rating programs are considered a quicker way to make changes to safety programs, although IIHS does petition regulators to make safety standard improvements, said Joe Young, director of media relations at IIHS, in an email to Fierce Electronics. “Right now, there aren’t any implementations of level 2 technology that meet all the criterial we’re looking for,” he said. The first ratings in the new program will be announced “in the coming months.”
One of the principal roles of IIHS is to prod safety improvements where regulations fall short or leave gaps, Young said. “Emerging technology is moving quickly, and we want to make sure it doesn’t take us in the wrong direction from a safety standpoint. The only way to do this is to ensure the systems are designed in a way to actively keep the driver in the loop.”
Many consumers have indicated they want the safeguards in place, he added, noting a June report on an IIHS survey of more than 1,000 drivers.
Drivers appear to prefer partially automated features such as driver-facing cameras or sensors in steering wheels that require them to stay engaged in driving, IIHS found in that survey.
General Motors responded to the latest IIHS survey with a statement shared with Fierce Electronics regarding its Super Cruise driver assistance tech:
“GM believes driver engagement is critical and required to operate any advanced driver assistance system in any vehicle we sell. Our industry-first Driver Attention System is specifically designed to focus drivers’ attention on the road while experiencing hands-free driving with Super Cruise driver assistance technology. The Driver Attention System monitors the driver’s head position and/or gaze in relation to the road to help ensure driver attention. When the system detects the driver isn’t paying attention, a series of escalations will prompt the driver to reengage. When using Super Cruise, the driver is responsible for operating the vehicle in a safe manner and must remain attentive to traffic, surroundings, and road conditions at all times.“
Also, GM President Mark Reuss outlined the company’s approach to self-driving deployment in a recent LinkedIn post, noting its use of cameras, radars, lidar and GPS in its comprehensive set of sensor technologies.