#j3016 — Public Fediverse posts

Let's talk about some of the core issues with the #J3016 standard, though.

The first, most important problem is that it is not a safety standard.

It is just a basic taxonomy of capabilities for #AutomatedDriving systems (ADS).

But what good is a capability in a #SafetyCritical system if there cannot be a foundational safety case built around it?

There is none.

That leaves the door open for various laypeople to see safety, explicitly or implicitly, as a secondary concern.

The term "driver assist" (or similar) is also not defined in the #J3016 standard - which is not a safety standard, but it is the closest thing we currently have to a generally-accepted #AutomatedDriving terminology and taxonomy document.

Do not know what the J3016 standard is?

Have you seen J3016 or "the levels" referenced in various articles over the years?

Check out this wonderful User Guide by an expert in the field, Professor Phil Koopman: https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/j3016/

I am not sure how I feel about this language highlighted here...

A conditional #AutomatedDriving system (likely described by "hands-free, eyes-off" which is not part of the official SAE #J3016 terminology by the way) seems entirely incompatible with the concept of "driver assist".

I really hope to see a detailed safety case here - and one should be demanded by regulators anyway, you know, hypothetically in the US.