DOCSLIB.ORG

Im Pact of Autonom Ous Shared Electric Vehicles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Im Pact of Autonom Ous Shared Electric Vehicles INTRODUCTION Feb 22, 1959 Arthur Radebaugh Sunday Comic Strip It is said that Henry Ford had the masses, is said to face a a vision that went beyond revolution as large as that of a building the Model T, and century ago. The new beyond reinventing revolution is the prospect of manufacturing. His vision was wide spread use of to “bring mobility to the autonomous, shared, and masses.” Ford also foresaw electric vehicles. This report that, if he succeeded, an will examine the nature of this entire new infrastructure of presumed revolution in roads, gas stations, roadside mobility and most importantly diners and motor courts the realistic prospects for the (motels) would emerge. What timing of this mobility he needed to do, he believed, revolution. was to build a car that was cheap enough, and that could electric vehicles be built quickly enough, so that the common person could afford one. That is what he set out to do. Within glen hiemstra | futurist.com | oct 17, 2017 twenty years of the introduction of the first Model Impact of autonomous shared T, Ford was well on his way to achieving the larger vision. A little over 100 years later, the world of automotive transportation, or mobility for 1 Autonomous Vehicles happened to sit next to a GM Waymo is well over a billion engineer on a cross-country dollars, and Morgan Stanley flight and as we discussed the put a valuation on Waymo future of cars, he said that if that is more than GM or Tesla GM wanted to it could or Uber. Waymo is in the produce a driverless car, even process of rolling out the back then.) largest public test of self driving vehicles in the U.S., in Ford is matching GM by Phoenix, where Avis has investing a billion dollars over signed on to manage the fleet Who is investing? the next five years in Argo AI, of several hundred cars and its driverless car operation, as vans. Going back at least to the well as investing in tech start- 1950’s carmakers have ups such as Willow Run. Tesla Not surprisingly California is dreamed of driverless has made it a very public the heart of much self driving vehicles. It has been a staple priority to build self-driving auto research and testing. As of science fiction scenarios. tech in all of its products, of the end of September 25, But it began to become a soon to include a semi-truck. 2017, here is the list of potential reality in 2004 when Uber has several self driving companies that have the Defense Advanced initiatives, including investing registered with the California Research Agency (DARPA) with Ford in Argo AI, and Department of Motor Vehicles sponsored its first “grand running its own self driving for the right to test self- challenge” for driverless company Otto, which ran the driving technology on vehicles, refining the splashy demonstration of self- California highways and roads. challenge to an urban setting driving a Budweiser delivery The DMV has issued in November 2007. Now just truck several hundred miles Autonomous Vehicle Testing ten years later, every major through Colorado last year. Permits to the following car company, tech and Lyft is also teaming up with entities: software companies from Ford, as well as doing its own Google to Apple to Intel to demonstration projects in San NVidia, and transportation as Francisco and elsewhere. a service companies like Uber (Permit holders are listed by Google jumped to an early and Lyft are all investing in the date the permit was lead in actually demonstrating driverless vehicle technology. issued) highway-ready self-driving GM paid a billion dollars for test vehicles several years • Volkswagen Group of the driverless tech company ago, and then in the past year America Cruise Automation, and has spun that project off into the • Mercedes Benz invested hundreds of millions • Waymo new company Waymo, under more in Nauto as well as its • Delphi Automotive the umbrella of the larger own driverless units. (It was • Tesla Motors research company Alphabet. several years ago that I • Bosch Google’s investment in • Nissan 2 • GM Cruise LLC Udacity engineers. They The second vision, • BMW have begun testing their exemplified by Voyage, Uber, • Honda self-driving taxi service in Lyft and others, is to develop • Ford The Villages, a 4000- a fleet of self-driving taxis, • Zoox, Inc. resident retirement with the idea being that the • Drive.ai, Inc. • Faraday & Future Inc. community in San Jose. fleet will be owned by one • Baidu USA LLC Other companies, like entity, perhaps the self driving • Wheego Electric Cars nuTonomy, are actively company (Voyage, Uber, Lyft, Inc. testing self driving taxi’s in etc.), the equipment • Valeo North America, Singapore while manufacturer (Ford, GM, Inc. Volkswagen is aiming to Daimler), or by some • NextEV USA, Inc. • Telenav, Inc. introduce fully sponsoring company or • NVIDIA Corporation autonomous mini-vans as perhaps by a major retailer • AutoX Technologies a global taxi service. like Walmart , Costco or Inc Starbucks. In the latter case, • Subaru Two Kinds of Autonomous the company would sponsor Udacity, Inc • Vehicle Visions the fleet, leasing vehicles and • Navya Inc. then reaping a variety of • Renovo.auto There are two basic advertising and customer • UATC LLC (Uber) approaches to the self-driving networking benefits, as well • PlusAi Inc vision. One, best exemplified • Nuro, Inc as fees, from each person who by Tesla, is to make cars • CarOne LLC takes a ride in one of the owned by individuals capable • Apple Inc. vehicles. • Bauer’s Intelligent of autonomous operation. Transportation This provides a benefit to the • Pony.AI car owner both in relieving • TuSimple the owner from some driving, • Jingchi Corp and also, potentially, by • SAIC Innovation enabling a car owner to allow Center, LLC • Almotive Inc his car to roam a local area as • Aurora Innovation a driverless rental or taxi. In • Nullmax fact, it is assumed that Tesla • Samsung Electronics may eventually develop its • Continental own software to manage an Automotive Systems Uber-style cooperative fleet Inc of individually owned cars. • Voyage • CYNGN, Inc When the owners are not personally using the cars, the owner may release the car for One of the companies on fleet use, and reap some of this list, Voyage, is a self- the financial payment from driving taxi start-up led by those who hire a ride. former Apple, Google and 3 Five Leves of Autonomy up, Strobe, in a bid to dominant visions for significantly reduce the cost of autonomy, we can see that To fully grasp the possible Lidar for autonomous autonomous taxis require autonomous vehicle future, it vehicles. There is debate Level 5 autonomy, or at least is important to understand within the autonomy field Level 4 with some kind of the five basic levels of about the level of technology remote assistance. In fact, the autonomy. Here, from needed to achieve level 4 and Phoenix experiment about to DriverlessGuru.com is a good 5 autonomy. Tesla believes be run by Waymo includes the illustration of the levels. Lidar is not needed, but, “Elon idea of a central command center in touch with each car, so that any car that becomes confused by a novel traffic situation will signal the command center asking for instruction, and a human operator in the command center will assess the situation and tell the car what do to. (One can image the frustration that might emerge among human drivers in Phoenix as they wait for a driverless car to receive human instruction from a Almost all new vehicles have is ‘full of crap,’ says Scott command center before it at least Level 2, automation. Miller, director of autonomous moves.) Among commercially sold cars vehicle integration at General Level 3 autonomy for on the road today, only Tesla Motors. The level of individually owned cars is makes the claim that it is technology and knowing what much easier. It can be already at Level 3 in all of its it takes to do the mission, to activated on good roads with cars, with only software say you can be a full Level intact lane markings, upgrades needed to take the 5 with just cameras and predictable traffic, and good cars to Level 4 or even Level 5. radars is not physically weather, and deactivated Tesla provides this level of possible,’ Miller told when these conditions do not autonomy with a combination journalists in Detroit last apply. The same can be true of cameras and on-board week.” (Source: of a car with Level 4 radar. Most other companies https://cleantechnica.com/20 autonomy that includes a full add Lidar, a laser based 17/10/11/cruise-automation- driving package for a driver. sensing system, and in fact buys-strobe-lidar-startup- As the AI capacity of on-board Cruise Automation, owned by elon-full-crap-gm-exec-says/) computing increases, as it will, GM, just in early October When we mix the five levels and thus the learning that can 2017 purchased a Lidar start- of autonomy with the two be shared among cars 4 improves, then more and getting out of a concert venue trivial challenge. The head of more driving situations and at the same time. There are the autonomous driving environments can be handed thus thousands of people program at Carnegie Mellon off to the autonomous milling about, a need for said that this “last 5%” of the system. Eventually individually literally thousands of cars to computing challenge will be owned cars with Level 4 flow though a pick up point at the hardest of all.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transit Energy Use Reduction Plan
    Lake Country Transit Energy Use Reduction Plan Energy Use Reduction, Capital Expenditure, Funding and Management/Training Plan December 2015 Prepared by ICF International 620 Folsom St, Suite 200 San Francisco, CA 94107 415.677.7100 Lake Country Transit Energy Use Reduction Plan Table of Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 1 Energy Use Reduction Plan ............................................................................................................ 4 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 4 1.2 Facility ......................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.1 Review of Existing Facility and Operations .................................................................................6 1.2.2 Facility, Operations and Maintenance Strategies .......................................................................7 1.3 Vehicle Fleet and Alternative Fuels .......................................................................................... 16 1.3.1 Review of Fleet Operations ...................................................................................................... 16 1.3.2 Alternative Fuel Options .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Autonomous Vehicles
    10/27/2017 Looming on the Horizon: Autonomous Vehicles Jim Hedlund Highway Safety North MN Toward Zero Deaths Conference October 26, 2017 St. Paul, MN In the next 25 minutes • AV 101 . What’s an autonomous vehicle (AV)? . What’s on the road now? . What’s coming and when? . What does the public think about AVs? . What are current state laws on AVs? • Traffic safety issues for states . AV testing . AV operations . What should states do . What should national organizations do 2 1 10/27/2017 Report released Feb. 2, 2017 3 Autonomous = self-driving, right? So what’s the challenge? • When all vehicles are autonomous: . The passenger economy: transportation as a service . No crashes (at least none due to driver error – about 94% currently) • And it’s coming soon . 26 states and DC with AV legislation or executive orders (and AVs probably can operate in most states without law changes) 4 2 10/27/2017 NCSL October 2017 www.ghsa.org @GHSAHQ 5 But … • It’s far more complicated than that 6 3 10/27/2017 What’s an AV? • Level 0: no automation, driver in complete control • Level 1: driver assistance . Cruise control or lane position, driver monitors at all times • Level 2: occasional self-driving . Control both speed and lane position in limited situations, like Interstates; driver monitors at all times ************** • Level 3: limited self-driving in some situations, like Interstates . Vehicle in full control, informs when driver must take control • Level 4: full self-driving under certain conditions . Vehicle in full control for entire trip, such as urban ride-sharing • Level 5: full self-driving at all times 7 What’s on the road now? • Level 1 available for many years .
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Registered Motorised Vehicles
    Submission No 6 NON-REGISTERED MOTORISED VEHICLES Name: Mr Mark Walker Date Received: 10/03/2013 Mr Greg Aplin MP Chair Joint Standing Committee on Road Safety NSW Parliament 10/03/2013 Re: Inquiry into Non‐registered motorised vehicles Dear Sir Upon becoming aware of the Committee’s Inquiry via an advertisement calling for submissions in the SMH (9‐ 10 Mar 2013), I resolved to make the Committee aware of my concerns in this regard. As I understand it from current road and vehicle regulations: ‐ Mobility scooters are not allowed to travel on public roads, are limited to 10km/h and 110kg unladen mass, but otherwise are not regulated ‐ Electrically‐assisted pedal‐powered bicycles (ADR category AB) are limited to 200W motors, but are otherwise unregulated ‐ ICE‐assisted* pedal‐powered bicycles are limited to 50cc capacity, must comply with certain noise limits, but are otherwise unregulated ‐ Segways are currently banned ‐ Mopeds (being motorised pedal‐assist cycles) must be registered as for ‘motorcycles’ whether electric or ICE‐powered ‐ Quad bikes, pitbikes and other similar small‐capacity motorised vehicles (like buggys) are restricted to ‘offroad recreational vehicle’ licensing for use in designated areas (such as Stockton Beach) but are otherwise unable to be registered or driven on roads and in public areas due to non‐compliance with ADRs. * ICE – Internal Combustion Engine As the Committee’s focus in its terms of reference is ‘usage’ and ‘impact on road safety’ perhaps the latter needs to be clarified, especially in regard to those vehicles specifically designed and only ‘allowed’ to be used ‘off‐road’.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1 of 32 VEHICLE RECALLS by MANUFACTURER, 2000 Report Prepared 1/16/2008
    Page 1 of 32 VEHICLE RECALLS BY MANUFACTURER, 2000 Report Prepared 1/16/2008 MANUFACTURER RECALLS VEHICLES ACCUBUIL T, INC 1 8 AM GENERAL CORPORATION 1 980 AMERICAN EAGLE MOTORCYCLE CO 1 14 AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO 8 212,212 AMERICAN SUNDIRO MOTORCYCLE 1 2,183 AMERICAN SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. 4 25,023 AMERICAN TRANSPORTATION CORP. 5 1,441 APRILIA USA INC. 2 409 ASTON MARTIN 2 666 ATHEY PRODUCTS CORP. 3 304 B. FOSTER & COMPANY, INC. 1 422 BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE 11 28,738 BLUE BIRD BODY COMPANY 12 62,692 BUELL MOTORCYCLE CO 4 12,230 CABOT COACH BUILDERS, INC. 1 818 CARPENTER INDUSTRIES, INC. 2 6,838 CLASSIC LIMOUSINE 1 492 CLASSIC MANUFACTURING, INC. 1 8 COACHMEN INDUSTRIES, INC. 8 5,271 COACHMEN RV COMPANY 1 576 COLLINS BUS CORPORATION 1 286 COUNTRY COACH INC 6 519 CRANE CARRIER COMPANY 1 138 DABRYAN COACH BUILDERS 1 723 DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION 30 6,700,752 DAMON CORPORATION 3 824 DAVINCI COACHWORKS, INC 1 144 D'ELEGANT CONVERSIONS, INC. 1 34 DORSEY TRAILERS, INC. 1 210 DUTCHMEN MANUFACTURING, INC 1 105 ELDORADO NATIONAL 1 173 ELECTRIC TRANSIT, INC. 1 54 ELGIN SWEEPER COMPANY 1 40 E-ONE, INC. 1 3 EUROPA INTERNATIONAL, INC. 2 242 EXECUTIVE COACH BUILDERS 1 702 FEATHERLITE LUXURY COACHES 1 83 FEATHERLITE, INC. 2 3,235 FEDERAL COACH, LLC 1 230 FERRARI NORTH AMERICA 8 1,601 FLEETWOOD ENT., INC. 5 12, 119 FORD MOTOR COMPANY 60 7,485,466 FOREST RIVER, INC. 1 115 FORETRAVEL, INC. 3 478 FOURWINNS 2 2,276 FREIGHTLINER CORPORATION 27 233,032 FREIGHTLINER LLC 1 803 GENERAL MOTORS CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • And Medium-Duty Eligible Vehicle List
    Public Benefit Grants Program New Alternative Fuel Vehicle Purchase Component Light- and Medium-Duty Eligible Vehicle List Program staff will review and update this list periodically to reflect the release of eligible new light- and medium-duty vehicles. Applicants may contact program staff at (559) 230-5800 or [email protected] to inquire about specific vehicles not listed or other vehicle types such as transport/utility carts, scooters, bicycles, etc. Year Vehicle Make Vehicle Model Technology Emission Standard Category 2014 Honda Accord Plug-In Hybrid PHEV AT PZEV Sedan VOLT with Low Emissions Package (Low 2013 Chevrolet Emissions Package will have an E, F, G or H in the PHEV AT PZEV Sedan 5th position of the VIN) 2013 Toyota PRIUS PLUG-IN HYBRID PHEV AT PZEV Sedan 2013 Ford CMAX Energi PHEV AT PZEV Sedan 2013 Ford Focus Electric BEV ZEV Sedan 2013 Ford Fusion Energi PHEV AT PZEV Sedan 2013 Honda FIT EV BEV ZEV Coupe 2013 Smart Electric Fortwo (Coupe and Cabrio) BEV ZEV Coupe 2013 Coda CODA BEV ZEV Sedan 2013 Nissan Leaf BEV ZEV Sedan 2013 Club Car CARRYALL 2 LSV BEV NEV NEV 2013 Club Car CARRYALL 6 LSV BEV NEV NEV 2013 Club Car VILLAGER 2 BEV NEV NEV 2013 Club Car VILLAGER 2+2 BEV NEV NEV 2013 Columbia Paccar SM2 (Battery Type: Pb-A or Li+) BEV NEV NEV 2013 Columbia Paccar SM4 (Battery Type: Pb-A or Li+) BEV NEV NEV 2013 Columbia Paccar SUV-SN (Battery Type: Pb-A or Li+) BEV NEV NEV 2013 Columbia Paccar SUV-LN (Battery Type: Pb-A or Li+) BEV NEV NEV Page 1 of 9 rev.
    [Show full text]
  • Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and Deployment
    Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and Deployment Updated April 23, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45985 SUMMARY R45985 Issues in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and April 23, 2021 Deployment Bill Canis Autonomous vehicles have the potential to bring major improvements in highway safety. Motor Specialist in Industrial vehicle crashes caused an estimated 36,096 fatalities in 2019; a study by the National Highway Organization and Business Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has shown that 94% of crashes involve human error. For this and other reasons, federal oversight of the testing and deployment of autonomous vehicles has been of considerable interest to Congress. In the 115th Congress, autonomous vehicle legislation passed the House as H.R. 3388, the SELF DRIVE Act, and a separate bill, S. 1885, the AV START Act, was reported from a Senate committee. Neither bill was enacted. Comprehensive legislation concerning autonomous vehicles was not introduced in the 116th Congress, but the America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act of 2019, S. 2302, which was reported by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, would have encouraged research and development of infrastructure that could accommodate new technologies such as autonomous vehicles. Comprehensive legislation has not been introduced in the 117th Congress as of the date of this report. In recent years, private and government testing of autonomous vehicles has increased significantly, although it is likely that widespread use of fully autonomous vehicles—with no driver attention needed—lies many years in the future. The pace of autonomous vehicle commercialization was slowed after to the 2018 death in Arizona of a pedestrian struck by an autonomous vehicle, which highlighted the challenges of duplicating human decisionmaking by artificial intelligence.
    [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]
  • Waymo Rolls out Autonomous Vans Without Human Drivers 7 November 2017, by Tom Krisher
    Waymo rolls out autonomous vans without human drivers 7 November 2017, by Tom Krisher get drowsy, distracted or drunk. Google has long stated its intent to skip driver- assist systems and go directly to fully autonomous driving. The Waymo employee in the back seat won't be able to steer the minivan, but like all passengers, will be able to press a button to bring the van safely to a stop if necessary, Waymo said. Within a "few months," the fully autonomous vans will begin carrying volunteer passengers who are now taking part in a Phoenix-area test that includes use of backup drivers. Waymo CEO John Krafcik, who was to make the In this Sunday, Jan. 8, 2017, file photo, a Chrysler announcement Tuesday at a conference in Pacifica hybrid outfitted with Waymo's suite of sensors Portugal, said the company intends to expand the and radar is shown at the North American International testing to the entire 600-square-mile Phoenix area Auto Show in Detroit. Waymo is testing vehicles on and eventually bring the technology to more cities public roads with only an employee in the back seat. The around the world. It's confident that its system can testing started Oct. 19 with an automated Chrysler Pacifica minivan in the Phoenix suburb of Chandler, Ariz. handle all situations on public roads without human It's a major step toward vehicles driving themselves intervention, he said. without human backups on public roads. (AP Photo/Paul Sancya, File) "To have a vehicle on public roads without a person at the wheel, we've built some unique safety features into this minivan," Krafcik said in remarks prepared for the conference.
    [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]
  • A Hierarchical Control System for Autonomous Driving Towards Urban Challenges
    applied sciences Article A Hierarchical Control System for Autonomous Driving towards Urban Challenges Nam Dinh Van , Muhammad Sualeh , Dohyeong Kim and Gon-Woo Kim *,† Intelligent Robotics Laboratory, Department of Control and Robot Engineering, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju-si 28644, Korea; [email protected] (N.D.V.); [email protected] (M.S.); [email protected] (D.K.) * Correspondence: [email protected] † Current Address: Chungdae-ro 1, Seowon-Gu, Cheongju, Chungbuk 28644, Korea. Received: 23 April 2020; Accepted: 18 May 2020; Published: 20 May 2020 Abstract: In recent years, the self-driving car technologies have been developed with many successful stories in both academia and industry. The challenge for autonomous vehicles is the requirement of operating accurately and robustly in the urban environment. This paper focuses on how to efficiently solve the hierarchical control system of a self-driving car into practice. This technique is composed of decision making, local path planning and control. An ego vehicle is navigated by global path planning with the aid of a High Definition map. Firstly, we propose the decision making for motion planning by applying a two-stage Finite State Machine to manipulate mission planning and control states. Furthermore, we implement a real-time hybrid A* algorithm with an occupancy grid map to find an efficient route for obstacle avoidance. Secondly, the local path planning is conducted to generate a safe and comfortable trajectory in unstructured scenarios. Herein, we solve an optimization problem with nonlinear constraints to optimize the sum of jerks for a smooth drive. In addition, controllers are designed by using the pure pursuit algorithm and the scheduled feedforward PI controller for lateral and longitudinal direction, respectively.
    [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]
  • Attracting Business
    Pittsburgh’s Next Big Win? BUSINESS ATTR ACTING Spring 2018 Industry Intelligence. Focused Legal Perspective. HIGH-YIELDING RESULTS. Meet our construction attorneys at babstcalland.com. Whether it’s negotiating a construction contract, litigating a mechanics’ lien or bond claim, resolving bid protests or dealing with delay, inefficiency, or acceleration claims, we help solve legal problems in ways that impact your business and add value to your bottom line. PITTSBURGH, PA I CHARLESTON, WV I STATE COLLEGE, PA I WASHINGTON, DC I CANTON, OH I SEWELL, NJ Babst_Construction_DEVPGH_8.625x11.125.indd 1 8/16/16 6:52 AM CONTENTS | Spring 2018 31 Development 05 President’s Message Project Hazelwood Green 41 Developing Trend Landscape of Public Subsidy for Development 45 Eye On the Economy 50 Office Market 06 Feature Update The Business of Attracting Business Jones Lang LaSalle 53 Industrial Market Update Newmark Knight Frank 56 Capital Market Update 61 Legal / Legislative Outlook Contract Termination: Don’t 19 2017 NAIOP Pittsburgh Awards Make a Bad Situation Worse 64 Benchmarks Handicapping and Recapping the Amazon HQ2 Response 67 Voices Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 69 News from the Counties 25 NAIOP Pittsburgh 80 People / Events Reflections on 25 years www.developingpittsburgh.com 3 BURNS WHITE CENTER Oxford Development Thanks NAIOP for Awarding Best Mixed Use Project 2555 SMALLAMAN We also want to thank our partners: Carl Walker Jeff Kumar McCaffery Langan The YARDS Chuck Local Trade Rycon Taylor Hammel Unions Scalo Solar Structural Engineers ERECT Funds Loftus Strip District Evolve Engineers Neighbors WTW 2501 SMALLMAN The HUB The YARDS Real Estate Development | Project Management | Property Management | Leasing & Brokerage | Investment Advisory | Energy Management PUBLISHER Tall Timber Group President’s Message www.talltimbergroup.com EDITOR Jeff Burd I am very fortunate and pleased to be nominated for “2017 Best Education 412-366-1857 able to serve in my second year as Event” through NAIOP Corporate and [email protected] NAIOP Pittsburgh president.
    [Show full text]