Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice 11(2), 2019
pp. 36–42, ISSN 1948-9137, eISSN 2162-2752
Automated Robotic and Network Connectivity Systems
for Self-Driving Vehicle Technology
Martin Groener
m.groener@aa-er.org
The Center for Innovative Data-driven
Smart Urban Ecosystems, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
ABSTRACT. Employing recent research results covering automated robotic and
network connectivity systems for self-driving vehicle technology, and building my
argument by drawing on data collected from Abraham et al. (2017), ANSYS, Atomik
Research, Capgemini Research Institute, Charles Koch Institute, CivicScience,
eMarketer, Ipsos, McKinsey, Schoettle & Sivak (2014), and Statista, I performed
analyses and made estimates regarding most popular activities to pursue with time
saved in an autonomous car (%), attitudes toward the safety of self-driving cars (%),
and the awareness of autonomous vehicles (%). Structural equation modeling was
used to analyze the collected data.
Keywords: network connectivity system; autonomous vehicle; safety; risk
How to cite: Groener, Martin (2019). “Automated Robotic and Network Connectivity Systems
for Self-Driving Vehicle Technology,” Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice
11(2): 36–42. doi:10.22381/CRLSJ11220195
Received 14 May 2019 • Received in revised form 10 October 2019
Accepted 14 October 2019 • Available online 15 November 2019
1. Introduction
Artificially intelligent autonomous vehicles will pave the way for breakthrough modes of transport mobility. (Joh, 2019) Using cutting-edge sensors
and embedded devices, connected and self-driving cars will offer a riskless
travel mode by putting an end to human driving errors, in addition to more
reliable and more adequate routes for passengers, constituting an important
progress with regard to sustainable development. (Chehri and Mouftah, 2019)
In order for self-driving cars to become satisfactorily assimilated, the social
interactions encompassing them should be thoroughly regulated. (Strömberg
et al., 2018)
36
2. Conceptual Framework and Literature Review
Accelerated connectivity integrated into autonomous driving functions present
a significant challenge to the massive socioeconomic advantages (Balica,
2018; Grossman, 2018; Kirby et al., 2018; Lăzăroiu et al., 2017; Popescu,
2017) provided by connected and autonomous vehicles. (Sheehan et al., 2019)
The objects and spaces that constitute automation systems are elaborate and
inconclusive. An ostensibly consonant automated object (e.g. the self-driving
car) may eventually be much less stable. (Bissell, 2018) The imaginable new
insecurities which autonomous vehicle driving behavior may display are
designed as decisional boundaries, as artificial driving intelligence will
require specific decisional capacities (De Gregorio Hurtado, 2017; Hayes
and Jandrić, 2017; Kral et al., 2018; Popescu et al., 2017; Popescu et al.,
2018), especially in the limitation to interpret and identify the driving setting
in relation to human values and moral grasp. (Cunneen et al., 2019)
3. Methodology and Empirical Analysis
Building my argument by drawing on data collected from Abraham et al.
(2017), ANSYS, Atomik Research, Capgemini Research Institute, Charles
Koch Institute, CivicScience, eMarketer, Ipsos, McKinsey, Schoettle & Sivak
(2014), and Statista, I performed analyses and made estimates regarding
most popular activities to pursue with time saved in an autonomous car (%),
attitudes toward the safety of self-driving cars (%), and the awareness of
autonomous vehicles (%). Structural equation modeling was used to analyze
the collected data.
4. Results and Discussion
As autonomous vehicles can determine new standards of safety undetectable
by human drivers, malware clusters may catalyze unconventional patterns of
convenience, mobility, and economic and sustainable imbalance throughout
urban areas. (Vassallo and Manaugh, 2018) Insofar as autonomous vehicles
systems are steadily networked, the massive volume of necessitated and
produced data will turn out to be too excessive and intricate for humans to
handle, and cutting-edge degrees of automation suitable for processing huge
quantities of data instantaneously will be required, but human supervision
over such systems will decrease. (Slaughter, 2018) Self-driving cars will be
equipped with high tech that is cognizant of their external setting and that
can keep track of the condition of the driver to monitor his/her capability of
taking up control again. (Mounce and Nelson, 2019) Likely software vulnerabilities in autonomous vehicles may subject users to sudden and at times
detrimental remote interference. (Joh, 2019) (Tables 1–10)
37
Table 1 Which of the following are you most comfortable with? (%)
Autonomous train
Autonomous car
Autonomous airplane
Autonomous boat
55
34
11
2
Sources: ANSYS; Atomik Research; my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 2 Most popular activities to pursue with time saved in an autonomous car (%)
Read a book
7
Smoking/Vaping
8
Watch film/Listen to music
41
Work/Email
28
Self-care
7
Eat & drink
9
Sources: ANSYS; Atomik Research; my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 3 How concerned would you be about driving or riding
in a vehicle with self-driving technology? (%)
Very concerned
Moderately concerned
Slightly concerned
Not at all concerned
57
28
11
4
Sources: Schoettle & Sivak (2014); my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 4 The advancement of electrical and electronic architecture
and digitalization of the car ecosystem increases attack surface
and leads to increasing cyberrisk (%)
Sensor spoofing: Access autonomous-drive functions, engine,
and brakes through vulnerability in sensors
Take over: Take over of safety-critical control units
such as engine control or brakes
Espionage: Listen to voices in cars
by misusing voice-recognition module
Physical access: Secure direct access to on-board diagnostics for
manipulation of vehicle data, engine characteristics, and tuning chips
Entertainment content: Access infotainment system
via Bluetooth, USB, or Wi-Fi
Telematics: Remotely unlock cargo doors through
vulnerability in external connectivity modules
Denial of service: Stop cars that rely on
back-end servers to provide data
Over the air: Access vehicle software though online updates
Unauthorized access: Access back-end vehicle services and user data
Data theft: Access car owner’s private information
via unsecure third party
Sources: McKinsey; my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
38
92
88
72
71
68
66
64
62
61
58
Table 5 How comfortable are you with self-driving vehicles? (%)
Very comfortable
Somewhat comfortable
Not comfortable at all
19
31
50
Sources: CivicScience; my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 6 Attitudes toward the safety of self-driving cars (%)
Most drivers occasionally drive distracted
Worry that self-driving cars will struggle to adapt to
unusual road conditions such as weather, pedestrians, bikers or wild animals
Self-driving cars will make drivers pay less attention
to roads and will make driving more dangerous overall
Self-driving cars will remove a lot of human error
in driving and will make the roads safer
Self-driving cars will help make teenagers safer, more competent drivers
Would feel safer if I knew most cars on the road were self-driving
88
91
84
36
41
28
Sources: Charles Koch Institute; eMarketer; my survey among
5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 7 “How would consumers rate their overall level of trust for …” (%)
Consumer view
Executive view
A traditional automaker
73
79
to produce a self-driving car?
Electric vehicle companies
70
74
to produce a self-driving car?
A Silicon Valley tech company
62
71
to produce a self-driving car?
An academic institution
48
68
to produce a self-driving car?
An automotive supplier
39
69
to produce a self-driving car?
A new tech startup
32
68
to produce a self-driving car?
Sources: Capgemini Research Institute; my survey among
5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 8 How much do you agree or disagree that
self-driving cars will make driving… (%)
More relaxing
Safer
Faster
Easier
Friendlier to the environment
More economical
More enjoyable
More comfortable
Sources: Ipsos; my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
39
76
64
53
63
52
57
61
72
Table 9 Willingness to use automation in vehicles: What is the maximum level
of automation you would be comfortable with? (%)
No automation
Emergency only
Help driver
Partial autonomy
Full autonomy
34
26
22
11
7
Sources: Abraham et al. (2017); my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
Table 10 The awareness of autonomous vehicles (%)
Know what semi-autonomous means but know very little
Only heard of semi-autonomous vehicles and have no knowledge
Fully know what an autonomous vehicle is
Fully know what semi-autonomous means
32
29
24
21
Sources: Statista; my survey among 5,200 individuals conducted April 2019.
5. Conclusions and Implications
Connected and autonomous vehicle users can be dissimilar in their route
choice behavior relative to human-driven vehicle users, bringing about hybrid
traffic flows that may considerably swerve from the standard human-driven
vehicle traffic pattern. (Wang et al., 2019) Networked autonomous vehicle
systems may modify the parameters and volume of mobility for various social
groups, alter the structuring of urban areas, redesign the kinds of power
individuals are caused to undergo, refashion how human life is assessed in
particular sectors of society, and can reinforce distinct axes of social disparity.
(Bissell et al., 2018)
Note
The interviews were conducted online and data were weighted by five variables (age,
race/ethnicity, gender, education, and geographic region) using the Census Bureau’s
American Community Survey to reflect reliably and accurately the demographic
composition of the United States. The precision of the online polls was measured
using a Bayesian credibility interval.
Funding
This paper was supported by Grant GE-1863248 from the Artificially Intelligent
Algorithmic Systems Research Unit, Westminster, CO.
Author Contributions
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and approved it for
publication.
Conflict of Interest Statement
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of
interest.
40
REFERENCES
Balica, R. (2018). “Big Data Learning Analytics and Algorithmic Decision-Making
in Digital Education Governance,” Analysis and Metaphysics 17: 128–133.
Bissell, D. (2018). “Automation Interrupted: How Autonomous Vehicle Accidents
Transform the Material Politics of Automation,” Political Geography 65: 57–66.
Bissell, D., T. Birtchnell, A. Elliott, and E. L. Hsu (2018). “Autonomous Automobilities: The Social Impacts of Driverless Vehicles,” Current Sociology. doi:
10.1177/0011392118816743
Chehri, A., and H. T. Mouftah (2019). “Autonomous Vehicles in the Sustainable
Cities, the Beginning of a Green Adventure,” Sustainable Cities and Society 51:
101751.
Cunneen, M., M. Mullins, and F. Murphy (2019). “Autonomous Vehicles and
Embedded Artificial Intelligence: The Challenges of Framing Machine Driving
Decisions,” Applied Artificial Intelligence 33(8): 706–731.
De Gregorio Hurtado, S. (2017). “A Critical Approach to EU Urban Policy from the
Viewpoint of Gender,” Journal of Research in Gender Studies 7(1): 200–217.
Grossman, T. (2018). “The Rise of an Automated Jobless Society: Do Cutting-Edge
Technologies Expel Workers Swifter than the Economy Can Identify New Jobs
for Them?,” Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Management 6(2):
62–67.
Hayes, S., and P. Jandrić (2017). “Learning, Technologies, and Time in the Age of
Global Neoliberal Capitalism,” Knowledge Cultures 5(2): 11–17.
Joh, E. E. (2019). “Automated Seizures: Police Stops of Self-Driving Cars,” New York
University Law Review 94: 292–314.
Kirby, R., K. Valaskova, J. Kolencik, and P. Kubala (2018). “Online Habits of the
Fake News Audience: The Vulnerabilities of Internet Users to Manipulations by
Malevolent Participants,” Geopolitics, History, and International Relations 10(2):
44–50.
Kral, P., K. Janoskova, and T. Kliestik (2018). “Key Determinants of the Public
Transport User’s Satisfaction,” Administratie si Management Public 31: 36–51.
Lăzăroiu, G., A. Pera, R. O. Ștefănescu-Mihăilă, N. Mircică, and O. Neguriță (2017).
“Can Neuroscience Assist Us in Constructing Better Patterns of Economic
Decision-Making?,” Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 11: 188.
Mounce, R., and J. D. Nelson (2019). “On the Potential for One-Way Electric
Vehicle Car-Sharing in Future Mobility Systems,” Transportation Research Part
A: Policy and Practice 120: 17–30.
Popescu, G. H., V. Sima, E. Nica, and I. G. Gheorghe (2017). “Measuring Sustainable Competitiveness in Contemporary Economies – Insights from European
Economy,” Sustainability 9(7): 1230.
Popescu, G. H. (2017). “Is Lying Acceptable Conduct in International Politics?,”
Educational Philosophy and Theory 49(6): 575–576.
Popescu, G. H., M. Mieilă, E. Nica, and J.-V. Andrei (2018). “The Emergence of the
Effects and Determinants of the Energy Paradigm Changes on European Union
Economy,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 81(1): 768–774.
Sheehan, B., F. Murphy, M. Mullins, and C. Ryan (2019). “Connected and Autonomous Vehicles: A Cyber-Risk Classification Framework,” Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice 124: 523–536.
41
Slaughter, R. A. (2018). “The IT Revolution Reassessed Part Two: Case Studies and
Implications,” Futures 98: 19–31.
Strömberg, H., I. Pettersson, J. Andersson, A. Rydström, D. Dey, M. Klingegård, et
al. (2018). “Designing for Social Experiences with and within Autonomous
Vehicles – Exploring Methodological Directions,” Design Science 4: e13.
Vassallo, E. W., and K. Manaugh (2018). “Spatially Clustered Autonomous Vehicle
Malware: Producing New Urban Geographies of Inequity,” Transportation
Research Record 2672(1): 66–75.
Wang, J., S. Peeta, and X. He (2019). “Multiclass Traffic Assignment Model for
Mixed Traffic Flow of Human-driven Vehicles and Connected and Autonomous
Vehicles” Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 126: 139–168.
42
Copyright of Contemporary Readings in Law & Social Justice is the property of Addleton
Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may
print, download, or email articles for individual use.