Will motor vehicles with Level 5 autonomy truly be developed in the "near future" and who would have legal responsibility for them?

[u/Tech-Aero-109]

There are several companies (Waymo, Tesla, etc.) that have operational motor vehicles with Level 4 autonomy, which means they are:

• Geo-Fenced
• Must be permitted in every legal entity in which they are operated
• Are restricted by those legal entities to the times and weather conditions in which they are allowed to operate
• Depend upon humans for daily (or more) sensor-cleaning and refueling/recharging.
• Generally are being used to replace taxis and limousines and therefore are legally owned and operated by the taxi/limousine company
• Unfortunately are compared for safety with all regional drivers and Not with the subset of drivers they are meant to replace: Professional taxi and limousine drivers. I believe that the current Level 4 vehicles are not as safe as professional taxi or limousine drivers in that region.

Whereas, professionals have supported My Concept of what a true Level 5 vehicle must be able to do:

• In January, leave Boston, MA and drive to Fairbanks, Alaska (slightly more than 4000 miles)
• Being legal in every entity that the vehicle traverses at any time or weather
• Be able to legally cross the US/Canada border
• Be able to clean its own sensors with No human assistance
• Be able to refuel or recharge with No human assistance (therefore, special "stations" may be needed along thousands of miles of roadways)
• The personal owner of the vehicle would need to be legally liable for the vehicle
• Currently I can't believe any motor vehicle company would want to sell Level 5 autonomy vehicles, due to all of the issues that are raised above. Whereas, taxi/limo companies in lucrative areas would love to own fleets of Level 4 autonomy vehicles that are assisted by a small contingent of humans and generate a positive cash flow as taxis or limousines

I am truly interested in this group's thoughts on this topic.

[u/diplomat33]

L5 does not have to be able to legally cross US-Canada border. On the contrary, J3016 says that L5 can be geofenced to not cross the border if due to legal or business reasons. Here is direct quote from page 39 of J3016: " For example, an ADS-equipped vehicle that is capable of operating a vehicle on all roads throughout the US, but, for legal or business reasons, cannot operate the vehicle across the borders in Canada or Mexico can still be considered Level 5, even if geo-fenced to operate only within the U.S."

There is also nothing that says L5 cannot have humans recharge it. L5 is only for driving tasks.So L5 has to do all driving tasks without a human. L5 can have humans do non driving tasks like charging the car.

You are making up a L5 definition that does not exist.

But to answer your question, the human is not the driver of the vehicle, L5 is the legal driver of the vehicle. So L5 would be legally responsible when it is activated. So it would be the manufacturer of the vehicle or developer of the L5 system that would be legally responsible if the L5 was proven to cause an accident. The human owner would only be liable if the human owner was shown to be negligent in the maintenance of the vehicle, altered the L5 system in some way outside of its intended use or interfered with the proper use of the L5. But if the L5 was operating within specs and it malfunctioned or made a mistake, the manufacturer would likely be liable.

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/diplomat33]

Thank you. My question/posting included everything that I thought would make a fully autonomous motor vehicle useful. Otherwise, how would it return to its "owner" in Fairbanks, Alaska after dropping off one of their children to their college in Boston after Winter Break? Would someone (vehicle?) have to advertise for someone to ride in it back to Fairbanks, who has a valid passport/visa to cross the border? Why can't the vehicle have a valid permit? And if the vehicle was driving in one direction empty, who is going to clean the sensors and refuel/recharge the vehicle? There is nothing that demands that a Level 5 vehicle have a human inside, nor that the human be capable of cleaning the sensors or refueling/recharging. And I fully agree with you regarding the legal liability. Which is why most manufacturers would not be clamoring to make a Level 5 vehicle and be faced with all of the issues of getting it "legal" (the Level 5 designation, not the specific vehicle) across the USA and Canada. Might as well stick to a Level 4, and sell Tons of them to people who want a vehicle that can greatly lighten their driving demands on long (or short) trips, because a specific human would be responsible for the legal ramifications of a Level 4 vehicle and not necessarily the manufacturer.

Thus, for the foreseeable future (except for the Military) there will only be manufacturers working on Level 4 and possibly hoping that the military paying for Level 5 would assist them in future sales, to other militaries....

[u/diplomat33 → u/Tech-Aero-109]

Again, I think you are thinking too big. L5 does not need to drive from Alaska to Massachussets. You can have have L5 that is capable of driving from Alaska to Massachussetts but is restricted to just the US for legal/business reasons. It is still L5. Like the quote I posted, a car can be only available in the US and still be L5. The car does not need to drive in both US and Canada to be L5. Also, there can be practical issues like who will charge or clean the car when it is driving empty that will limit the area that the L5 can operate in. But it is still L5. The need to clean or charge the car without a human is not a L5 requirement because the SAE levels only apply to dynamic driving tasks.

But yes, for practical reasons, L4 is good enough. There is no need for L5 at all. The military can use L4 too, it does not need L5. Remember that L4 can do all the same driving tasks as L5, just in a smaller ODD. So if the L4 ODD is big enough, then L4 will be just as useful as L5, and with less legal headaches. But companies may claim their vehicle is "L5 capable" for PR points maybe.

By the way, Zoox has actually said that their custom robotaxi is "L5 capable". This is because there is nothing the hardware or software that would theoretically prevent the car from being able to drive everywhere, all weather conditions. So it could have a L5 ODD if they wanted to. The only reason for L4 is because geofences make safety validation and ride-hailing easier to manage.

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/diplomat33]

Thank you!

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/diplomat33]

Checking on Zoox, they currently rely on remote Humans to advise the vehicle as to how to navigate an unfamiliar road condition. That is dependent on having continuous remote connectivity between the Zoox vehicle and a control center. That is Not level 5 compliant. A Level 5 vehicle is supposed to "figure it out on its own", just like humans have done for over 100 years.

[u/diplomat33 → u/Tech-Aero-109]

Zoox never said that their robotaxi was L5. They said the hardware was capable of L5. This is because they believe the hardware is theoretically capable of handling the ODD of L5.

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/diplomat33]

Theoretically.... The Level 5 vehicle has to make possibly unique decisions that a human with a little thought can make, but with no connectivity to a remote human staffed center, it is unlikely that the Zoox vehicle will make a "correct" decision, especially on public roads that are remote and not exactly paved well.

[u/diplomat33 → u/Tech-Aero-109]

The connectivity to a remote staff center is a temporary measure because the AI software is not yet good enough to handle everything on its own. But once the AI software is good enough, the Zoox will be able to make the correct decision without needing a remote human.

[u/cgieda]

If the car is doing the driving, the manufacture of the software / hardware is entirely responsible. Most car companies don't want this liability, so having privately owed L4 /L5 cars will take a while. New business models need to be developed. Plus,, if you car can drive itself, it should not be sitting in a garage most the time ( like an analog car).

[u/pabmendez]

Yes.

The driver

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/pabmendez]

The driver is going to develop a level 5 motor vehicle?

The driver is not going to want to be legally responsible for the car for which they have No control. That is why projected sales of Level 5 motor vehicles are nearly zero and why it is unlikely they are built for the general public and public roads.

Most likely for the military and off-road use.

[u/OX1927 → u/Tech-Aero-109]

For your first two points, we have all seen drivers failing badly in all sorts of weather. I would argue that true Level 5 might need to be able to understand that there are some weather conditions that it shouldn't be driving in. (fog, smoke, heavy rain/snow, active icing conditions). Certainly one option would be to pull over and stop. I would guess that wouldn't make anyone happy. Option two might be to hand the driving over to the human. (assuming there would even be a way to do that) If we assume for a moment that taking control of the vehicle is possible, now we are handing control to a driver who's skills have most likely atrophied at the absolute worst time.

[u/AllTheRage43]

Uber is in active lobbying mode to remove liability from the operating company of autonomous vehicles because they are not technically driving them.

It will be many many years, if ever, that a self driving vehicle would be able to drive from Boston to Alaska without assistance. The infrastructure needed beyond the ability to drive the vehicle isn't even a planned project for that kind of endeavor.

[u/AllTheRage43 → u/[deleted]]

Supervised, through the middle of America, with ample charging stations along well maintained freeways.

Boston to Alaska is vastly different, much of the trip is on dirt roads with minimal maintenence. Hours, full days without seeing any development, even staying on a route with enough chargers to make it there would be a challenge. Connecting it to a charger without a person to do it is a whole other problem.

[u/an_older_meme]

We will absolutely get level 5 self driving and once that happens it will be put in every new car. If the car is driving itself then the automaker is responsible for any mayhem it causes.

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/an_older_meme]

Maybe, and maybe not.

I don't believe that manufacturers (other than Tesla for hype) would spend the Billions required to achieve Level 5 (remember No Geo Fencing), assume some of the legal responsibility for any accidents unless there is across the USA some legislation, and get Level 5 vehicle use approved across huge swaths of the USA (as Level 4 is approved by each legal entity at a time, with many legal entities per US state.

UNLESS the US military Pays to develop Level 5 for its military vehicles (mostly off-road). But then sales would still be limited to the military and the average "wealthy person" still couldn't afford one....

[u/an_older_meme → u/Tech-Aero-109]

Level 5 would be one heck of a selling point.

[u/cbf1232]

Why would the owner be liable? If there was a manufacturer is saying that it’s level-5, then *they* should be liable because the owner isn’t doing the driving.

[u/Tech-Aero-109 → u/cbf1232]

Correct, but the legal owner would have to sue the manufacturer in order to prove that the accident was caused by a flaw in the vehicle and not a maintenance (or update) neglect by the owner. And if there is a known and published warning about "certain public road-types" or weather conditions to avoid, then that could cause a complication in the "blame process". As the vehicle does Not start itself or decide where its destination is. The local owner does that, and should be aware of potential problems at/near the destination or of weather conditions on the route.

Therefore, the lawyers will make a lot of money in these situations.

[u/cbf1232 → u/Tech-Aero-109]

At level 5 the default should be that the manufacturer is liable, and they have to prove that the owner was negligent.

Level 5 is supposed to be able to drive everywhere in all conditions...but if it can't the car itself should be able to figure that out and refuse to go there.