Lack of Automated Vehicle Test Standards Is an Oversight

In a capitalist economy, companies have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize the returns for their shareholders. That can often be at odds with the general public good. Ideally, political and regulatory leaders can find ways to strike a balance between the two that helps the economy grow and allows the populace to be safe. When it comes to the automated vehicle industry, in the past few years those leaders have abdicated their responsibilities.

Vehicles today are safer than they have ever been. While we have seen an uptick in traffic fatalities in the past couple of years, the overall trend has been downward for nearly half a century. In large part, that is due to leaders having the courage to impose safety and emissions regulations since the early 1970s. Automakers complained vociferously every step of the way, but in the end, they have largely complied. We are now safer while automakers remain very profitable.

Regulations created some speed bumps, but the world did not come to an end. In virtually every business sector, companies faced with new rules whine about it, but ultimately, they adapt.

From a societal good perspective, 37,000 deaths on the nation’s roads every year is not acceptable. On the other hand, when considered against the 3.2 trillion miles we travel annually, that’s about 1.1 death for every 100 million miles. Over the long haul, a shift away from human drivers toward automated mobility will almost certainly slash those numbers dramatically. However, engineers still have a lot of development to do to prove that the technology we have available is better than us flawed humans.

We Need Real World Testing

The vast majority of the testing will probably be done in ever more sophisticated simulation environments. But we also need real world testing, and it seems reasonable to begin with the same tests we apply to humans that want to drive. Before a teenager can get their first driver’s license, they have to take a vision test to demonstrate that they can see and recognize pedestrians, signs, and other objects in the driving environment. They also have to demonstrate a basic knowledge of rules of the road.

In the US, the federal government is responsible for motor vehicle safety standards like occupant crash protection. The states are responsible for licensing and registration of drivers and vehicles.

Human test drivers have to pass those aforementioned evaluations. So too should the virtual drivers that many hope will someday replace us. The death of a pedestrian struck by an automated Uber test vehicle demonstrates the failure of the laissez-faire approach taken by Arizona and many other states to automated vehicle testing.

We Also Need Standards

SAE International has for decades provided a platform for industrywide standards development. The oft-quoted (and misquoted) automation levels are the product of an SAE standards committee. Now would be a good time for SAE to develop standards for testing that a sensor system can detect a pedestrian or cyclist at a minimum distance in various lighting and weather conditions. With those standards in hand, every state should require that any company wishing to test automated driving systems on public roads must demonstrate that they can pass those tests and respond appropriately when other road users are detected.

The standards should be technology agnostic, but would demonstrate the most basic functionality, just as a human must do. We will undoubtedly have more fatal crashes along the way to some hoped-for automated utopia, but requiring automated cars to pass a driving test is a minimum today.