https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car#Classificatio...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-driving_car#Classificatio...
So when people talk about a particular company "achieving" level 4 or level 5, I don't know what they mean. Maybe they mean achieving it "safely" which is murky, since any system can crash. Maybe they mean achieving it legally on public roads, in which case, it's a legal achievement (although depending on what regulatory hoops they had to go through, maybe they had to make technical achievements as well).
[1] : https://web.archive.org/web/20161120142825/http://www.sae.or...
Not really. L5 is impossible, period.
What I think will happen is L4 with 99.999% cases covered and have it come to a safe stop for the 0.0001%, assuming there was a way to safely stop.
L5 which means 100.000% covered, will not happen, but the PR people will continue to use the term.
Agreed.
> L5 which means 100.000% covered, will not happen, but the PR people will continue to use the term.
Which is precisely why so many people are critical of the term "fully autonomous".
> 99.999% cases covered
What cases? The point is that edge cases are the issue with autonomous driving. I can fall asleep on a train or a plane because I know there is human conductor who can handle the edge cases. This doesn't exist with L4. Everything else that doesn't let me fall asleep (read a book, look at my phone, etc.) is only marginally better.
> assuming there was a way to safely stop.
That's a pretty damn strong assumption.
No communicating with a server to download maps, no perfect performance, just a car that knows the state's traffic laws driving a brand new road in any reasonable weather, and getting into less crashes than a human would.