Specialists from the University of Glasgow believe self-driving cars "need to learn the language of cyclists", with their research suggesting such improvements are necessary to help autonomous vehicles safely share the roads with those riding bicycles.
In a paper titled 'Keep it Real: Investigating Driver-Cyclist Interaction in Real-World Traffic', which will be published later in 2023 and was today reported by The Herald newspaper, researchers looked to unpick the relationship between cyclists and automated vehicles, saying there had been "comparatively little" research into how self-driving technology can keep cyclists safe.
Professor Stephen Brewster of the university's School of Computing Science said there had been "a lot of research in recent years on building safety features into autonomous vehicles to help keep pedestrians safe", something that needs to be repeated with cyclists.
> "These are completely safe autonomous vehicles": Cyclist spots driverless car using cycle lane
"Cars and bikes share the same spaces on the roads, which can be dangerous – between 2015 and 2020, 84 per cent of fatal bike accidents involved a motor vehicle, and there were more than 11,000 collisions," he said.
"There has been a lot of research in recent years on building safety features into autonomous vehicles to help keep pedestrians safe, but comparatively little on how automated vehicles can safely share the road with cyclists.
"That's a cause for concern as automated vehicles become more commonplace on the roads. While pedestrians tend to meet automated vehicles in highly controlled situations like road crossings, cyclists ride alongside cars for prolonged periods and rely on two-way interactions with drivers to determine each other's intentions.
"It's a much more complicated set of behaviours, which makes it a big challenge for future generations of automated vehicles to tackle. Currently, self-driving cars offer very little direct feedback to cyclists to help them make critically important decisions like whether it's safe to overtake or to switch lanes. Adding any guesswork to the delicate negotiations between car and bike has the potential to make the roads less safe."
> Tesla car in Full Self-Driving Beta almost rams cyclist
Brewster's team studied the ways drivers and cyclists directly and indirectly communicate in real-world situations. From the research they have formed recommendations for future generations of automated vehicles.
The researchers suggest the vehicles' intentions could be displayed on their exteriors, for example displaying animations signalling intention to speed up, slow down, give way or manoeuvre.
At the other end of the relationship they suggest cyclists could wear 'smart glasses' communicating the vehicle's intentions to them, for example when coloured LEDs on the car light up to signal right of way is up for negotiation a vibration could be sent to the glasses as a non-verbal message.
> Tesla using Full Self-Driving Beta crashes into cycle lane bollard...weeks after Elon Musk's zero collisions claim
The paper's co-author, Ammar Al-Taie, said he hopes the research will inform autonomous vehicle designers, encouraging them to develop "new ways that self-driving cars can work safely alongside cyclists by speaking their language".
"Just like spoken languages, communication between cyclists and drivers varies from country to country. We're very conscious that this paper focuses specifically on UK roads – any future developments will need to take into account the differences in drivers' and cyclists' interactions across the world."
The research will be presented, at the ACM Conference on Human factors in Computing Systems, in Germany next week.
Add new comment
105 comments
Neither Cruise nor Waymo rely on communication from bicycles to spot them so I'd anticipate such a feature being an adjunct to the main autonomous system.
Akin to a daytime running light, not vital but well worth considering.
Some form of passive (doesnt need battery, fit and forget) transponder fitted to a bike could work. Something the size of an airtag, doesnt need long range. Like Rich_cb says something additional to help the AV identify the hazard rather than to be relied on.
How about something that could reflect visible light rays and then the AV could use its 'eyes' to 'see' the cyclist?
Since when is "right of way" up for negotiation, either you have it or you don't, this sounds like they want autonomous vehicles to be able to ignore the highway code in the same way regular drivers do. So much for them being safer!
For starters, it's "priority" rather than "right of way" (which is to do with rights to cross privately owned land).
If they've forgotten to allow for being on the same roads as cyclists, I wonder when they'll remember to allow for horses, scooters, mobility vehicles etc.
I'm not convinced that they mean priority, if a cyclist or pedestrian proceeds when they don't have priority is it ok to run them down? The autonomous vehicle should be programmed to stop in that case regardless of priority.
If 2 vehicles approach a road narrowing like this at the same time, who goes first?
With humans, usually there will be some communication (flashing of headlights, hand gesture, indicators) to say "you go first".
That's similar to how locks are used in software.
In this case, there's two vehicles trying to use the same resource (narrowed road), so one solution would be for both vehicles to stop as neither has priority. Then, they wait a random time and attempt to claim the resource by starting to move slowly forwards if the other vehicle isn't moving towards it. If both start moving simultaneously, then both stop and wait a random time before trying again.
"need to learn the language of cyclists",
I can think of a few robust Anglo Saxon words !
Will "the victim, who wasn't wearing smart glasses..." become the new "the victim, who wasn't wearing hiviz or a helmet..."?
Can I be the first, of many I hope, to tell these incel Musk fanbois to ram their stupid cyclist-hating ideas where the sun don't shine?
I'm betting that is because the likes of Musk, and other less ostentatiously evil car company CEOs, are hoping to get cyclists banned from roads, or their usage severely restricted, like their predecessors did with pedestrians when they invented the completely bullshit made-up concept of "jaywalking".
Well they can get bent with that idea.
Who's going to pay for these? The car companies? Unlikely
I don't want to be invovled in a crash and told it's my fault for not wearing my digital glasses.
Presumably that would be except on anything made by Audi or BMW, since their indicators don't ever seem to work...
Cool - so will the car companies be buying all the cyclists these smart glasses to enable them to ride safely on the roads made unsafe because of their 'self-driving' new vehicles? No, didn't think so...
You forgot Mercedes.
Pages