State of the Art & Near Term Future of Smart Driving Cars by

1. State of the Art & Near Term Future of Smart Driving Cars by Alain L. Kornhauser, Ph.D.Professor, Operations Research & Financial EngineeringDirector, Program in Transportation Faculty Chair, PAVE (Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering) Princeton University Presented at NJ DoT Trenton, NJ June 18, 2013

2. Where Have We Been?

3. The Automobile’s 1st 125 Years (1886-2011) Benz Circa 2011 Benz patent 1886 1st Automobile Delivered: Enormous Personal Freedom & Mobility But…Safe Operation Requires Continuous Vigilance

4. We Love the Freedom & Mobility But…Continuous Vigilance is an unrealistic requirement for drivers

5. Txtng while driving is out of control…

6. TravelTainment Industry Wants Everyone’sAttention

7. http://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SmartDrivingCars/NHTSA_Hendricks2001_UnsafeDrivingActs.pdfhttp://orfe.princeton.edu/~alaink/SmartDrivingCars/NHTSA_Hendricks2001_UnsafeDrivingActs.pdf In In 717 out of 723 accidents ((99%) “In 717 out of 723 crashes (99%), a driver behavioral error caused or contributed to the crash”

8. Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2012

9. Response is Laudable Kirkland, WA But… Not Likely to be Effective

10. What About Automation?

11. Preliminary Statement of Policy Concerning Automated Vehicles Extending its vehicle safety standards from Crash Mitigation to Crash Avoidance with Aim at Full Self-Driving Automation Level 0 – No-Automation. The driver is in complete and sole control of the primary vehicle controls (brake, steering, throttle, and motive power) at all times, and is solely responsible for monitoring the roadway and for safe operation of all vehicle controls. Vehicles that have certain driver support/convenience systems but do not have control authority over steering, braking, or throttle would still be considered “level 0” vehicles. Examples include systems that provide only warnings • Level 1 – Function-specific Automation: Automation at this level involves one or more specific control functions; if multiple functions are automated, they operate independently from each other. The driver has overall control, and is solely responsible for safe operation, the driver. The vehicle’s automated system may assist or augment the driver in operating one of the primary controls – either steering or braking/throttle controls (but not both). • Level 2 - Combined Function Automation: Automation of at least two primary control functions designed to work in unison to relieve the driver of control of those functions. Vehicles at this level of automation can utilize shared authority when the driver cedes active primary control in certain limited driving situations. The driver is still responsible for monitoring the roadway and safe operation and is expected to be available for control at all times and on short notice. • Level 3 - Limited Self-Driving Automation: Vehicles at this level of automation enable the driver to cede full control of all safety-critical functions under certain traffic or environmental conditions. • Level 4 - Full Self-Driving Automation: The vehicle is designed to perform all safety-critical driving functions and monitor roadway conditions for an .

12. Preliminary Statement of Policy Concerning Automated Vehicles The Aim to Full Self-Driving is Laudable; But…, Ironically, it may be overly ambitious and potentially counter productive We Like to Drive and Can Be Vigilant But… Preferablyonly when we want to; Otherwise, Let us “TXT” Eternal Vigilance should not be the price of Freedom derived from the Automobile By Focusing on Level 3 (Limited Self-Driving, aka SmartDrivingCar) NHTSA Can Capture “All” Safety Benefits & Make the Car Even More Desirable The Jump to Level 4 (Full Self-Driving) Delivers Broad Societal Benefits Equal Mobility for All (young, old, handicapped, disadvantaged), Elimination of Congestion, Halving of Energy, Pollution These are NOT NHTSA’s Mission & Shouldn’t be Distracted by that Goal

13. Where Are We Now?R&D “Level 3 Semi Self-Driving Automation”

14. Has drive ~ 500,000 miles with “Level 3: Limited Self-Driving Automation” But…Hardware too expensive and Reliance on 3D Google Maps is “non-elegant” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdgQpa1pUUE

15. Where Are We Now? Operational in ExclusiveEnvironments “Level 4 Full Self-Driving Automation”

16. APM Automated People Movers and a growing number of Driverless Metros Beijing Paris Milan Now exist in essentially every Major Airport

17. Personal Rapid Transit: Morgantown (1975 - ) Today… Remains a critical mobility system & expansion being planned > 25M Driverless VMT Zero serious accidents

18. And Today… Video > 1M Driverless VMT Zero accidents Masdar & Heathrow are operational

19. This is actually “Level 4 Full Self-Driving Automation” Very Slow Speed (~ 10 mph); “Limited Pedestrian Environment” • Autonomous Buses at La Rochelle (CyberCars/Cybus/INRIA) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72-PlSFwP5Y • Simple virtual non-exclusive roadway • Virtual vehicle-based longitudinal (collision avoidance) and lateral (lane keeping) systems

20. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0RCSX95QmE • Driverless Trucks in Australian & Chilean Mines

21. Where Are We Now? Operational Bus Transit “Level 0+ No Automation, Driver Assistance ”

22. Bus 2.0: Initial Demonstration of Transit-based Driver Assistance (Level 0+ , no control, only warning) Fleet of 10 Gillig low floor buses Morning and evening express services 22 mile (one-way) travel distance Reliable travel times in all weather and traffic conditions

23. Bus 2.0: Transit-based Driver AssistanceHow Do They Do It?

24. Bus 2.0: Transit-based Driver AssistanceHow Do They Do It? It Just Works!

25. Where Are We Now? Available in ShowRooms for Consumers “Level 2- Combined Automation wit Constant Vig1lance ”

26. BAS-Plus • Active Lane-Keeping Assist (braking not steering  ) • Intelligent Drive (active steering  ) Volvo Truck Emergency braking

27. More on Google: Levandowski Presentation DOT HS 810 767 Pre-Crash Scenario Typology for Crash Avoidance Research

28. With Mercedes the Market Leader in “Level 2-” and an incremental price tag that can be absorbed by a Price Leading Insurance Company, then other automakers will be enticed to follow which should lead to: • Viral adoption by the car buying public • “Moore’s Law type of price/performance improvement • Market-driven Transition to “Level 2” and “Level 3” at same or even lower price structure • Adoption and enhancement rates that are comparable to that enjoyed by airbags (With likely a comparable hick-up)

29. What’s Near-term for Transit? With Mercedes the Market Leader in “Level 2-” and an incremental price tag that can be absorbed by a Price Leading Insurance Company, then other automakers will be enticed to follow which should lead to:

30. The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System • Fact:For over 40 years New Jersey has had the World’s Best “Bus Rapid Transit” System! • It Consists of: • Efficient Boarding/Alighting @ Port Authority Bus Terminal • 223 Departure Gates • Readily Accommodates 700 Buses/hr

31. The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System • Fact:For over 40 years New Jersey has had the World’s Best “Bus Rapid Transit” System! • It Consists of: • Efficient Boarding/Alighting @ PA Bus Terminal • Direct Access/Egress to Exclusive Lanes in the Lincoln Tunnel • 3+ HOV Lanes on the NJ Turnpike that are, by default, essentially bus-only • Many Strategically Located Park&Ride Lots

32. The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System • Pieces are Connected by: • “495-viaduct” Counter-flow Exclusive Bus Lane (XBL) • Lane Segregation is by Removable Plastic Peg • Yet exceedingly Safe • 3 (?) accidents in 41 years, no fatalities.

33. A Perfect Storm Opportunity PABT in desperate need of “rehabilitation” XBL at capacity “Helix” due for “rehabilitation” Desperately need: Increased late afternoon in-bound capacity for busses New bus procurement cycle begins in 2 years Test facility available @ Ft. Monmouth

34. Improving The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System • add Intelligent Cruise Control with Lane Assist to the 3,000 buses… • e.g. Daimler Benz Distronic Plus with Traffic Jam Assist • even at an incremental $75,000/bus this is just $200M • Could achieve sustained 3.0 second headways • Increases practical throughput by 50% • from 700 -> 1,000 buses/hr; 35,000 -> 50,000 pax/hr • Increased passenger capacity comparable to what would have been provided by $10B ARC rail tunnel • Institutionally manageable: • All Express Buses are acquired according to NJT Specs. • Facilities (XBL, LT, PABT) are controlled by PANY&NJT • Ideal test facility available: • Ft. Monmouth

35. Improving The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System Concept Not New: Concept Makes Even More Sense Now!

36. Near-term Opportunity for a Substantive Extension of Autonomous Transit • Specific: General Mobility for Fort Monmouth Redevelopment • Currently: Decommissioned Ft. Monmouth is vacant . • Ft. Monmouth Economic Revitalization Authority (FMERA) is redeveloping the 3 sq. mile “city” • Focus is on attracting high-tech industry • The “Fort” needs a mobility system. • FMEDA is receptive to incorporating an innovative mobility system • Because it is being redeveloped as a “new town” it can accommodate itself to be an ideal site for testing more advanced driverless systems.

37. Where might We End Up?

38. Most every day… • Almost 9 Million NJ residents • 0.25 Million of out of state commuters • Make 30+ Million trips • Throughout the 8,700 sq miles of NJ • Where/when do they start? • Where do they go? • Does anyone know??? • I certainly don’t • Not to sufficient precision for credible analysis

39. I’ve Tried… • I’ve harvested one of the largest troves of GPS tracks • Literally billions of individual trips, • Unfortunately, they are spread throughout the western world, throughout the last decade. • Consequently, I have only a very small ad hoc sample of what happens in NJ on a typical day.

41. Project Overview Trip Synthesizer • Motivation – Publicly available data do not contain: • Spatial precision • Where are people leaving from? • Where are people going? • Temporal precision • At what time are they travelling? ORF 467 Fall 2012

42. Why do I want to know every trip? • Academic Curiosity • If offered an alternative, which ones would likely “buy it” and what are the implications. • More specifically: • If an alternative transport system were available, which trips would be diverted to it and what operational requirements would those trip impose on the new system? • In the end… • a transport system serves individual decision makers. It’s patronage is an ensemble of individuals, • I would prefer analyzing each individual trip patronage opportunity.

43. Synthesize from publically available data: • “every” NJ Traveler on a typical day NJ_Residentfile • Containing appropriate demographic and spatial characteristics that reflect trip making • “every” trip that each Traveler is likely to make on a typical day. NJ_PersonTrip file • Containing appropriate spatial and temporal characteristics for each trip

44. Creating the NJ_Residentfile for “every” NJ Traveler on a typical day NJ_Resident file Start with Publically available data:

45. 2010 Population census @Block Level • 8,791,894 individuals distributed 118,654 Blocks.

46. Publically available data: • Distributions of Demographic Characteristics • Age • Gender • Household size • Name (Last, First)

47. Final NJ_Resident file Home County Person Index Household Index Full Name Age Gender Worker Type Index Worker Type String Home lat, lon Work or School lat,lon Work County Work or School Index NAICS code Work or School start/end time

48. Assigning a Daily Activity (Trip) Tour to Each Person

49. NJ_PersonTrip file • 9,054,849 records • One for each person in NJ_Resident file • Specifying 32,862,668 Daily Person Trips • Each characterized by a precise • Origination, Destination and Departure Time

50. Project Overview Overview of Data Production Generate population Assign work places Assign schools Assign tours / activity patterns Assign other trips Assign arrival / departure times ORF 467 Fall 2012