Driverless cars worse at detecting children and darker-skinned pedestrians say scientists::Researchers call for tighter regulations following major age and race-based discrepancies in AI autonomous systems.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
9 points
*

Weird question, but why does a car need to know if it’s a person or not? Like regardless of if it’s a person or a car or a pole, maybe don’t drive into it?

Is it about predicting whether it’s going to move into your path? Well can’t you just just LIDAR to detect an object moving and predict the path, why does it matter if it’s a person?

Is it about trolley probleming situations so it picks a pole instead of a person if it can’t avoid a crash?

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Im guessing it can’t detect them as objects at all, not that it can’t classify them as humans.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

That seems like the car is relying way too much on video to detect surroundings…

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Bingo.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Sooo… like the Tesla?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Conant and Ashby’s good regulator theorem in cybernetics says, “Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system.”

The AI needs an accurate model of a human to predict how humans move. Predicting the path of a human is different than predicting the path of other objects. Humans can stand totally motionless, pivot, run across the street at a red light, suddenly stop, fall over from a heart attack, be curled up or splayed out drunk, slip backwards on some ice, etc. And it would be computationally costly, inaccurate, and pointless to model non-humans in these ways.

I also think trolley problem considerations come into play, but more like normativity in general. The consequences of driving quickly amongst humans is higher than amongst human height trees. I don’t mind if a car drives at a normal speed on a tree lined street, but it should slow down on a street lined with playing children who could jump out at anytime.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Thanks, you make some good points. (safe) human drivers drive differently in situations with a lot of people in them, and we need to replicate that in self-driving cars.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Anyone who quotes Ashby et al gets an upvote from me! I’m always so excited to see cybernetic thinking in the wild.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Cameras and image recognition are cheaper than LIDAR/RADAR, so Tesla uses it exclusively.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

They need to safely ignore shadows, oil stains on the road, just because there’s contrast on an image doesn’t mean it’s an object.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sure but why on earth are we relying on cameras to drive cars? Many modern cars have radar, which is far more reliable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Natural vision is awesome, it works for billions of humans. We just have nothing close to what the human eyes and brain offers in terms of tech in that spectrum.

I think it needs to be a combination of sensors since radar sucks in the rain/snow/fog.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 13K

    Posts

  • 570K

    Comments