Jump to content
Create New...
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    Hyundai Develops Machine Learning Cruise Control

      ...can it read your thoughts?...

    Hyundai Motor Group has announced they have developed the first Machine Learning based Smart Cruise Control (SCC-ML). This new technology can read the driver's behavior and incorporate the driving style into the cruise control's system. It incorporates artificial intelligence with advanced driver assistant system that is essential to self-driving technology. 

    Previously, the driver had to manually adjust factors like distance to the next vehicle and acceleration.  Now with machine learning, the SCC can fine-tune these settings by reading a driver's habits.  Even the same driver may accelerate differently depending on the situation. SCC is now able to read those different situations and adjust acceleration to the driver's preferences automatically. 

    The system is specifically programmed to avoid learning unsafe driving patterns. 

    The system is planned for Hyundai group vehicles in the future with an upcoming Highway Driving Assist system that features land change assist. SCC-ML achieves level 2.5 self driving. 

    Edited by Drew Dowdell

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    13 minutes ago, USA-1 said:

    That's scary knowing how scatter brained or slow some people think while driving out there. No thanks.

    This is actually to address that.... it will filter out the unsafe driving bits and smooth out the good driving bits.  It should make those bad drivers more predictable. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    This is actually to address that.... it will filter out the unsafe driving bits and smooth out the good driving bits.  It should make those bad drivers more predictable. 

    Yeah, I see what they are trying to do, but being able to filter all of that out will be a large task. "Traffic is stopping I should probably start applying the brakes...look a squirrel!!" 🤣

    I think what GM has been working on for a few years might work better with what they call V2V (Vehicle to Vehicle) where vehicles will communicate with others knowing what's going on ahead and behind and can react earlier and faster than the largely distracted human being behind the wheel. It would start with GM vehicles and would probably become an industry standard. GM says this would help with the "rubber band effect" in rush hour making it much more consistent while keeping vehicles moving smoothly when merging as well as being evenly spaced from each vehicle.

    Edited by USA-1
    Added to the end of my previous comment.
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    41 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    GM already had V2V in the CTS.  I don't know how well it worked or if they even put it in the CT5.

    I don't think it was the full V2V with the CTS though, could be wrong. What year of CTS? I know the CT4 and CT5 as well as the C8 Vette have the new GM "digital nervous system" wiring schematic that ties all the vehicles functions into several different sensors, so they may have a next gen. V2V that works in conjunction with that.  

    They had a system in place with a CT6 Platinum that I had for a 24hr. test drive that works in conjunction with Super Cruise and they've been continuing to test it and seems like they were on the right track, but who knows with all the GM Corp. general counsel involved.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Well the problem was that it could only talk to other CTSes because they were the only model with it, so unless you were about to rear end another CTS in your CTS, the system didn't do a whole lot. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Well the problem was that it could only talk to other CTSes because they were the only model with it, so unless you were about to rear end another CTS in your CTS, the system didn't do a whole lot. 

    Well, not exactly because the car ahead of you can be several cars up so it doesn't have to be directly in front of you to communicate with the other to know that traffic is slowing or stopping up ahead. If all GM vehicles eventually had V2V that would be key to a successful implementation of it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    27 minutes ago, USA-1 said:

    Well, not exactly because the car ahead of you can be several cars up so it doesn't have to be directly in front of you to communicate with the other to know that traffic is slowing or stopping up ahead. If all GM vehicles eventually had V2V that would be key to a successful implementation of it.

    Every car would need it for it to be successful

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    Every car would need it for it to be successful

    As far as I've read and heard it's not meant to always drive the car autonomously, but has adaptive brake control/accident avoidance included to slow and/or stop the car. Just like all cars now don't have active braking or other safety features, but if even just a few in the local traffic have V2V then they can at least be alerted of slowing or stopped traffic several cars or even just 3 or 4 vehicles ahead and not just the one in front of you. There's really no perfect scenario, just like this Hyundai system.

    I'd rather be involved and drive the vehicle myself anyway :metal:  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    V2V sounds useless unless everybody got together to work on a system for every manufacturer. Even if all GM vehicles had it, it would still be useless as there aren't enough on the roads. 

    (That's not some weird sales dig. There are just too many other manufacturers and nobody has even 50% total market share)

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

    V2V sounds useless unless everybody got together to work on a system for every manufacturer. Even if all GM vehicles had it, it would still be useless as there aren't enough on the roads. 

    (That's not some weird sales dig. There are just too many other manufacturers and nobody has even 50% total market share)

    GM has not had 50% market share (in the USA) since 1980.  You are correct in that V2V needs some real technical interoperability standards for it to work consistently.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    21 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

    GM has not had 50% market share (in the USA) since 1980.  You are correct in that V2V needs some real technical interoperability standards for it to work consistently.

    Oh I just threw out a number of vehicles that still wouldn't make it super successful and unrealistic to obtain(50% market share across the board). 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, ccap41 said:

    V2V sounds useless unless everybody got together to work on a system for every manufacturer. Even if all GM vehicles had it, it would still be useless as there aren't enough on the roads.

    Like I stated earlier it's not meant to drive every single car out there autonomously at the moment, but it would still be useful now if even a few cars that are several cars ahead had it to alert your car that traffic is slowing or stopped and prepare for it before you would. Especially on a freeway like I live near that has a somewhat sharp bend to the left where traffic usually doesn't back up until around the bend and there's almost always a rear-end accident, so if even one car ahead has V2V it would alert the car you're in to prepare for it. And if it was installed on every GM car it would be pretty good. I could pretty consistently count 2 or 3 GM cars or trucks/SUV's out of 10 in a group on the road and sometimes even more.

    The Hyundai system is a "Smart Cruise Control" so you would have to have the cruise control engaged and the driver would have to remember that, it also requires 25 mph or more. GM V2V is automatic and would be tied in with the rest of the safety tech. onboard.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    15 minutes ago, USA-1 said:

    And right now all the non GM or non V2V vehicles would be alerted by the V2V vehicles brakes lights coming on much earlier. It's better than no warning at all. 

    That sounds like the auto-brake sensing systems already out there. It wouldn't be the lights triggering it but the distance closing quickly. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, ccap41 said:

    That sounds like the auto-brake sensing systems already out there. It wouldn't be the lights triggering it but the distance closing quickly. 

    The emergency auto braking out there now only "sees" the car that's 50 -150 ft. (depending on your sensitivity setting) directly in front of your vehicle that relies on radar and ultra sonic sensors. V2V is an extremely early warning communication from cars several hundred feet ahead in traffic that dictate what is happening.

    I'm talking about the brake lights triggering the actual person driving behind to apply the brakes earlier that don't have V2V or another type of EAB safety system. 

    Like I stated before I'd rather be involved in the vehicle I'm in and actually drive it, but so many people are not involved or distracted these days so unfortunately we need these safety alert systems for them.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 minutes ago, USA-1 said:

    The emergency auto braking out there now only "sees" the car that's 50 -150 ft. (depending on your sensitivity setting) directly in front of your vehicle that relies on radar and ultra sonic sensors. V2V is an extremely early warning communication from cars several hundred feet ahead in traffic that dictate what is happening.

    I'm talking about the brake lights triggering the actual person driving behind to apply the brakes earlier that don't have V2V or another type of EAB safety system. 

    Like I stated before I'd rather be involved in the vehicle I'm in and actually drive it, but so many people are not involved or distracted these days so unfortunately we need these safety alert systems for them.

    And your V2V system isn't going to know there may be 5 vehicles in between you and the other V2V vehicle braking. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    And your V2V system isn't going to know there may be 5 vehicles in between you and the other V2V vehicle braking. 

    Vehicles with V2V have the onboard EAB system integrated so local vehicle braking is covered and there will obviously be more than one GM vehicle in traffic if they implemented it in all GM vehicles. They are constantly studying American driving habits, it's how they came up with 40 mi. of electric range for the first EREV Volt because a study they ran found that 40 mi. is the average American drivers round trip work commute. So I'm pretty sure GM engineers know more about cars and our daily traffic congestion than you do.

    It must be exhausting for you to constantly try to prove people or technology wrong on here...

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    51 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    And your V2V system isn't going to know there may be 5 vehicles in between you and the other V2V vehicle braking. 

    Toyota is now working on a similar system and V2V would become available for aftermarket as well.

    The basics of V2V below.

    "Not only will GM share the technology with other companies (at a price), as it did with OnStar, but it is working with other companies to set standards, so that other automakers can use the same basic technologies with completely different equipment. Donald Grimm, senior researcher at GM, said that aftermarket kits were likely as well, a possibility because the system will allow for both active and passive transponders. An active transponder uses GPS to figure out where it is, and connects into Stabilitrak (or the vehicle’s other stability control system) to figure out speed and braking, and communicates both to any vehicle within 300 yards.

    How the vehicle to vehicle (V2V) system works

    Using vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication, a vehicle can detect the position and movement of other vehicles up to a quarter of a mile away. Vehicles will be equipped with a simple antenna, a computer chip, and GPS (Global Positioning System) technology; they will know where the other vehicles are by communicating directly with them, and other vehicles will know where they are -- in blind spots, stopped on the highway but hidden from view around a blind corner or blocked by other vehicles. The vehicles can anticipate and react to changing driving situations and then instantly warn the drivers with chimes, visual icons and seat vibrations. If the driver doesn’t respond to the alerts, the car can bring itself to a safe stop, avoiding a collision.

    The system would replace the long range scanning sensor for adaptive cruise control, forward vision sensors for object detection, mid-range blind spot detection sensors, and long-range lane change assist sensors. GM has the ability to replace all of these sensors with one advisory sensor that will provide all-around, instantaneous traffic intelligence. This promises a better and significantly less costly way of sensing other vehicles around your car while driving.

    During a demonstration attended by acarplace in March 2007, GM showed scenarios in which V2V technology can assist drivers. Using V2V communication, the vehicle alerts the driver to vehicles in blind spots with a steady amber light in the side mirror. If the turn signal is activated, a flashing amber light and gentle seat vibration on the side notifies the driver of a potentially dangerous situation. The vibration was enough to get our attention but not a sudden distraction - it was much more subtle than our pager.

    Pile-ups on congested roads during rush hour due to a chain reaction rear-end collisions could be lessened. Using V2V, the vehicle monitors messages from other vehicles up to a quarter of a mile ahead. The trailing vehicle warns the driver first with visual icons and seat vibrations on the front and then automatically brakes if there is danger of a read-end collision with the vehicle ahead.

    In addition, GM’s V2V technology can warn the driver when vehicles ahead, regardless of lane, are stopped or traveling much slower or any vehicle ahead brakes hard, allowing the driver to brake or change lanes as needed. It also can use rear lights to warn the other driver when the approaching vehicle is moving very quickly and a rear-end collision is imminent.
    While other vehicle manufacturers are developing similar technology, GM’s unique advantage is in its ability to leverage or enhance existing systems such as OnStar and StabiliTrak systems to deliver this solution more quickly and cost effectively.
    “GM is the world leader in Telematics,” said Patrick Popp, director of GM’s Advanced Technical Work in Safety. “Our V2V technology builds on GM’s earlier Telematics systems to give our customers new meaningful traffic safety and efficiency applications.” "

    https://www.acarplace.com/brands/gm/vehicle-to-vehicle.html

     

    Edited by USA-1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    47 minutes ago, USA-1 said:

    Vehicles with V2V have the onboard EAB system integrated so local vehicle braking is covered and there will obviously be more than one GM vehicle in traffic if they implemented it in all GM vehicles. They are constantly studying American driving habits, it's how they came up with 40 mi. of electric range for the first EREV Volt because a study they ran found that 40 mi. is the average American drivers round trip work commute. So I'm pretty sure GM engineers know more about cars and our daily traffic congestion than you do.

    So back to my original point.

    There simply aren't anywhere near enough vehicles on the road for this system to be truly effective. 

    I'm not saying the technology is bad or anything. I simply said;

    7 hours ago, ccap41 said:

    V2V sounds useless unless everybody got together to work on a system for every manufacturer. Even if all GM vehicles had it, it would still be useless as there aren't enough on the roads. 

     

    Edited by ccap41
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    So back to my original point.

    There simply aren't anywhere near enough vehicles on the road for this system to be truly effective. 

    I'm not saying the technology is bad or anything. I simply said;

     

    Not right now it's not, but it could be pretty useful in the future. I didn't and I don't think anyone else on here said that it's in enough vehicles right now. GM has been testing V2V in the Cad. CTS and now CT6 with Gen. 2 Super Cruise.

    5 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    You're fck'n stupid if you think that's what I'm trying to do here. 

    Dude just read up on it before you jump to conclusions and say "it's useless". And try not be childish with immature comments or vulgar language.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It's factual that it is useless unless there are enough vehicles using it. 

    17% of new vehicles will never cut it.

    Like I originally said, AGAIN, unless all of the manufacturers get together and all implement it together, it will be damn near useless. 

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

    It's factual that it is useless unless there are enough vehicles using it. 

    17% of new vehicles will never cut it.

    Like I originally said, AGAIN, unless all of the manufacturers get together and all implement it together, it will be damn near useless. 

    THAT is why GM is working with other manufacturers and why they want to implement it in several other makes and models.

    Did you read anything that I posted above about how V2V works and how GM is working with other manufacturers to make it work even better?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    8 minutes ago, USA-1 said:

    THAT is why GM is working with other manufacturers and why they want to implement it in several other makes and models.

    Did you read anything that I posted above about how V2V works and how GM is working with other manufacturers to make it work even better?

    Then WTF are you arguing about if they're doing it?!? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, ccap41 said:

    Then WTF are you arguing about if they're doing it?!? 

    OMG you're the one that's arguing!! You said V2V is useless and I said to read up on it then make an educated comment. Now you say it's "damn near useless" other than "useless" so you're making some progress. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    16 hours ago, USA-1 said:

    OMG you're the one that's arguing!! You said V2V is useless and I said to read up on it then make an educated comment. Now you say it's "damn near useless" other than "useless" so you're making some progress. 

    Your reading comprehension level is dogsh!t. Read the whole thing before jumping to a conclusion.

    How many times do I have to say that it IS USELESS UNLESS THERE ARE ENOUGH VEHICLES USING IT. 

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    37 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

    Your reading comprehension level is dogsh!t. Read the whole thing before jumping to a conclusion.

    How many times do I have to say that it IS USELESS UNLESS THERE ARE ENOUGH VEHICLES USING IT. 

    You obviously don't get it poor little Millennial keyboard warrior, but that's ok. Do you need a participation trophy to feel better about yourself? I never said they are using V2V now with 2 cars moron obviously that's why they need other manufacturers onboard. You didn't even know what it was until I brought it up so you're welcome you learned something.   

    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 10/24/2019 at 1:10 PM, USA-1 said:

    Vehicles with V2V have the onboard EAB system integrated so local vehicle braking is covered and there will obviously be more than one GM vehicle in traffic if they implemented it in all GM vehicles. They are constantly studying American driving habits, it's how they came up with 40 mi. of electric range for the first EREV Volt because a study they ran found that 40 mi. is the average American drivers round trip work commute. So I'm pretty sure GM engineers know more about cars and our daily traffic congestion than you do.

    It must be exhausting for you to constantly try to prove people or technology wrong on here...

    Are these the same GM engineers responsible for all those faulty ignitions (Barely a decade ago) or is that a different set of engineers? 
     

    Asking for a friend. 

    • Haha 2
    • Disagree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, ocnblu said:

    ?????????

    Yes, unlike you, I have friends. Made a lot a of friends during my time as a “lot hockey” (as you pointed out a few months ago before your little “hiatus”). It’s a novel concept you should try out sometime. 
     


     

     

    My question was a legitimate one since the GM fanboy is claiming that GM engineers are always on the ball. 
     

    Also, maybe I should just display this next time before getting troll responses. Just the same old one brand fanboy nonsense.


     

     

    12FA3DEB-1E2B-47EF-B4AA-4F5CF40C7F31.jpeg

    Edited by surreal1272
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, ocnblu said:

    ?????  Well it's a lot JOCKEY.  What sort of bull hockey is this

    Be cause autocorrect sucks ass (“lot hockey” iPhone). much like your past condescending comments about my choice of work (or second job in this case). 
     

    Stick to the subject at hand. I asked someone, who was not you, about the engineers at GM and there was actually a pretty good reason for it. Your weak personal jibe does not change this fact. Offer something of substance for once in your life or F off. It’s just that simple. 
     

    Seriously,

    Letterkenny GIF by Crave

     

    Edited by surreal1272
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, surreal1272 said:

    Yes, unlike you, I have friends. Made a lot a of friends during my time as a “lot hockey” (as you pointed out a few months ago before your little “hiatus”). It’s a novel concept you should try out sometime. 
     


     

     

    My question was a legitimate one since the GM fanboy is claiming that GM engineers are always on the ball. 
     

    Also, maybe I should just display this next time before getting troll responses. Just the same old one brand fanboy nonsense.


     

     

    12FA3DEB-1E2B-47EF-B4AA-4F5CF40C7F31.jpeg

    Where in this whole string did I say GM engineers are always on the ball?

    I do prefer GM vehicles because I have now and in the past had very good vehicles from Chevrolet, GMC and Cadillac as well as my whole family to include Pontiac when it was still around, but I've also had a BMW 540i and an Audi Q7 in the past as well so I have owned and driven vehicles outside of GM makes and models.

    We've had 15 - 20 vehicles at one time from Ford, Dodge and GM trucks and vans in our electrical contracting business for the past 35 years and the GM trucks have always held up better and have had a more reliable powertrain (all with the same regular maint.) so I have a reason to like a certain brand of vehicles having owned many different ones.

    I'm not saying GM is perfect because no brand is, but is there something wrong with being loyal to a brand that's been good to me? 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Posts

    • Yeah, it doesn't seem super space efficient.
    • So three major problems with this car, one, terrible Jellybean external shape, not impressed at all with the style. Second is the buttonless dash having everything via a touch screen and rotary knob, terrible safety issue as your eyes will be off the road more than on trying to find the right option in the right menu. Third is the center pack clearly cuts into valuable leg space based on their own picture. This is a hard pass.
    • Great Masculine shape, really digging the style they did here.
    • First seen at the Shanghai Auto Show (see article: Polestar 4 - The New Breed of Electric SUV Coupe), Polestar brought the Polestar 4 to the New York International Auto Show for North Americans to see in person. Polestar calls the Polestar 4 an "electric SUV 4-door coupe". Outside of that marketing speak, the Polestar 4 is a slightly lifted four-door hatchback about 190 inches in length, or roughly 2 inches shorter than a Toyota Camry.  Built without rear glass, the Polestar 4 makes use of a rear camera for visibility astern. Polestar 4 features a plethora of standard content, including 20-inch 5 V-spoke black diamond cut alloy wheels, panoramic glass roof, adaptive cruise control, 360 parking camera with 3D view, energy saving heat pump, front-illuminated Polestar logo, e-latch doors, power-operated tailgate with soft close, Polestar digital key, wireless phone charging, and 8-way electrical driver seat and 6-way electrical passenger seat. The fastest production car the brand has ever developed to date, Polestar 4 can accomplish a 0-60 mph sprint in 3.7 seconds and in top spec can produce 544 horsepower. Long-range single-motor variants have 272 horsepower and a targeted EPA range of over 300 miles. All long range variants have a 102 kWh battery capable of 200 kW charging on a DC Fast Charger and 11 kW on home level-2 charging. Google built-in is ... built in and includes Google Assistant, Google Maps and Google Play. Polestar continues to offer a leading connected in-car experience. As with all other Polestar cars, regular over-the-air updates allow for new features and improvements to be sent remotely to all vehicles. Pricing starts at $54,900, with orders opening in April for deliveries in the latter half of this year.   View full article
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings