Andrej Karpathy (Tesla): CVPR 2021 Workshop on Autonomous Vehicles [video]

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 9:52 PM UTC

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #18

option wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two fundamental reasons, in principle, vision alone can do it: 1) Humans do it with vision alone 2) You can actually predict lidar’s output with vision alone. So many systems out there actually use lidar to generate more labeled data to make lidar unnecessary

There are many things humans do with vision alone that machines can't. For instance see if a person standing 50 ft away is looking at you or at the house behind you. The human vision system operates at a bitrate equivalent of well beyond 500 gigabits per second. Resorting to "humans can do it with vision alone" is only a sufficient argument if your computer vision system can match that.

Post by eddanger » Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 10:05 PM UTC

avs733 wrote: post #23

Robotbeat wrote: post #17

He made a very good argument for vision-only, but it seems like training actually uses radar data to help calibrate vision measurements, so it seems to me there’s value in making some vehicles still contain radar (say, one out of 10) even if it’s not used for controlling the vehicle directly at drive time. Also, the sensor resolution issue he mentioned could be addressed by using a higher resolution radar sensor. I f…

Most fatal car crashes are investigated, but by the police not engineering experts. The invetigational motivation is legal and liability focused not improvement focused. You sparked a happy delusion in my mind...training drivers to the same level we train pilots. Can you imagine drivers having regular check rides?

Post by karpathy » Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 10:16 PM UTC

ketamine__ wrote: post #11

I've read claims that they are desperately trying to hire. https://mobile.twitter.com/TaylorOgan/status/140705191831739...

Post by kaba0 » Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 10:21 PM UTC

darknavi wrote: post #21

andyxor wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

besides vision, humans also have this thing called brain, and reasoning, and instincts, and being able to tell if the object in front of them is e.g. a roof of an overturned truck vs. empty space, etc, etc. the key word is "etc" which expands into infinite tail, which no big data training on farms of GPUs would ever help with. Humans and other animals have an ability to understand the scene and generalize from prior…

> humans also have this thing called brain, and reasoning, and instincts, and being able to tell if the object in front of them is e.g. a roof of an overturned truck vs. empty space, etc, etc. Assuming the car is reasonably good at this, it has the advantage that it can see in every direction at once. I don't think self-driving cars will ever be perfect, but I think they will quickly become less-lethal than the avera…

Post by stefan_ » Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 10:32 PM UTC

aeternum wrote: post #14

nightski wrote: post #9

It's interesting that an academic conference now feels like a marketing op for industrial research labs more than anything. His claims about how accurate their vision system is and how it is exceeding other sensors is not verifiable in any way to the public. Given how well qualified he is I am sure he is not wrong! Andrej is brilliant. But this is an academic conference right? This isn't open science, it's a discussi…

In the talk, he gave clear examples with detailed position + velocity graphs where the vision system detected obstacles sooner and with less jitter than the radar system. Specifically the overpass where radar triggers erroneous braking, and the pulled over truck where radar detects the obstacle significantly slower.