[LINK] itN: Is Vehicle Autonomy being contemplated in Qld?

[Marghanita da Cruz]

Do these fit the classification?

>
>     If these robotics startups get their way, this could be the year
>     delivery robots become a regular sight on city streets.
>
https://www.fastcompany.com/90291820/8-robots-racing-to-win-the-delivery-wars

On 13/8/19 3:00 pm, Roger Clarke wrote:
> Queensland debuts "most advanced" driverless car in Oz
> Matt Johnston
> itNews
> Aug 13 2019
> https://www.itnews.com.au/news/queensland-debuts-most-advanced-driverless-car-in-oz-529501 
>
>
> ...
> The $1.5 million, purpose-built Renault ZOE2 completed the trip at 
> level four on the automation scale, where the car can travel fully 
> autonomously, but a human driver can still take control if needed.
>
> Previous efforts from the Queensland Department of Transport and Main 
> Road’s (TMR) Connected and Autonomous Vehicle Initiative (CAVI) trial 
> have aimed for level three, or ‘conditional’ automation, where the car 
> can drive itself some of the time. Level five is full automation, 
> where carmakers won’t need to include a steering wheel.
> ...
>
> [Does anyone know where this particular scale is published?
> 1.  ?
> 2.  ?
> 3.  ‘conditional’ automation, the car can drive itself some of the time
> 4.  Artefact Autonomy, human driver can take control 'if needed' (?)
> 5.  Artefact Autonomy, no steering-wheel
>
>
> [I've published a related but different scale, most recently here:
> http://www.rogerclarke.com/EC/AII.html#TAA
>
>     Function of the Artefact       Function of the Controller
> ...
> 5.  Notify an Impending Action     Override/Veto an Impending Action
> 6.  Act and Inform                 Interrupt/Suspend/Cancel an Action
> 7.  Act                            NIL
>
>
> [I find it remarkable that artefacts, with serious potential for 
> action in the real world, operating in close proximity to even 
> property let alone people, may already have been authorised to be 
> outside human control.
>
> [Can you shoot out the tyres?  put up a (multi-sided) roadblock that 
> it can't get through or out of?  Pity the police patrols that have to 
> find a way to run a rogue robot-car off the road.  Oh, but surely 
> voyeurs, organised criminals, notoriety-seekers and terrorists 
> wouldn't investigate the possibilities, would they?
>
>
> [I have Level 7 in there for things like buggies on Mars, where signal 
> latency precludes human control.
>
> [My paper (above) continues:
> >There appears to be de facto public acceptance of the notion of 
> delegation of low-level, real-time functions to artefacts [i.e. my 7, 
> their 5 - where the rapidity with which analysis, decision and action 
> need to be undertaken may preclude conscious human involvement (e.g. 
> aircraft trim and stability, collision avoidance)]. Even at that 
> level, however, AI is adding a further level of mystery.
> >
> >It remains to be seen whether the public will continue to accept 
> inexplicable events resulting in aircraft and driverless-vehicle 
> incidents. Following the crash of a second Boeing 737 Max in early 
> 2019, the US President voiced a popular sentiment, to the effect that 
> pilots should be professionals who can easily and quickly take control 
> of their aircraft.
> >
> >That portends an edict that robot autonomy, at least for passenger 
> aircraft, will be limited to revocable autonomy (5-6), with layer 7 
> prohibited. In respect of less structured decisions [such as full 
> control of a vehicle's journey], there seems little prospect of public 
> acceptance even of revocable automated decision-making.
>
>
-- 
Marghanita da Cruz
Telephone: 0414-869202
Email:  marghanita at ramin.com.au
Website: http://ramin.com.au