DOCSLIB.ORG

Automated and Connected Vehicle Deployment Efforts: a Primer for Transportation Planners

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Automated and Connected Vehicle Deployment Efforts: a Primer for Transportation Planners AUTOMATED AND CONNECTED VEHICLE DEPLOYMENT EFFORTS: A PRIMER FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNERS April 2019 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CENTER FOR AUTOMOTIVE RESEARCH II Sponsoring Organization: Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) 425 Ottawa Street, P.O. Box 30050, Lansing, MI 48909 Performing Organization: Center for Automotive Research (CAR) 3005 Boardwalk, Ste. 200 Ann Arbor, MI 48108 Automated and Connected Vehicle Deployment Efforts: A primer for transportation planners MDOT REQ. NO. 2193. Specialty Services: Connected and Automated Vehicle Technology Task D3 April 2019 Author(s): Eric Paul Dennis, P.E. Valerie Sathe Brugeman Managing Editor(s): Valerie Sathe Brugeman Niles Annelin (MDOT) III ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This document is a product of the Center for Automotive Research under a State Planning and Research Grant administered by the Michigan Department of Transportation. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND CENTER FOR AUTOMOTIVE RESEARCH IV CONTENTS 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 2 United States Federal Efforts ............................................................................................. 3 2.1 USDOT Connected Vehicle Program .............................................................................................. 3 2.2 USDOT Automated Vehicle Program ............................................................................................ 13 2.3 USDOT University Transformation Centers ................................................................................. 15 2.4 Truck Platooning Research ............................................................................................................... 16 2.5 NOCoE SPaT Challenge .................................................................................................................. 18 3 U.S. State-level Legislation and Regulation .................................................................... 19 3.1 Alabama ............................................................................................................................................... 19 3.2 Arizona ................................................................................................................................................. 19 3.3 Arkansas ............................................................................................................................................... 20 3.4 California ............................................................................................................................................. 21 3.5 Colorado .............................................................................................................................................. 23 3.6 Connecticut ......................................................................................................................................... 24 3.7 Delaware .............................................................................................................................................. 24 3.8 Florida .................................................................................................................................................. 24 3.9 Georgia ................................................................................................................................................ 25 3.10 Hawaii .................................................................................................................................................. 25 3.11 Idaho .................................................................................................................................................... 26 3.12 Illinois................................................................................................................................................... 26 3.13 Indiana ................................................................................................................................................. 26 3.14 Kentucky .............................................................................................................................................. 27 3.15 Louisiana .............................................................................................................................................. 27 3.16 Maine .................................................................................................................................................... 28 3.17 Maryland .............................................................................................................................................. 28 3.18 Massachusetts...................................................................................................................................... 28 3.19 Michigan .............................................................................................................................................. 29 V 3.20 Minnesota ............................................................................................................................................ 30 3.21 Mississippi ........................................................................................................................................... 30 3.22 Nebraska .............................................................................................................................................. 31 3.23 Nevada ................................................................................................................................................. 31 3.24 New Jersey ........................................................................................................................................... 33 3.25 New Mexico ........................................................................................................................................ 33 3.26 New York ............................................................................................................................................ 33 3.27 North Carolina .................................................................................................................................... 34 3.28 North Dakota...................................................................................................................................... 35 3.29 Ohio ..................................................................................................................................................... 35 3.30 Oregon ................................................................................................................................................. 36 3.31 Pennsylvania ........................................................................................................................................ 36 3.32 South Carolina .................................................................................................................................... 37 3.33 Tennessee ............................................................................................................................................ 37 3.34 Texas .................................................................................................................................................... 39 3.35 Utah ...................................................................................................................................................... 39 3.36 Vermont ............................................................................................................................................... 40 3.37 Virginia ................................................................................................................................................. 40 3.38 Washington ......................................................................................................................................... 41 3.39 Washington, D.C. ............................................................................................................................... 41 3.40 Wisconsin ............................................................................................................................................ 41 3.41 Other states ......................................................................................................................................... 42 3.42 Canada .................................................................................................................................................. 45 4 U.S. State and Local Public-Private Partnerships ............................................................ 47 4.1 Highly Automated Vehicle Research and Development Program ............................................. 47 4.2 Knight Foundation Smart Cities Project ........................................................................................ 53 4.3 Carnegie Mellon University .............................................................................................................. 54 4.4 Colorado RoadX & Denver Smart City .......................................................................................... 54 4.5 Las Vegas ............................................................................................................................................. 55 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ZTE Gets Temporary Reprieve
    REALTY WOES Property curbs to dampen earnings prospects p14 HOT DISH HELPING HAND Tech fund set up to help boost sector p16 ON MENU World Cup fans flames of crawfish craze BUSINESS p15 CHINA DAILY HONG KONG EDITION Thursday, July 5, 2018 Tariffs Tech will not ZTE gets take fizz out of temporary fireworks reprieve By HONG XIAO in New York [email protected] US Commerce Department grants firm Tariffs are not going to put a damper on one grand old US breathing space from July 2 to Aug 1 tradition. On the Fourth of July, By MA SI mercialization of fifth-genera- whether you gaze up at the [email protected] tion mobile communication pyrotechnics over the East technology has already kicked River in New York, watch the ZTE Corp has been allowed off,” Xiang said. nationwide spectacles on TV to temporarily resume business Edison Lee, a telecom analyst or stage your own celebration A boy plays with sparklers as he waits for the Fourth of July fireworks display at Ault Park in Cincinnati, the United States. AP activities as the Chinese smart- at investment bank Jefferies, in the backyard, one thing is phone and telecom company said in a research note that the for sure — thanks for the thrill works hard to secure the lifting temporary reprieve was “a very of fireworks go to China. works and firecrackers in ing new duties. importing from countries man said. “As the regulations of a seven-year US supplier ban. positive indication that ZTE is Fireworks were originally May, just in time for this “Thankfully, the fireworks such as Italy, Mexico and [in the US] got tighter and The US Commerce Depart- on track to a full lifting of the invented in China in the ninth year’s Independence Day, industry has not been impact- China.
    [Show full text]
  • Automated Driving Activities in the U.S
    AUTOMATED DRIVING ACTIVITIES IN THE U.S. A PARTIAL REPORT JANE LAPPIN CHAIR, TRB STANDING COMMITTEE ON VEHICLE HIGHWAY AUTOMATION APRIL 19, 2021 EUCAD- VIRTUALLY BRUSSELS WHAT NATIONAL POLICIES AND ACTIONS CAN ACCELERATE DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT? • Structural safety standards for new vehicle designs • Data exchange standards • Safe driving integration, by ODD, vehicle size/type • Public acceptance • Built infrastructure • ReMote operations • • Machine-readable signage Consistent national regulations • Procedural safety • Digital short-range communications • Platooning • Road operations • Planning • Ethics • Sensors/enabling technologies • Liability • Equity • Internal and external vehicle communications • Investment in Innovation* • Accessibility • Multi-sector Pilots • Personal security • Public deMonstrations • Cybersecurity • Test beds INDICATORS OF HEALTHY INNOVATION: AS OF FEBRUARY 25, 2021, CA DMV HAS ISSUED AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TESTING PERMITS (WITH A DRIVER) TO THE FOLLOWING 56 ENTITIES: • AIMOTIVE INC • RENOVO.AUTO • Qcraft.ai • • • AMBARELLA CORPORATION RIDECELL INC • LEONIS TECHNOLOGIES QUALCOMM TECHNOLOGIES, • INC • APEX.AI SUBARU • LYFT, INC • TELENAV, INC. • APPLE INC • BOX BOT INC • MANDO AMERICA CORP • • TESLA • ARGO AI, LLC CONTINENTAL • MERC BENZ • • TOYOTA RESEARCH INSTITUTE • ATLAS ROBOTICS, INC CRUISE LLC • NIO USA INC. • • UATC, LLC (UBER) • AURORA INNOVATION CYNGN INC • NISSAN • DEEPROUTE.AI • UDACITY • AUTOX TECHNOLOGIES INC • NURO, INC • • Udelv, Inc • BAIDU USA LLC DELPHI • NVIDIA CORPORATION • • VALEO NORTH AMERICA,
    [Show full text]
  • Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases
    Science and Technology Law Review Volume 23 Number 2 Article 3 2020 Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases Richard F. Dole, Jr. Univerisity of Houston Law Center, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech Part of the Computer Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, Internet Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Richard F Dole,, Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases, 23 SMU SCI. & TECH. L. REV. 127 (2020) https://scholar.smu.edu/scitech/vol23/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Science and Technology Law Review by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. Provisional Injunctive Relief Under the UTSA and the DTSA in Federal Court New Product Cases Richard F. Dole, Jr.* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 128 II. FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 65 ............ 131 A. Procedural Requirements .............................. 131 B. Discretionary Requirements ............................ 133 III. THE WAYMO CASE ...................................... 136 A. Background ........................................... 136 B. Lessons from the Waymo Case ......................... 141 1. The Importance of the Unchallenged Evidence that Levandowski had Downloaded Without Authorization Over 14,000 Files of Waymo’s Driverless Vehicle Research.......................................... 141 2. Judge Alsup’s Refusal to Draw Negative Inferences from Levandowski’s Claim Over 400 Times of the Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self- Incrimination ..................................... 141 3. The Adequacy of Waymo’s Remedy at Law .......
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Tech M&A Outlook: Internet of Things
    2021 Tech M&A Outlook: Internet of Things Analysts - Christian Renaud, Rich Karpinski, Katy Ring, Brian O’Rourke, Johan Vermij, Mark Fontecchio, Jonathan Stern Publication date: Thursday, February 18 2021 Introduction Semiconductor activity contributed to a strong year for IoT dealmaking in 2020, followed by a flurry of consolidation in the healthcare, transportation, manufacturing and wireless sectors. According to 451 Research's M&A KnowledgeBase, the total value of IoT acquisitions rose to nearly $69bn from $8bn in 2019. Transaction volume was down slightly to 125 prints from the 2019 record of 139 purchases. Even backing out the $33.5bn NVIDIA-Arm pairing, total deal value was over four times the prior year. M&A activity was concentrated in a small handful of verticals as businesses sought to digitize. Spurred by a global health crisis, healthcare technology-related transactions led in volume with 24 acquisitions totaling over $19bn, or 20% of all deals in the year. There was continued enthusiasm for the transportation sector, with 13 transactions in both commercial and consumer transportation totaling over $5.8bn, including four rather large LiDAR special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC) deals. This transportation number does not include the acquisition in December of Uber's Advanced Technology Group by Aurora Innovation for a reported $4bn and is also not reflected in the $66bn in total IoT transactions. Healthcare and transportation were followed by manufacturing and industrial (13 prints, $5bn) and wireless-related firms (sensors and infrastructure), with 13 deals totaling $41m. This export was generated by user [email protected] at account S&P Global on 6/24/2021 from IP address 168.149.160.75.
    [Show full text]
  • Nevada Supply Chain Analysis
    Financial Advisory Gaming & Hospitality Public Policy Research Real Estate Advisory [Year] Regional & Urban Economics NEVADA COVID-19 COORDINATED ECONOMIC RESPONSE PLAN: SUPPLY CHAIN ANALYSIS PREPARED FOR THE: & DECEMBER 2020 Prepared By: & 7219 West Sahara Avenue Spatial Economic Concepts Suite 110-A Las Vegas, NV 89117 Main 702-967-3188 www.rcgecon.com December 31, 2020 Mr. Michael Brown Executive Director Governor’s Office of Economic Development State of Nevada 808 W. Nye Lane Carson City, Nevada 89703 Re: Nevada COVID-19 Coordinated Economic Response Plan: Supply Chain Analysis (“Study/Report”) Dear Mr. Brown: The Consulting Team (“CT’) of RCG Economics LLC (“RCG”) and Spatial Economic Concepts (“SEC”) is pleased to submit the referenced study to the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (“GOED”) and the Nevada State Treasurer’s Office (“STO”) relative to the Nevada COVID-19 Coordinated Economic Response Plan by the State of Nevada (“the State or Nevada”) for an analysis of Nevada’s supply chain and last-mile delivery services in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. According to GOED: “The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in a number of adverse effects on the State of Nevada’s economy, as the State has been faced with disruptions to existing supply chain infrastructure. The strain placed on the supply chain throughout the public health emergency has resulted in significant delays for the delivery of essential products and lifesaving prescription medications for Nevada residents.” This Study focuses on the steps that Nevada can take to improve its supply chain infrastructure to adequately respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and contains the following elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Engaging Drivers and Law Enforcement
    SM Governors Highway Safety Association ® The States’ Voice on Highway Safety Automated Vehicle Safety Expert Panel: Engaging Drivers and Law Enforcement AUGUST 2019 www.ghsa.org MADE POSSIBLE BY A GRANT FROM Table of Contents Introduction 1 Brief Background on Automated Vehicles 1 The Role of State Highway Offices 4 State Behavioral Highway Safety Programs and Partnerships 4 State Highway Safety Offices and Automated Vehicles 5 Current State Automated Vehicle Activities 6 Legislation 6 Testing and Deployment 6 Automated Vehicles and State Highway Safety Offices: Challenges and Recommendations 8 Challenges Involving Automated Vehicle Policy 8 Challenges Involving the Public 9 Public Information Recommendations for SHSOs and Other Stakeholders 10 Automated Vehicles and Law Enforcement: Challenges and Recommendations 13 Challenges Involving AV Policy 13 Challenges Involving AV Operations 14 Operational Recommendations for Law Enforcement and SHSOs 16 Major Themes and Conclusions 17 Summary of Recommendations for State Highway Safety Offices, Law Enforcement, and GHSA 18 References 20 Appendix 23 Agenda 23 Goals 23 Attendee List 24 The report was overseen by GHSA Executive Director Jonathan Adkins and Director of Government Relations Russ Martin. Senior Director of Communications and Programs Kara Macek and Communications Manager Madison Forker edited the report. The views and recommendations in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of GHSA, State Farm® or the individuals or organizations represented on the expert Panel. The report was designed by Brad Amburn. Introduction Automated vehicles—vehicles with technology that can perform some or all driving tasks, called AVs for short—already are appearing on our roads. Their presence will expand steadily in the coming years.
    [Show full text]
  • A Behavioural Lens on Transportation Systems: the Psychology of Commuter Behaviour and Transportation Choices
    A Behavioural Lens on Transportation Systems: The Psychology of Commuter Behaviour and Transportation Choices Kim Ly, Saurabh Sati, and Erica Singer, and Dilip Soman Research Paper originally prepared for the Regional Municipality of York Region 22 March 2017 Research Report Series Behavioural Economics in Action, Rotman School of Management University of Toronto 2 Correspondence and Acknowledgements For questions and enquiries, please contact: Professors Dilip Soman or Nina Mažar Rotman School of Management University of Toronto 105 St. George Street Toronto, ON M5S 3E6 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] Phone Number: (416) 946-0195 We thank the Regional Municipality of York Region for support, Philip Afèche, Eric Miller, Birsen Donmez, Tim Chen, and Liz Kang for insights, comments, and discussions. All errors are our own. 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 6 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 7 2. The Impact of Path Characteristics on Travel Choices ....................................... 9 2.1 Hassle factors – Mental effort and Commuter Orientation ................................... 11 2.2 Perceived Progress towards a Destination ............................................................... 14 2.3 Physical Environment Surrounding the Travel path and The Effect on The Commuter ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Signature Redacted
    Driving Toward Monopoly: Regulating Autonomous Mobility Platforms as Public Utilities By Joanne Wong A. B. in Social Studies Harvard College (2013) Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2018 ( 2018 Joanne Wong. All Rights Reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT the permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of the thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now known pkereafter created. Author Signature redacted ga rdae rtment of Urban Studies and Planning (Signature redacted May 24, 2018 Certified by I Professor Amy Glasmeier Depa rtment of Urban Studies and Planning / Thesis Supervisor Accepted by- Signature redacted Professor of the Practice, Ceasar McDowell MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE Chair, MCP Committee OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Urban Studies and Planning JUN 18 2018 LIBRARIES ARCHIVES Driving Toward Monopoly: Regulating Autonomous Mobility Platforms as Public Utilities By Joanne Wong Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planning on May 24, 2018 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in City Planning Abstract Autonomous vehicles (AV) have captured the collective imagination of everyone from traditional auto manufacturers to computer software startups, from government administrators to urban planners. This thesis articulates a likely future for the deployment of AVs. Through stakeholder interviews and industry case studies, I show that there is general optimism about the progress of AV technology and its power to positively impact society. Stakeholders across sectors are expecting a future of autonomous electric fleets, but have divergent attitudes toward the regulation needed to facilitate its implementation.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms, Pages 1–5 August 6, 2021
    WOAH 2021 The 5th Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms Proceedings of the Workshop August 6, 2021 Bangkok, Thailand (online) Platinum Sponsors ©2021 The Association for Computational Linguistics and The Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing Order copies of this and other ACL proceedings from: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) 209 N. Eighth Street Stroudsburg, PA 18360 USA Tel: +1-570-476-8006 Fax: +1-570-476-0860 [email protected] ISBN 978-1-954085-59-6 ii Message from the Organisers Digital technologies have brought myriad benefits for society, transforming how people connect, communicate and interact with each other. However, they have also enabled harmful and abusive behaviours to reach large audiences and for their negative effects to be amplified, including interpersonal aggression, bullying and hate speech. Already marginalised and vulnerable communities are often disproportionately at risk of receiving such abuse, compounding other social inequalities and injustices. The Workshop on Online Abuse and Harms (WOAH) convenes research into these issues, particularly work that develops, interrogates and applies computational methods for detecting, classifying and modelling online abuse. Technical disciplines such as machine learning and natural language processing (NLP) have made substantial advances in creating more powerful technologies to stop online abuse. Yet a growing body of work shows the limitations of many automated detection systems for tackling abusive online content, which can be biased, brittle, low performing and simplistic. These issues are magnified by the lack of explainability and transparency. And although WOAH is collocated with ACL and many of our papers are rooted firmly in the field of machine learning, these are not purely engineering challenges, but raise fundamental social questions of fairness and harm.
    [Show full text]
  • China's Baidu Rolls out Self-Driving Buses 4 July 2018
    China's Baidu rolls out self-driving buses 4 July 2018 Early next year, they are set to enter Japan's self- driving market as shuttle buses at nuclear power stations or in Tokyo to ferry around elderly people in local communities. The vehicles have the "fourth level" of automation as defined by the Society of Automotive Engineers, meaning they can operation within an enclosed location without human intervention. This is one short of the highest level, where vehicles can operate anywhere on the road. "I took a self-driving car to come to the developer conference last year, and ended up getting a ticket The Apolong is designed to run at airports and tourist at (Beijing's) fifth ring road," Li quipped. spots Baidu, often referred to as China's Google, operates the country's leading search engine and also invests heavily in services ranging from online China's internet giant Baidu announced payments to connected devices and artificial Wednesday it had begun mass producing the intelligence. country's first autonomous mini-bus, as the firm prepares to roll them out in tourist spots and "In the past, China exported cheap commodities to airports. the world. In the future, China will export AI technology to the world," Li said at the firm's annual CEO Robin Li watched the 100th vehicle roll off a AI developer conference. production line of a factory in the southeastern city of Xiamen. He also announced a new AI chip called Kunlun at the conference, which can support a wide range of "2018 marks the first year of commercialisation for AI applications including voice recognition, natural autonomous driving.
    [Show full text]
  • Driverless Cars: How Innovation Paves the Road to Investment Opportunity
    The Invesco White Paper Series June 2017 Driverless cars: How innovation paves the road to investment opportunity Authored by About this paper Jim Colquitt Disruptive technologies and trends are radically reshaping the investing landscape across sectors, Analyst, Invesco Fixed Income asset classes and geographies. This paper is the first in a series examining the investment Dave Dowsett implications of these innovations. Global Head of Invesco’s Innovation, Strategy and We are at a point in history where computer science and technology are enabling the creation Disruptive Technology team of products and services that previously existed only in the realm of science fiction. In this Abhishek Gami article, we consider the investment implications of one such game-changing innovation: Senior Equities Analyst, Invesco autonomous driving technology, or driverless cars. The global market for these vehicles is 1 Fundamental Equities expected to reach the trillion US dollar mark by 2025. We also explore the impact of the technology on key global industrial sectors, such as auto manufacturing, transportation Evan Jaysane-Darr services and freight. Partner, Invesco Private Capital Continuing improvements in computer processing power, artificial intelligence (the ability to program Clay Manley computers to “learn” like humans) and the growing network of smart devices communicating directly Portfolio Manager, Invesco Fundamental Equity with one another (often referred to as the “internet of things”) have created a new ecosystem ripe for disruption and new entrants in global industry. Artificial intelligence began as a sub-discipline of Rahim Shad computer science in the 1950s. The scope of what we continue to “teach” computers has become Senior Analyst – High Yield, increasingly complex as input data sets grow larger and data scientists develop deeper “thinking” Invesco Fixed Income algorithms.
    [Show full text]
  • P15tech.Qxp:Layout 1
    Established 1961 15 Technology Thursday, July 5, 2018 ZTE given temporary reprieve from US; removes more execs On track to have supplier ban lifted NEW YORK/HONG KONG: China’s embattled ZTE longer holds any position in the company. An insider Corp has received a temporary reprieve from the US source told Reuters a memo was sent out on Tuesday government to conduct business needed to maintain announcing the removal of seven other executives, with- existing networks and equipment as it works toward the out providing a reason. They included vice presidents lifting of a US supplier ban. ZTE, which makes smart- Wang Keyou, Xie Jiepeng and Ma Jie, who were in charge phones and networking gear, was forced to cease major of the legal, finance and supply chain departments, operations in April after the United States slapped it respectively. with a supplier ban, saying it broke an agreement to dis- Reuters could not immediately contact them for com- cipline executives who conspired to evade US sanctions ment. The source declined to be identified due to the on Iran and North Korea. sensitivity of the matter. As part of the deal to lift the The authorization seen by Reuters from the US supplier ban, ZTE had agreed to remove all members of Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Services its leadership at or above the senior vice president level, runs from July 2 until Aug 1. It allows China’s No 2 along with any executives associated with the wrong- telecommunications equipment maker to continue operat- doing within 30 days.
    [Show full text]