Anyone looking for a self driving test track?

With the closure of Argo AI, my county has found itself in possession of a test circuit it would like to rent out when construction is finished

Local paper link

Westmoreland County officials will continue to pursue development of a $20 million test track facility despite the shuttering of Argo AI, a marquee tenant at the East Huntingdon site.

“There’s a strong demand for test track space, and I’m pretty confident we will be able to back-fill this facility with another company in that space,” Regional Industrial Development Corp. President Don Smith said.

The announcement that Argo AI will close means Westmoreland County has a 30-acre, closed-circuit test track ready for use. The county will be marketing Argo’s autonomous vehicle test facility and research space near New Stanton, officials said.

Your company can join the likes of VW and Chrysler in automotive history for building stuff that moves here. 

Argo AI failed?  Really?  I remember when F did a huge investment in them not to long ago- and many of us workers really questioned that investment.  Especially the ones who were already responsible for self driving cars- who could have really used that investment.

(we have a self driving car proving ground here in Ann Arbor, MI, too)

Ford changed their mind.

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/10/argo-ai-will-cease-operations-as-ford-and-volkswagen-pull-investments/ 

In reply to Keith Tanner :

shocking... (not really- more disappointing that it took that long to realize it)

This isn't about Argo, but more about all self-driving car ventures:

I have some past experience with aircraft autopilot software. It is really hard to design to cover every possible corner-case that can occur under every single situation.  I was shocked when Tesla hinted that their cars could self-drive. I wondered how long they'd last with all the wrongful death lawsuits. Now, while they still claim self-driving with a nudge and a wink, they also say that drivers must be ready at all times to grab control. Right... so the driver sits there with his foot hovering on the brake, and his hands just off the wheel. Sure. Anyway, it's inevitable that it'll happen, and Musk had the balls to "go there" first, but I still think that we're far from being able to get in our car at home, say "take me to work", and taking a nap.

In reply to kb58 :

There are defined levels of autonomy: https://www.nhtsa.gov/technology-innovation/automated-vehicles-safety

The holy grail is Level 5, which is your "take me to work" level. That's gonna be a tough one, especially since "better, on average, than a human driver" is not going to be accepted by the public or the courts. It would take a significant societal shift plus very good systems to work.

Level 4 is more plausible. That's full automation in certain areas, like controlled and mapped interstates - maybe even autonomous-only roads. That's where you get in your car, drive to the autonomous area entrance and say "take me to the exit closest to work". It's like taking the train to work where you have to get yourself to the train station.

Levels 2 and 3 are not clearly separated to me, but it's basically "car does as much as it can but the driver has to be able to take over". Level 2 does speed and steering, Level 3 does everything else (such as?). That's where the best of the autonomous systems are now. They have a fatal flaw to me, though. The human has to be paying attention and ready to take over immediately. Even if the human has the best intentions and tries to do so, we're not really wired to sit and keep that level of concentration for long periods. And by definition, when the vehicle needs attention it will need it RIGHT NOW because something has gone wrong, so the demands on the human are highest when the human is least prepared to offer assistance. Even better is the fact that people will (and do) treat it like Level 4/5 and start watching movies or napping or having sex or whatever. This is going to be a tough hurdle, and I don't think we'll ever get truly useful Level 2/3 systems but instead will just go straight to 4. From my limited understanding of aviation autopilots, they're at this level. The difference is that you've usually got more time to react at 30,000 feet.

Level 1 is pretty common, it's driver assistance stuff like lane centering and radar cruise control. Level 0 is mostly emergency alerts and reactions like automatic emergency braking or lane departure warnings.

Tesla has confused the issue by having several different systems on the market at the same time (Autosteer, Traffic Aware Cruise Control, Autopilot, Full Self Driving (but not really)) that meet different levels. I'm not even sure Autopilot is a specific system anymore, I think it got renamed Autosteer.

Keith Tanner said:

In reply to kb58 :

... They have a fatal flaw to me, though. The human has to be paying attention and ready to take over immediately. Even if the human has the best intentions and tries to do so, we're not really wired to sit and keep that level of concentration for long periods. And by definition, when the vehicle needs attention it will need it RIGHT NOW because something has gone wrong, so the demands on the human are highest when the human is least prepared to offer assistance...

This is exactly what I was trying to say in too few words. There's no way that someone can be 100% ready every second without actually doing anything.

In reply to kb58 :

IIRC there's some research around how long it takes pilots to take over from the autopilot I've seen cited in older ACM journals in the context of self-driving car software. It's surprisingly long (IIRC well over a second), and that's for pilots who are supposedly much better trained than your average driver.

kb58 said:

Keith Tanner said:

In reply to kb58 :

... They have a fatal flaw to me, though. The human has to be paying attention and ready to take over immediately. Even if the human has the best intentions and tries to do so, we're not really wired to sit and keep that level of concentration for long periods. And by definition, when the vehicle needs attention it will need it RIGHT NOW because something has gone wrong, so the demands on the human are highest when the human is least prepared to offer assistance...

This is exactly what I was trying to say in too few words. There's no way that someone can be 100% ready every second without actually doing anything.

There's been plenty of research to show that "multi-tasking" is impossible for a human.  You can single-task and switch between them, but how well you do that definitely depends on how much attention you're giving to the separate tasks.

Level 2 and 3 automated driving should be banned outright.

Tesla muddied a lot of water giving systems names that lead people to expect more of them than they realistically deliver. 

"Autopilot" and "self drive" for systems where the driver is expected to intervene at less than a moments notice. Where the only system making sure you are paying attention is a steering wheel torque sensor (a company making a weighted cell phone mount that magnetically clamped and circumvented that was a fun aftermarket addition). It invites misuse.

At least GM super Cruise had sensors that watched your face and where you were looking.

Mr_Asa said:

There's been plenty of research to show that "multi-tasking" is impossible for a human.  You can single-task and switch between them, but how well you do that definitely depends on how much attention you're giving to the separate tasks...

Totally agree. 99% of the time when I see a car randomly weaving or going into other lanes, it's because they're texting. I drive a truck and as a test, always look over to confirm the suspicion. Yup.

In reply to Keith Tanner :

Keith, I've been to a lot of DE conferences and listened to people from all sorts of ABC organizations discuss this. You've done the best job of explaining it in layman's terms. Thank you.

In reply to Apexcarver :

Autopilot was technically a good name, as it mirrored the capabilities of an aircraft autopilot. But that's not how the general public interpreted it, combined with, umm, enthusiastic publicly stated stretch goals that were invariably taken as promises.

IIRC the first Teslas used a touch sensor on the wheel, and later moved to the torque sensor.
All Model 3/Y cars are equipped with an unused interior camera, though, so it would be technically possible to implement a camera-based driver monitoring system with an OTA update. People being what they are, ways to fool that will be figured out so they can continue to use a Level 3 system like a Level 5 and they will continue to be killed doing so. 

Tesla being the highest profile "autonomous" car manufacturer (to put it mildly) also had the side effect of making the general public think that EVs and autonomous cars were one and the same. I think we're finally getting past that as the number of options for EVs grows. I think that's good. 

In reply to vwcorvette (Forum Supporter) :

Thanks.