Robotic Audi To Brave Pikes Peak Without a Driver 197
Scifi83 writes "A team of researchers at the Center for Automotive Research at Stanford (CARS) has filled the trunk of an Audi TTS with computers and GPS receivers, transforming it into a vehicle that drives itself. The car will attempt Pikes Peak without a driver at race speeds, something that's never been done."
I, for one (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
In Soviet Russia, robotic driver overlords welcome YOU!!!!
Re: (Score:2)
would like to welcome our robotic driver overlords. (Score:1, Offtopic)
Somebody with a mod point earned a chocolate bar!
Re: (Score:2)
You're on slashdot.
Explanation (Score:5, Funny)
The researchers have programmed Shelley to handle like a racecar by using a set of computer calculations called algorithms
Ha! So that's how they did it! Quite simple, really, once you know the trick.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
some people feel the need to bring political bashing into every conversation. How useless!
Re:Explanation (Score:5, Funny)
Truth is, it's probable just The Stig in the trunk, with a laptop.
Re:Explanation (Score:5, Funny)
Bah. "Algorithm" is just doublespeak for "Mechanical Turk."
Some say he can steer a car just by thinking evasive thoughts.
And if he turns the wheel, the road will slide easily underneath his car like a waitress with Tiger Woods.
All I know is that it'll be driven by The Stig.
Re: (Score:2)
>Some say he can steer a car just by thinking evasive thoughts.
Works great, if you can think in German, that is.
Re: (Score:2)
The researchers have programmed Shelley
God, I hope that's a typo. Does no one read Asimov any more? The car's name should be Sally [wikipedia.org]. It would fit perfectly; iirc the story tales place in 2020, and Sally is an antique.
As Asimov coined the word "robotics" and this car is a robot, it's a damned shame if they didn't pay homage.
Re:Explanation (Score:5, Informative)
The car is named after Michèle Mouton, her nickname apparently was Shelley, the most successful female rally driver to date. Apparently she's considered the most successful female driver in all of motorsports. And it just so happens she drove Audi's and she was the first woman to win the Pikes Peak hill climb. I'd say that's a far more appropriate reference than anything from Asimov.
Re: (Score:2)
Top Female Driver?
Where does that put her overall?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Top Female Driver?
Where does that put her overall?
Well, she won something, came second in something else and then quit due to rule changes. But please, read the article [wikipedia.org] already.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not much of a race fan - so while her Wikipedia does tell what races she's won, I don't have a frame of reference.
I know that the Pikes Peak race has been going on for nearly 100 years...and that this was the first girl to win.
I don't know how she relates to male drivers.
Is racing a male-dominated sport? Or is gender insignificant?
Re: (Score:2)
Racing is very male dominated. While there aren't any rules (anymore) preventing female drivers from competing, there just hasn't been a lot of female participation in auto racing of any sort.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Pfft. Call me when she's making sexually suggestive domain registrar commercials.
Re: (Score:2)
The World Rally Championship is the highest level of competition in that sport. So winning rounds of it, and coming second in the championship, indicates that you're pretty bloody good.
I'd hazard a guess that such results rank her in the top 30 rally drivers, all-time.
Re: (Score:2)
"I'd say that's a far more appropriate reference than anything from Asimov"
Yes, Shelley or Walter Rohrl! :-D _O_
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Explanation (Score:5, Funny)
How exactly is the bravery implemented? What if next it decides to "brave" global domination?
Don't worry! The scientists have that covered.
To have bravery, you first must have fear. So the first and most difficult step was to program the car to be afraid all the time. Then, to get bravery, they simply program it to ignore its fear when it's driving up Pike's Peak.
The rest of the time it's a total scaredy-car. If you think it's trying to dominate the globe, just shout "boo!" at it and it'll drive off to cower in the corner and cry.
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly is the bravery implemented?
/s/fear/courage/g
Re: (Score:2)
They did mention that the car was going to be equipped with a "Kill Switch".
Note to Self (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Note to Self (Score:5, Insightful)
Observe trials from uphill side of road.
No kidding. If ever a story deserved a "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag...
Re:Note to Self (Score:5, Funny)
"Observe trials from uphill side of road."
It's an Audi, not a Toyota!
Re: (Score:2)
That's not too different from when the humans are driving, then. Lots of people of course still stand in the most retarded places possible, and occasionally pay for that dearly when somebody misses the braking point by a fraction of a second.
Re: (Score:2)
They can try Mt. Washington Auto Road next (Score:2)
Re:They can try Mt. Washington Auto Road next (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They can try Mt. Washington Auto Road next (Score:4, Interesting)
Sounds like a PERFECT time to unleash an autonomous racing vehicle.
Especially if the goal is AI research. We have chess-playing computers, we need GTA-playing computers.
Re: (Score:2)
PP is an exciting road (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:PP is an exciting road (Score:4, Insightful)
Rapid reaction time, good slide slip sensors, and some great counterintuitive steering routines are all going to be essential if this is going to be "at race speeds". Good trained drivers screw this kind of thing up all the time. A robot can be programmed to be repeatable, but is this one flexible enough to conditions to be fast AND safe?
Look out below!
Re: (Score:2)
Rapid reaction time, good slide slip sensors, and some great counterintuitive steering routines are all going to be essential if this is going to be "at race speeds".
Unfortunately, *realtime* reaction time has nothing to do with staying on the road if physics wont allow it. If you go into a corner too fast, then you're quick reaction could put you into a beautiful sideways controlled drift, right past the point where the surface of the road stops existing. This means the car must also have some very impressive "look ahead". If it doesn't have a map of the road, it'll have to predict a safe speed for any blind turns (I imagine nearly all of them are) while considering th
Re: (Score:2)
Definitely, I just don't see them letting the car drive up there without a map. It's difficult enough for human drivers to turn in competitive times without pace notes, but it's going to be even more difficult for a computer to deal with.
The most interesting part here, IMO, is seeing how the car deals with driving at racing speed vs the more leisurely pace of the previous AI challenge race, where, IIRC, the cars averaged below 30km/h. At those sorts of speeds the car just goes where the wheels are pointing
Re: (Score:2)
Now you know. And Knowing is half the battle.
Racing speed? Awesome! (Score:2)
Not many humans [youtube.com] can drive up the Pike's Peak at racing speed.
If they can create a robotic car to do this then one major criterion for a "human level" AI has been reached.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that's the easy part. It's called Traction Control [audiusa.com], and it's standard on pretty much all cars sold in the US these days. Given that the article mentions how they're using a lot of Audi's electronics and sensor systems, I expect they'll leave these systems in place.
It is true that a good
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most drivers I've talked to with far more experience driving on gravel than I do seem to be of the opinion that traction control = BAD NEWS on gravel and that even moderately experienced drivers can do far better than what any TCS can do/allows you to do in terms of maintaining control on gravel.
Most TC systems are apparently tuned more towards pavement or ice/snow, not towards gravel.
There's also the fact that, as you state, taking a turn properly requires prior knowledge of the conditions of that turn - t
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious when you raced Pikes Peak - I watched the race a couple of years ago from lower on the course, and the road was tarmac at that point. It's my understanding that every year the road's owners pave a little more of it, with the goal of eventually paving all the way to the top - they want to make it easier for the tourists to reach the summit. Changes the nature of the PPHC, but economics wins out. Now if 'Shelley' has to handle both tarmac and gravel in the same run, that's actually fairly impress
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It might not just be economics: there is an enormous amount of environmental damage done by maintaining a high-altitude, high-traffic dirt road. The city of Colorado Spr
meh (Score:5, Funny)
I already saw this on Speed Racer.
Spoiler Alert!
Speed wins the race anyway, and helps Inspector Detector catch the nefarious people behind the robot car
W1N vs. FA1L (Score:4, Funny)
Re:W1N vs. FA1L (Score:5, Insightful)
Easy. Watching it succeed will be more astonishing.
Watching it fail will be more entertaining (assuming some safety precautions preventing anyone from being killed).
Re:W1N vs. FA1L (Score:5, Funny)
(assuming some safety precautions preventing anyone from being killed).
Good point!
The summary only says that the car won't have a driver. I hope they remember to have the passengers get out, too!
Re: (Score:2)
I was mostly thinking "make sure there aren't any pedestrians in the way" and "make sure that when it falls off the mountain, it doesn't land on anything important," but getting the passengers out would be valuable too.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, don't forget the hooker in the trunk.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't you look at the pictures? That's not a hooker, that's a computer! (Gotta wonder about some of these /. types... though I suppose it could be a robot hooker...)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's a computer?!
Then what's the thing that balances my checkbook and snorts all my coke?!
Re: (Score:2)
Yikes! (Score:4, Funny)
The researchers have programmed Shelley to handle like a racecar by using a set of computer calculations called algorithms
See what happens when you let Liberal Arts majors playing journalist direct the public's understanding of technical things?
Soon: "John's car rolled out of his driveway all by itself and hit a fire hydrant, honey! He should sue General Motors for faulty algorithms!"
Re: (Score:2)
Soon: "John's car rolled out of his driveway all by itself and hit a fire hydrant, honey! He should sue General Motors for faulty algorithms!"
If someone's car did that, couldn't "faulty algorithms" actually be the problem?
Re: (Score:2)
ESPECIALLY if it was a GM.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly. But more likely than not, it was because the driver forgot to set the parking brake, or something equally stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
So you mean, “algorithms” becomes the new “gene”, as in “genetically modified”, meaning “It can’t possibly also have good applications.”?
Let’s see them become Amish then. ;) ;)
*must... wait...until... then... to tell them that our own bodies are basically based genetic algorithms*
Re: (Score:2)
The researchers have programmed Shelley to handle like a racecar by using a set of computer calculations called algorithms
See what happens when you let Liberal Arts majors playing journalist direct the public's understanding of technical things?
Soon: "John's car rolled out of his driveway all by itself and hit a fire hydrant, honey! He should sue General Motors for faulty algorithms!"
You're ridiculing the author for clearly and correctly defining the terminology? If the intended audience [stanford.edu] of the article [stanford.edu] is unlikely to know what "algorithm" means, don't you think a concise definition is in order? Now, I'm sure that writers assuming an Ivy League audience [harvard.edu] would reasonably expect people to know what the big words mean.
Not to mention the fact that there are many Computer Science and Engineering majors who are also capable of effective communication; this is not the sole domain of "liberal a
Price is Right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory Family Guy reference! [youtube.com]
Bravery (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe they could require the development team to ride along. I'll bet the quality of the code would go way up.
Current achievements? (Score:2, Funny)
Shelley has reached speeds of 130 miles per hour without a driver on testing grounds at the Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah.
I could do much better with a brick.
Re: (Score:2)
What kind of brick?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Given a straight and long enough track, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Doh. But isn't it at least *mildly* interesting that a brick's terminal velocity is just about the same 130 MPH? Something needs to make me feel better about completely missing the point (and spending the time doing the math). :)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh, what?
Oh yeah.
Fucking WOOOOOOOOSSSSSHHHHHH.
Audi?! (Score:2)
If you were going to build a robot car, why not build it out of something you can get real cheap. Like, say, you know, your Grandma's Plymouth Aries K.
Re:Audi?! (Score:5, Insightful)
Audi, specifically Audi Quattros, have been rally car favorites for years. Big engine, good tranny, four wheel drive. There are a lot of people that know how to get them running well, and the cars are built well to do the job.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Big engine, good tranny, four wheel drive.
I'll thank you to leave my mother/father out of this.
Re: (Score:2)
Specifically Audi Quattros? That's anything made by Audi with AWD. It's the exact same system as used by Volkswagen and called 4Motion, where they use torsen LSDs with a 5:1 maximum slip ratio, with the maximum slip then limited by automatic application of the ABS. Porsche uses basically the same thing. The most likely explanation is that Subaru and Mitsubishi have enough WRC wins to not need the publicity, but the post-VW-acquisition Audi could use some positive press, and it's worth it to provide a car an
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
From what I remember, 4Motion does not necessarily refer to an AWD system with a torsen differential, although this has been the case in several instances (VW have also used a viscous coupling for AWD). Quattro, on the other hand, refers to a very specific set of technologies.
As far as the engines go, Audi make one of the better (if not the best) 2 Liter engines out there. They put most V6s to shame.
Re: (Score:2)
To paraphrase the brilliant (but eccentric) Dr. Brown: The way I see it, if you're gonna build an automatic driver into a car, why not do it with some style?
Re: (Score:2)
They specifically state in the article that they're shooting for real racing speeds. While I don't know what a Plymouth Aries is, I think my grandma has a Reliant. I'm pretty sure that isn't going up Pike's Peak at anything like racing speeds.
The Audi is a car that can let drivers shine, and any flaw in the driving algorithm will be quickly apparent at high
Re: (Score:2)
I may be off because I'm not an expert in optimal control theory or nonlinear dynamics but I'm gonna guess it's because the Audi offers 4WD and in turn a much more stable platform through what are very "dynamic" turns. Consider the mathematics throughout a turn on gravel while applying power with a 2WD versus a 4WD. Would the 4WD be easier to control? I propose it would be.
Then again it could be because Audis are great at rally racing and they got one for cheap.
The Audi will also come with a lot of built-in "don't drive off the road" features called algorithms.
Fortunately for the stanford team, Audi has already figured out computer controls to mostly keep the car from spinning out or locking up the brakes when presented with mostly reasonable inputs. They have to make it run up the mountain without creating any unreasonable inputs now.
Re: (Score:2)
The best rally cars, as evinced by their superior records, are the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo and the Subaru Impreza. The Impreza is the only car to win the WRC four years in a row. The Lancer Evo has better weight-distribution and about the same cojones but is more "touchy" by most reports, probably because of the superior weight-distribution; Having more front weight makes the car more reluctant to swap ends. The Subaru has the least body roll and best CG due to its "Symmetric AWD" design. Audi is now an also-
Re: (Score:2)
And not that either was worth a nickel. Stupid K cars!
Carburetor stuck open on the freeway once, and I got my own taste of "sudden uncontrolled acceleration." Of course, I just popped it into neutral and let the engine blow, but still scary at the time.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Well I was 16 at the time and was just glad to be able to stop again, but you keep riding that high horse.
Obligatory AWESOME PP Video (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Good news (Score:2)
The good news about this is it can now drive only itself off a cliff when the gas pedal gets stuck.
But can it beat (Score:2)
Rod Millen's time
Interesting times with those culverts (Score:2)
It's going to be interesting to see how the car detects and handles the drainage culverts. The last few miles have corrugated metal drainage culverts crossing the road periodically to carry off the snowmelt. These often get overloaded and instead you have a big mud puddle with a hard metal culvert under the mud. Humans can use a little intelligence and slow down for these. It will be interesting to see how the automated Audi handles these and other unexpected situations!
Hill climbing algorithm (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
The Mt. Evans road is paved all the way. I understand Pike's has some gravel. I've been on Evan's but not Pike's. It was challenging for me as a human being from sea level, who hadn't had enough time to acclimate*. For a robot it doesn't seem like such a big deal.
*The worst effects of mountain sickness came after getting back down. The cumulative effects gave me a wicked headache.
Re: (Score:2)
Pike's Peak has gravel, packed dirt, some asphalt, the works! The change in altitude plays HELL with the engine output even on turbocharged cars so there are many many variables at work. Oh, there's not great guardrails either I understand....
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously though. There aren't any. Well, there's a couple on the paved section (the first 7 miles) but none on the last 13 miles (the section the racers run.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's not a simple road. Even going slowly, you definitely have to pay attention. Lots of loose gravel and dirt where a moments inattention can result in a skid where you go driving right off the side of the mountain. And as others have pointed out, the difference in elevation wreaks havoc on engine efficiency - going f
Re: (Score:2)
Mount Evans Road would be more challenging...
Except there's not an annual race to the top of Mt. Evans, and therefore nothing to compare. Also, Evans is paved. I'd say the drifting done in the Hill Climb is FAR more challenging.
I forsee emergency bridge building projects... (Score:2)
...when the DOT discovers that Google Maps shows a bridge that isn't there. Yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Still needs speech (partially possible), a bar of moving lights (existing), turbo boost (as the lowriders for assistance) and super pursuit mode (might be a biit hard, to accelerate time itself to twice the normal speed. ;)
Wait for a Chinese-Russian joint-venture, producing KARR! ^^
And David Hasselhoff with a goatee!
Re: (Score:2)
Dammit, now I have to get out my geek cred.
KARR was not built by the Russians or Chinese. The Knight Automated Roving Robot was the prototype for KITT (Knight Industries Two Thousand). When KARR was powered up for the first time, A programming error (or perhaps a faulty algorithm!!) made its AI unstable and dangerous. Namely KARR was programmed for self-preservation instead of preservation of human life, as KITT was.
The more you know!
-yes I know I'm a loser.
You are not a looser, (Score:2)
You are my new best friend.
If it wasn't for KITT I wouldn't know how to perform a flawless in lane J-Turn!
P.S. it's not as easy as it looks in the movies!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is GPS navigation only. The article makes no mention of visual processing. Without much better "eyes" these cars will just run you over follwoing the map....
This is only safe because it is a closed road.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see how this has any relation to driving on actual roads. This is a marked-off course with no cross streets, pedestrians, bicycles, or other vehicles. Even under these very special conditions there's no guarantee it won't drive into the wall or off into thin air. Or hit a mule deer. Or get stuck in a mud-puddle/culvert.