2021

Emerging
Trends

Submitted By:
Ganesh Kokate

Guided By:
Asma hannure mam

P R O J E C T:

Report self Driving

car like Tesla
 CERTIFICATE

MAHARASHTRA STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL

EDUCATION, MUMBAI

GOVERNMENT POLYTECHNIC, SOLAPUR.

This is to certify that Ganesh Kokate Roll no 82 Of 6th

Semester of Diploma in Computer Technology has satisfactorily
completed the Project work in this subject Emerging Trends for the
academic year 2021-2022 as prescribed in the curriculum.

Place: Enrollmentno:1900150328

Date: Exam seat no:

Subject teacher. HOD. Principal

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We wish to express our profound and sincere gratitude

to our guide PROF. Asma mam, a who guided us into the
intricacies of this micro–project non-chalantly with
matchless magnanimity. We are indebted to his constant
encouragement, co-operation and help. It was his
enthusiastic support that helped us in overcoming he
various obstacles in this project.

We would also like to express our thankfulness to our

beloved Principal, H.O.D., and other faculty members of
our Second Year Department for extending their support
and motivation.

Thank you !!!

2
 Index

Sr.no Topic

1 Abstract

2 Introduction

3 History

4 Definitions

5 Application

6 Challenges

7 References

8 Conclusion

3
 Acknowledgement

I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been
possible without the kind support and help of many individuals and
organizations. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them.
I am highly indebted to Mrs. Asma mam for their guidance and constant
supervision as well as for providing necessary information regarding the project
& also for their support in completing the project.
I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents & teachers for
their kind co-operation and encouragement which help me in completion of this
project.
I would like to express my special gratitude and thanks to industry persons for
giving me such attention and time.

4
 Abstract

IN THE PAST decade, autonomous driving has gone from “maybe

possible” to “definitely possible” to “inevitable” to “how did anyone ever think
this wasn’t inevitable?” to "now commercially available." In December
2018, Waymo, the company that emerged from Google’s self-driving-car
project, officially started its commercial self-driving-car service in the suburbs
of Phoenix. At first, the program was underwhelming: available only to a few
hundred vetted riders, and human safety operators remained behind the
wheel. But in the past four years, Waymo has slowly opened the program to
members of the public and has begun to run robot axis without drivers
inside. The company has since brought its act to San Francisco. People
are now paying for robot rides.

5
 Introduction

A self-driving car, also known as an autonomous vehicle (AV), driver-

less car, or robotic car (robo-car), is a car incorporating vehicular
automation, that is, a ground vehicle that is capable of sensing its
environment and moving safely with little or no human input.
Self-driving cars combine a variety of sensors to perceive their
surroundings, such as thermographic
cameras, radar, lidar, sonar, GPS, odometry and inertial measurement units.
Advanced control systems interpret sensory information to identify
appropriate navigation paths, as well as obstacles and relevant signage.
Autonomy in vehicles is often categorized in six level, according to a
system developed by SAE International (SAE J3016, revised periodically).
The SAE levels can be roughly understood as Level 0 - no automation; Level
1 - hands on/shared control; Level 2 - hands off; Level 3 - eyes off; Level 4 -
mind off, and Level 5 - steering wheel optional.
As of March 2022, vehicles operating at Level 3 and above remain a
marginal portion of the market. In December 2020, Waymo became the first
service provider to offer driver-less taxi rides to the general public, in a part
of Phoenix, Arizona. In March 2021, Honda became the first manufacturer to
provide a legally approved Level 3 car, and Toyota operated a potentially
Level 4 service around the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Village. Nuro has been
allowed to start autonomous commercial delivery operations in California in
2021 In December 2021, Mercedes-Benz became the second manufacturer to
receive legal approval for a Level 3 car complying with legal requirements. In
February 2022, Cruise became the second service provider to offer driver-
less taxi rides to the general public, in San Francisco in the US

6
 History

Experiments have been conducted on automated driving systems (ADS)

since at least the 1920s trials began in the 1950s. The first semi-automated
car was developed in 1977, by Japan's Tsukuba Mechanical Engineering
Laboratory, which required specially marked streets that were interpreted by
two cameras on the vehicle and an Analog computer. The vehicle reached
speeds up to 30 kilometres per hour (19 mph) with the support of an
elevated rail.
A landmark autonomous car appeared in the 1980s, with Carnegie
Mellon University's Navlab and ALV projects funded by the United
States' Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) starting in
1984 and Mercedes-Benz and Bundeswehr University Munich's EUREKA
Prometheus Project in 1987. By 1985, the ALV had demonstrated self-driving
speeds on two-lane roads of 31 kilometres per hour (19 mph), with obstacle
avoidance added in 1986, and off-road driving in day and night time
conditions by 1987. A major milestone was achieved in 1995,
with CMU's NavLab 5 completing the first autonomous coast-to-coast drive of
the United States. Of the 2,849 mi (4,585 km) between Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania and San Diego, California, 2,797 mi (4,501 km) were
autonomous (98.2%), completed with an average speed of 63.8 mph
(102.7 km/h). From the 1960s through the second DARPA Grand
Challenge in 2005, automated vehicle research in the United States was
primarily funded by DARPA, the US Army, and the US Navy, yielding
incremental advances in speeds, driving competence in more complex
conditions, controls, and sensor systems.Companies and research
organizations have developed prototypes.
The US allocated US$650 million in 1991 for research on the National
Automated Highway System, which demonstrated automated driving through
a combination of automation embedded in the highway with automated
technology in vehicles, and cooperative networking between the vehicles and
with the highway infrastructure. The program concluded with a successful
demonstration in 1997 but without clear direction or funding to implement
the system on a larger scale. Partly funded by the National Automated
Highway System and DARPA, the Carnegie Mellon University Navlab drove
4,584 kilometres (2,848 mi) across America in 1995, 4,501 kilometres
(2,797 mi) or 98% of it autonomously. Navlab's record achievement stood
7
unmatched for two decades until 2015, when Delphi improved it by piloting
an Audi, augmented with Delphi technology, over 5,472 kilometres
(3,400 mi) through 15 states while remaining in self-driving mode 99% of
the time. In 2015, the US states of Nevada, Florida, California, Virginia,
and Michigan, together with Washington, DC, allowed the testing of
automated cars on public roads.
From 2016 to 2018, the European Commission funded an innovation
strategy development for connected and automated driving through the
Coordination Actions CARTRE and SCOUT. Moreover, the Strategic Transport
Research and Innovation Agenda (STRIA) Roadmap for Connected and
Automated Transport was published in 2019.

8
 Definitions

Terminology and safety considerations

Modern vehicles provide features such as keeping the car within its
lane, speed controls, or emergency braking. Those features alone are just
considered as driver assistance technologies because they still require a
human driver control while fully automated vehicles drive themselves without
human driver input.
According to Fortune, some newer vehicles' technology names—such as
AutonoDrive, PilotAssist, Full-Self Driving or DrivePilot—might confuse the
driver, who may believe no driver input is expected when in fact the driver
needs to remain involved in the driving task.[59] According to the BBC,
confusion between those concepts leads to deaths.[60]
For this reason, some organizations such as the AAA try to provide
standardized naming conventions for features such as ALKS which aim to
have capacity to manage the driving task, but which are not yet approved to
be an automated vehicles in any countries. The Association of British
Insurers considers the usage of the word autonomous in marketing for
modern cars to be dangerous because car ads make motorists think
'autonomous' and 'autopilot' mean a vehicle can drive itself when they still
rely on the driver to ensure safety. Technology able to drive a car is still in its
beta stage.
Some car makers suggest or claim vehicles are self-driving when they
are not able to manage some driving situations. Despite being called Full
Self-Driving, Tesla stated that its offering should not be considered as a fully
autonomous driving system.[61] This makes drivers risk becoming
excessively confident, taking distracted driving behaviour, leading to crashes.
While in Great-Britain, a fully self-driving car is only a car registered in a
specific list.[62] There have also been proposals to adopt the aviation
automation safety knowledge into the discussions of safe implementation of
autonomous vehicles, due to the experience that has been gained over the
decades by the aviation sector on safety topics.[63]
According to the SMMT, "There are two clear states – a vehicle is either
assisted with a driver being supported by technology or automated where
the technology is effectively and safely replacing the driver.".

9
 Autonomous vs. automated
Autonomous means self-governing. Many historical projects related to
vehicle automation have been automated (made automatic) subject to a
heavy reliance on artificial aids in their environment, such as magnetic strips.
Autonomous control implies satisfactory performance under significant
uncertainties in the environment, and the ability to compensate for system
failures without external intervention.
One approach is to implement communication networks both in the
immediate vicinity (for collision avoidance) and farther away (for congestion
management). Such outside influences in the decision process reduce an
individual vehicle's autonomy, while still not requiring human intervention.
As of 2017, most commercial projects focused on automated vehicles
that did not communicate with other vehicles or with an enveloping
management regime. EuroNCAP defines autonomous in "Autonomous
Emergency Braking" as: "the system acts independently of the driver to avoid
or mitigate the accident", which implies the autonomous system is not the
driver.
In Europe, the words automated and autonomous might be used
together. For instance, Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 on type-approval
requirements for motor vehicles (...) defines "automated vehicle" and "fully
automated vehicle" based on their autonomous capacity:
"automated vehicle" means a motor vehicle designed and constructed
to move autonomously for certain periods of time without continuous driver
supervision but in respect of which driver intervention is still expected or
required;
"fully automated vehicle" means a motor vehicle that has been
designed and constructed to move autonomously without any driver
supervision;
In British English, the word automated alone might have several
meaning, such in the sentence: "Thatcham also found that
the automated lane keeping systems could only meet two out of the twelve
principles required to guarantee safety, going on to say they cannot,
therefore, be classed as ‘automated driving’, instead it claims the tech should
be classed as ‘assisted driving’.": The first occurrence of the "automated"
word refers to an Unece automated system, while the second occurrence
refers to the British legal definition of an automated vehicle. The British law
interprets the meaning of "automated vehicle" based on the interpretation

10
 Autonomous versus cooperative
To enable a car to travel without any driver embedded within the
vehicle, some companies use a remote driver
According to SAE J3016,
Some driving automation systems may indeed be autonomous if they
perform all of their functions independently and self-sufficiently, but if they
depend on communication and/or cooperation with outside entities, they
should be considered cooperative rather than autonomous.

11
 Applications

Autonomous trucks and vans

Companies such as Otto and Starsky Robotics have focused on
autonomous trucks. Automation of trucks is important, not only due to the
improved safety aspects of these very heavy vehicles, but also due to the
ability of fuel savings through platooning. Autonomous vans are being used
by online grocers such as Ocado.[citation needed]
Research has also indicated that goods distribution on the macro
(urban distribution) and micro level (last mile delivery) could be made more
efficient with the use of autonomous vehicles [185] thanks to the possibility
of smaller vehicle sizes.
Transport systems
China trailed the first automated public bus in Henan province in 2015,
on a highway linking Zhengzhou and Kaifeng. Baidu and King Long produce
automated minibus, a vehicle with 14 seats, but without driving seat. With
100 vehicles produced, 2018 will be the first year with commercial automated
service in China.
In Europe, cities in Belgium, France, Italy and the UK are planning to
operate transport systems for automated cars, and Germany, the
Netherlands, and Spain have allowed public testing in traffic. In 2015, the UK
launched public trials of the LUTZ Pathfinder automated pod in Milton
Keynes. Beginning in summer 2015, the French government allowed PSA
Peugeot-Citroen to make trials in real conditions in the Paris area. The
experiments were planned to be extended to other cities such as Bordeaux
and Strasbourg by 2016. The alliance between French
companies THALES and Valeo (provider of the first self-parking car system
that equips Audi and Mercedes premi) is testing its own system.New Zealand
is planning to use automated vehicles for public transport in Tauranga and
Christchurch.

12
 Challenges

Obstacles
The potential benefits from increased vehicle automation described may
be limited by foreseeable challenges such as disputes over liability, the time
needed to turn over the existing stock of vehicles from non-automated to
automated, and thus a long period of humans and autonomous vehicles
sharing the roads, resistance by individuals to forfeiting control of their cars,
concerns about safety, and the implementation of a legal framework and
consistent global government regulations for self-driving cars
Other obstacles could include de-skilling and lower levels of driver
experience for dealing with potentially dangerous situations and anomalies,
ethical problems where an automated vehicle's software is forced during an
unavoidable crash to choose between multiple harmful courses of action
('the trolley problem'), concerns about making large numbers of people
currently employed as drivers unemployed, the potential for more intrusive
mass surveillance of location, association and travel as a result of police and
intelligence agency access to large data sets generated by sensors and
pattern-recognition AI, and possibly insufficient understanding of verbal
sounds, gestures and non-verbal cues by police, other drivers or pedestrians.
Problems
Regulation
In 2010s, it had been worried about the uncertainty that potential future
regulation may delay deployment of automated cars on the road.
[123] However, as written in UNECE WP.29 GRVA, international regulation
for Level 3 was smoothly established in 2020, and the uncertainty was
resolved. As of 2022 in practice, it is actually very difficult to be approved as
Level 3, but challenging.
Deceptive marketing
As Tesla's "Full Self-Driving (FSD)" actually corresponds to Level 2,
[124] senators called for investigation to the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) about their marketing claims in August 2021.[125] And in
December 2021 in Japan, Mercedes-Benz Japan Co., Ltd. was punished by
the Consumer Affairs Agency for the descriptions in their handouts that are
different from the fact.[126]

13
 It was in July 2016, following a fatal crash by a Tesla car operating in
"Autopilot" mode, that Mercedes-Benz was also slammed misleading over
their commercial of E-Class models which had been available with "Drive
Pilot".[127] At that time, Mercedes-Benz stopped its "self-driving car" ad
campaign which had been running in the United States, after they once
rejected the claims.[128][129]
Employment
Companies working on the technology have an increasing recruitment
problem in that the available talent pool has not grown with demand.
[130] As such, education and training by third-party organizations such as
providers of online courses and self-taught community-driven projects such
as DIY Robocars[131] and Formula Pi have quickly grown in popularity, while
university level extra-curricular programmes such as Formula Student Driver-
less[132] have bolstered graduate experience. Industry is steadily increasing
freely available information sources, such as code,[133] datasets[134] and
glossaries[135] to widen the recruitment pool.
National security
In 2020s, from the importance of the automotive sector to the nation, self-
driving car has become a topic of national security. The concerns regarding
cybersecurity and data protection are not only important for user protection,
but also in the context of national security. The trove of data collected by
self-driving cars, paired with cybersecurity vulnerabilities, creates an
appealing target for intelligence collection. Self-driving cars are required to
be considered in a new way when it comes to espionage risk.[136]
It was in July 2018 that a former Apple engineer was arrested
by Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) at San Jose International
Airport (SJC) while preparing to board a flight to China and charged with
stealing proprietary information related to Apple’s self-driving car project.
[137] And in January 2019, another Apple employee was charged with
stealing self-driving car project secrets.[138]
Human factors
See also: Human factors and ergonomics
Moving obstacles
Self-driving cars are already exploring the difficulties of determining the
intentions of pedestrians, bicyclists, and animals, and models of behavior
must be programmed into driving algorithms.[9] Human road users also have
the challenge of determining the intentions of autonomous vehicles, where
there is no driver with which to make eye contact or exchange hand

14
signals. Drive.ai is testing a solution to this problem that involves LED signs
mounted on the outside of the vehicle, announcing status such as "going
now, don't cross" vs. "waiting for you to cross".[139]
Handoff and risk compensation
Two human-factor challenges are important for safety. One is the handoff
from automated driving to manual driving. Human factors research on
automated systems has shown that people are slow to detect a problem with
automation and slow to understand the problem after it is detected. When
automation failures occur, unexpected transitions that require a driver to
take over will occur suddenly and the driver may not be ready to take over.
[140]
The second challenge is known as risk compensation: as a system is
perceived to be safer, instead of benefiting entirely from all of the increased
safety, people engage in riskier behavior and enjoy other benefits. Semi-
automated cars have been shown to suffer from this problem, for example
with users of Tesla Autopilot ignoring the road and using electronic devices
or other activities against the advice of the company that the car is not
capable of being completely autonomous. In the near future, pedestrians and
bicyclists may travel in the street in a riskier fashion if they believe self-
driving cars are capable of avoiding them.
Trust
In order for people to buy self-driving cars and vote for the government to
allow them on roads, the technology must be trusted as safe.[141][142] Self-
driving elevators were invented in 1900, but the high number of people
refusing to use them slowed adoption for several decades until operator
strikes increased demand and trust was built with advertising and features
like the emergency stop button.[143][144] There are three types of trust
between human and automation.[145] There is dispositional trust, the trust
between the driver and the company's product;[145] there is situational
trust, or the trust from different scenarios;[145] and there is learned trust
where the trust is built between similar events.[145]
Rationale for liability
There are different opinions on who should be held liable in case of a crash,
especially with people being hurt.[146] Besides the fact that the car
manufacturer would be the source of the problem in a situation where a car
crashes due to a technical issue, there is another important reason why car
manufacturers could be held responsible: The owner of the self-driving car
should be held responsible when the car crash happens. One study suggests

15
requesting the owners of self-driving cars to sign end-user license
agreements (EULAs), assigning to them accountability for any accidents.
[147] Other studies suggest introducing a tax or insurances that would
protect owners and users of automated vehicles of claims made by victims of
an accident.[146] Other possible parties that can be held responsible in case
of a technical failure include software engineers that programmed the code
for the automated operation of the vehicles, and suppliers of components of
the AV.[148]
Trolley problem
The automated vehicles should be programmed to behave in an emergency
situation where either passengers or other traffic participants like
pedestrians, bicyclists and other drivers are endangered. A moral dilemma
that a software engineer or car manufacturer might face in programming the
operating software is described in an ethical thought experiment, the trolley
problem: a conductor of a trolley has the choice of staying on the planned
track and running over five people, or turn the trolley onto a track where it
would kill only one person, assuming there is no traffic on it.[149] When a
self-driving car is in following scenario: it's driving with passengers and
suddenly a person appears in its way. The car has to decide between the two
options, either to run the person over or to avoid hitting the person by
swerving into a wall, killing the passengers.[150] There are two main
considerations that need to be addressed.Researchers have suggested, in
particular, two ethical theories to be applicable to the behavior of automated
vehicles in cases of emergency: deontology and utilitarianism.[9]
[151] Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics are a typical example of deontological
ethics. The theory suggests that an automated car needs to follow strict
written-out rules that it needs to follow in any situation. Utilitarianism
suggests the idea that any decision must be made based on the goal to
maximize utility. This needs a definition of utility which could be maximizing
the number of people surviving in a crash. Critics suggest that automated
vehicles should adapt a mix of multiple theories to be able to respond
morally right in the instance of a crash.[9][151] Recently, some specific
ethical frameworks i.e., utilitarianism, deontology, relativism, absolutism
(monism), and pluralism, are investigated empirically with respect to the
acceptance of self-driving cars in unavoidable accidents.[152]
The MIT Media Lab has animated the trolley problem in the context of
autonomous cars in a website called The Moral Machine. The Moral Machine
generates random scenarios in which autonomous cars malfunction and

16
forces the user to choose between two harmful courses of action. MIT's
Moral Machine experiment has collected data involving over 40 million
decisions from people in 233 countries to ascertain peoples' moral
preferences. The MIT study illuminates that ethical preferences vary among
cultures and demographics and likely correlate with modern institutions and
geographic traits.[153]
Global trends of the MIT study highlight that, overall, people prefer to
save the lives of humans over other animals, prioritize the lives of many
rather than few, and spare the lives of young rather than old.[153] Men are
slightly more likely to spare the lives of women, and religious affiliates are
slightly more likely to prioritize human life. The lives of criminals were
prioritized more than cats, but the lives of dogs were prioritized more than
the lives of criminals.[154] The lives of homeless were spared more than the
elderly, but the lives of homeless were spared less often than the obese.
[154]
People overwhelmingly express a preference for autonomous vehicles
to be programmed with utilitarian ideas, that is, in a manner that generates
the least harm and minimizes driving casualties.[155] While people want
others to purchase utilitarian promoting vehicles, they themselves prefer to
ride in vehicles that prioritize the lives of people inside the vehicle at all
costs.[155] This presents a paradox in which people prefer that others drive
utilitarian vehicles designed to maximize the lives preserved in a fatal
situation but want to ride in cars that prioritize the safety of passengers at all
costs.[155] People disapprove of regulations that promote utilitarian views
and would be less willing to purchase a self-driving car that may opt to
promote the greatest good at the expense of its passengers.[155]
Bonnefon et al. conclude that the regulation of autonomous vehicle
ethical prescriptions may be counterproductive to societal safety.[155] This is
because, if the government mandates utilitarian ethics and people prefer to
ride in self-protective cars, it could prevent the large scale implementation of
self-driving cars.[155] Delaying the adoption of autonomous cars vitiates the
safety of society as a whole because this technology is projected to save so
many lives.[155] This is a paradigmatic example of the tragedy of the
commons, in which rational actors cater to their self-interested preferences
at the expense of societal utility.[156]
Privacy
Privacy-related issues arise mainly from the interconnectivity of automated
cars, making it just another mobile device that can gather any information

17
about an individual (see data mining). This information gathering ranges
from tracking of the routes taken, voice recording, video recording,
preferences in media that is consumed in the car, behavioural patterns, to
many more streams of information.[157][158][159] The data and
communications infrastructure needed to support these vehicles may also be
capable of surveillance, especially if coupled to other data sets and advanced
analytics.

References

18
 We conducted reference that helped us a lot from the
following References
 Reference 1: https://www.timesnownews.com/auto/features/article/are-
puc- systems-in-india-really-effective/525978
 Reference 2: https://echallan.jhpolice.gov.in/app/actsection/index/40
 Reference 3: https://www.insurancedekho.com/car-
insurance/news/everything-about-the-pollution-under-control-
certificate.htm
 Reference 4: https://mpcb.gov.in/

19
 Conclusion

It is crucial to keep our bodies well hydrated and nourished at all times. All
we need to be mindful of is that the water being consumed in our houses is
safe and pure. Pureit water purifiers ensure 100% safe drinking water free of
viruses and bacteria.

20