Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

images.nvidia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 102 posts

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#31

Post by mikeyouse »

mechanon05 wrote: post #28
blazespin wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving cars must do significantly better safety wise otherwise the adoption will be hampered. Plus, the whole point here I think is to save lives. Google self driving cars arent really a hazard they're more just very annoying because they are overly cautious.

I feel like people just assume that they are annoying to drive around, but very few people actually have experience driving around google's cars. The times that I'm around them (a few mornings a week), they are never in any way weird or annoying. In fact, they are extremely predictable, and therefor, if anything, less annoying to drive around.

I agree -- they never encroach in your lane, they signal with plenty of room to spare, they don't threaten to pull out in front of you, in many different ways, they're preferable to human (Californian) drivers.

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#34

Post by teraflop »

bduerst wrote: post #30
elihu wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've read that one of the problems with Google's self-driving cars has been that other cars tend to run into them because the self-driving cars drive extremely conservatively and violate other driver's expectations of how a typical California driver is expected to behave. I think this sort of thing is something developers are going to have to find ways of dealing with; a car can be technically driving in a safe, lega…

>problems with Google's self-driving cars has been that other cars tend to run into them I feel like this is already an urban myth, given the small amount of people who have actually been driving around the cars. And won't some of the people at fault for hitting them try to put the blame on the robot anyways? Is there even a credible source for what you read?

Maybe you wouldn't consider this "credible", but Google publishes a monthly report listing every collision their autonomous cars have been involved in. [1]

I was curious, so I went through the whole list. By my count, in the history of the program they've been involved in 19 accidents during autonomous operation, and the car was only at fault in one of those. [2] The majority of the other crashes were caused by other drivers rear-ending the car while it was stopped.

[1]: https://www.google.com/selfdrivingcar/reports/

[2]: http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/9/11186072/google-self-drivin...

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#35

Post by ktRolster »

mechanon05 wrote: post #28
blazespin wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self driving cars must do significantly better safety wise otherwise the adoption will be hampered. Plus, the whole point here I think is to save lives. Google self driving cars arent really a hazard they're more just very annoying because they are overly cautious.

I feel like people just assume that they are annoying to drive around, but very few people actually have experience driving around google's cars. The times that I'm around them (a few mornings a week), they are never in any way weird or annoying. In fact, they are extremely predictable, and therefor, if anything, less annoying to drive around.

I think the fear is that they'll drive the speed limit on the freeway, even when no one else is.

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#36

Post by danieltillett »

ktRolster wrote: post #35
mechanon05 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like people just assume that they are annoying to drive around, but very few people actually have experience driving around google's cars. The times that I'm around them (a few mornings a week), they are never in any way weird or annoying. In fact, they are extremely predictable, and therefor, if anything, less annoying to drive around.

I think the fear is that they'll drive the speed limit on the freeway, even when no one else is.

Actually what would speed up adoption would be if they were able to drive over the speed limit legally. If they are significantly safer then this should be a win-win for everyone other than those issuing speeding tickets.

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#38

Post by johntb86 »

andrewchambers wrote: post #9
birdmanjeremy wrote: post #2

This is really interesting, but I'd want autonomous cars to be better than humans at driving, not to emulate them.

They need some sort of prefilter to remove any bad driving habits before training begins I suppose.

From the paper:

To train a CNN to do lane following we only select data where the driver was staying in a lane and discard the rest.

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#39

Post by euyyn »

One problem with training a neural network end-to-end this way is that the system is susceptible to unpredictable glitches: The same principle that lets people trick a NN into [thinking a panda is a vulture](https://codewords.recurse.com/issues/five/why-do-neural-netw...) can happen randomly just by differing lighting/shadow conditions, sun glare, or who knows.

One can always train the network with more and more scenarios, but how do you know when to stop? How good is good enough in this regard?

Re: End to End Learning for Self-Driving Cars [pdf]

#40

Post by ChuckMcM »

Wow I guess having a self driving car is the new thing next we'll have self driving sli, can drive two cars if they are joined together with a proprietary cable :-)

More seriously, this is amazing work, I am really impressed, I just wonder if we can't get something more topical like training lasers on mosquitoes or something. I feel like I did when 3D graphics was the new thing, every day it felt like there was a new advance, now the same tech is doing the same thing to machine learning.

Post reply on HN