Smart Driving Cars: Where Are We Going? Why Are We Going? Where Are We Now? What Is In It For Whom? How Might We Get There? Where might We End Up? Alain L. Kornhauser Professor, Operations Research & Financial Engineering Director, Program in Transportation Faculty Chair, PAVE (Princeton Autonomous Vehicle Engineering Princeton University Board Chair, Advanced Transit Association (ATRA) Presented at 2013 TransAction Conference Atlantic City, NJ April 18, 2013

Where Are We Going?

Why Are We Going? Save our Cities????

Starting in the 1960s… Some/I thought that: “The automation & computer technology that took us to the moon could now revolutionize mass transit and save our cities from the onslaught of the automobile” Westinghouse Skybus 1960’s-Skybus Westinghouse Skybus 1960’s-Skybus APM

Now exist in essentially every Major AirportMajor Airport Now exist in essentially every Major AirportMajor Airport APM Automated People Movers APM Automated People Movers Milan Beijing Paris and a growing number of Driverless Metros 1971 Tampa JFK Newark

Starting in the 1960s… Some thought that: “The automation & computer technology that took us to the moon could now revolutionize mass transit and save our cities from the onslaught of the automobile” Westinghouse Skybus 1960’s-Skybus Westinghouse Skybus 1960’s-Skybus Donn Fichter “Individualized Automatic Transit and the City” 1964 APM PRT

~1971: U of Minnesota extended Ficter’s vision & became the center of PRT research focused on delivering auto-like ubiquitous mobility throughout urban areas PRT Personal Raid Transit PRT Personal Raid Transit Since Demand very diffuse (Spatially and Temporally) : – Many stations served by Many small vehicles (rather than a few large vehicles). Many stations – Each off-line with interconnected mainlines To minimize intermediate stops and transfers Many small vehicles – Require more sophisticated control systems, both longitudinal and lateral. Since Demand very diffuse (Spatially and Temporally) : – Many stations served by Many small vehicles (rather than a few large vehicles). Many stations – Each off-line with interconnected mainlines To minimize intermediate stops and transfers Many small vehicles – Require more sophisticated control systems, both longitudinal and lateral. J. Edward Anderson Alain Kornhauser William Garrard

Morgantown 1975 Video1Video1 Video2Video2 Morgantown 1975 Video1Video1 Video2Video2 Early “victory”

– About 40 years ago: Exec. Director of APTA* said to me: “Alain: PRT is the transportation system of the future… And Always will be!!!” Well after 40 years..… …are we finally approaching the promised land??? *American Public Transit Association

Morgantown 1975 Remains a critical mobility system today & planning an expansion Today…

And Today… Masdar & Heathrow are operational Video

– About 40 years ago: Exec. Director of APTA* said to me: “Alain: PRT is the transportation system of the future… And Always will be!!!” Well after 40 years..… …are we finally approaching the promised land??? *American Public Transit Association But implementation progress has been excruciatingly slow …

What he was saying was… Final Region-wide Systems would be really great, but… Any great final system MUST evolve from some initial system and be great at EVERY step of the way, otherwise… It will always be “a system of the future”. The dedicated grade-separated guideway infrastructure requirement of PRT may simply be too onerous and risky for it to ever serve a significant share of the urban mobility market.

Why Are We Going? Its NOT Save our Cities …..NOT Yet!

Maybe it is simply the fact that… We really don’t want to drive…

We aren’t that good… ~92% crashes involve human error 2009 Road Traffic Deaths (World Health Org): US: 42,642; World: 578,543; China: 96,611 And that… DOT HS Pre-Crash Scenario Typology for Crash Avoidance Research More on Google: Levandowski Presentation

Where Are We Now?

Intelligent Transportation Systems Coined by Fed DoT in early ‘90s to include: – ATMS (Adv. Transp. Management Systems) Intelligent Traffic Control Systems and Value Pricing Systems ( EZ Pass mid 80s) – ATIS (Adv. Transp. Information Systems) Turn-by-Turn GPS Route Guidance Systems (‘97 CoPilot Live) – ARTS (Adv. Rural Transp. Systems) – ATS (Automated Transit Systems) Automated People Movers and Personal Rapid Transit (Ficter ‘64, W. Alden ’71, WWU ‘75 ) – AHS (Automated Highway Systems) (1939 World’s Fair, RCA-Sarnoff late 50s*, R.Fenton ‘72 OSU) Autonomous vehicles – * VK Zworykin & L Flory “Electronic Control of Motor Vehicles on Highways” Proc. 37 th Annual Mtg Highway Research Board, 1958

Evolution of AHS Concept GM 1939 World’s FairFuturama GM 1939 World’s FairFuturama Zworykin & RCA-Sarnoff in Princeton, Late 50s* * VK Zworykin & L Flory “Electronic Control of Motor Vehicles on Highways” Proc. 37 th Annual Mtg Highway Research Board, 1958 Zworykin & RCA-Sarnoff in Princeton, Late 50s* * VK Zworykin & L Flory “Electronic Control of Motor Vehicles on Highways” Proc. 37 th Annual Mtg Highway Research Board, 1958 Robert E OSU, Early 70s* * “A Headway Safety Policy for Automated Highway Operations” R.E. Fenton 1979“A Headway Safety Policy for Automated Highway Operations” R.E. Fenton 1979 Robert E OSU, Early 70s* * “A Headway Safety Policy for Automated Highway Operations” R.E. Fenton 1979“A Headway Safety Policy for Automated Highway Operations” R.E. Fenton 1979

AHS Studies by FHWA in late 70’s and mid 90’s Military: Absolutely NOT interested in building Infrastructure Must Operate in “Harshest” Environment ~ 2000: Military: Mandate to automate ground logistics Evolution of AHS Concept ( Automated Highway System )

Link to Presentation Not Easy Old House Beginning of Serious Vehicle Automation

2. Current State of Driverless Vehicles Recent advances in automated systems in exclusive environments: – Milan driverless Metro – PodCar system at Heathrow Extension Plans announced – Driverless Trucks in Australian & Chilean Mines additional-personal-rapid-transit-prt-system-heathrow/# additional-personal-rapid-transit-prt-system-heathrow/#

2. Current State of Driverless Cars Much of the public interest has been promoted by the car. – It is not driverless… Not yet – But substantial advancements have focused on: Development of a self-driving vehicle that can operate in the existing environment. – Motivated by fact: >90% of road traffic accidents involve human error. So… remove the human from the loop. » FAA Sept 2007 Operator’s Manual “ Majority of ramp accidents involve Human error” – Also… People often really do not want to drive. Driven over 500,000 miles in self-driving mode

2. Current State of Driverless Cars, cont. Substantial advances by auto industry: – Automated parking

Audi

Bosch

Mercedes-Benz Brake-assist Mercedes-Benz Brake-assist

S/model-S400HV%23performance#performance

2. Current State of Driverless Cars, cont. Substantial advances by auto industry: – Automated parking – Jam Assist (lane keeping + collision avoidance) Currently available as a $3K Mercedes Dealers Mercedes-Benz Steering-assist Mercedes-Benz Steering-assist

2. Current State of Driverless Cars, cont. Substantial advances by auto industry: – Automated parking – Jam Assist (lane keeping + collision avoidance) Currently available as a $3K Mercedes Dealers – Partnership arrangement btwn Parts suppliers and manufacturers (ex: Continental + BMW) suggests that such options will become common place. – Recent successful completion of a collaborative European research initiatives demonstrating automated driving systems using low-cost sensing componentsEuropean research initiatives

2. Current State of Driverless Cars, cont. Substantial advances by Federal Regulators: – NHTSA Administrator David Strickland: NHTSA extending vehicle crash oversight from Mitigation to Avoidance – Mitigation: Airbags, Seatbelts, CrumpleZones – Avoidance: AntiLockBrakes, ActiveStabilityControl, V2X, CollisionAvoidance, LaneKeeping, DriverMonitoring, AutomatedDriving

3s_cdk_yE&feature=player_embedded 3s_cdk_yE&feature=player_embedded 0ZN2tPihQ&feature=player_embedded 0ZN2tPihQ&feature=player_embedded rtDrivingCars/Videos/VolvoPlatooningC oncept.wmv rtDrivingCars/Videos/VolvoPlatooningC oncept.wmv S396W2BY&feature=player_detailpage S396W2BY&feature=player_detailpage Assorted Videos of Self-Driving Cars _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4 _FrozenLakeVID_onlySteeringWoIndividualWheelBraking.mp4

Initial Demonstration of Autonomous Transit Autonomous Buses at La Rochelle (CyberCars/Cybus/INRIA) Autonomous Buses at La RochelleCybus – Simple virtual non-exclusive roadway Virtual vehicle-based longitudinal (collision avoidance) and lateral (lane keeping) systems

2. Current State of Driverless Cars, cont. Technology forecasts by the European Researchers: – Looks to Full Automation ~ 2030

What is in it for whom? Players – Consumers – Automobile Companies – Infrastructure Providers/Managers (DoT, NJTPA, PANYNJ) – Transit Operators – Insurance Companies – Society/The Economy

What is in it for whom? Consumers – Main Values: Increased Safety, Comfort and Convenience. – AAA : AAA

What is in it for whom? Consumers – Main Values: Increased Safety, Comfort and Convenience. DOT HS Pre-Crash Scenario Typology for Crash Avoidance Research

What is in it for whom? Consumers – Main Values: Increased Safety, Comfort and Convenience. DOT HS Pre-Crash Scenario Typology for Crash Avoidance Research

What is in it for whom? Consumer – Main Values: Increased Safety, Comfort and Convenience. DOT HS Pre-Crash Scenario Typology for Crash Avoidance Research $475 are Pass-through Dollars

$475 are “Pass-through” Dollars $450 Discount for You $25 for Flo or the Gecko Could Discount Finance?: Assume: Emergence of “Price Leading” Insurer What is in it for whom?

Probably only 2/3rds the safety of Google Car $300/yr to Mercedes $20/yr for Flo or the Gecko Could “Pass-through” Finance Mercedes Lane Keeping + Jam Assist to be Available in 2014 Models $475 Pass-through becomes: $320 You get (for free): Prob. of your car killing you reduced factor: 2/3*.81= 0.54 (half) Prob. of your car injuring you reduced factor: 2/3*.65= 0.44 “Save” expected “deductible self-insurance”: $247/yr Comfort Convenience “Anxiety” relief

What is in it for whom? New Jersey Consumers

What is in if for whom? Society Can’t really place value on the injuries and lives that will be saved Priceless! Self-driving Technology has a REAL business model!

How Might We Get There?

Fact: For over 40 years New Jersey has had the World’s Best “Bus Rapid Transit” System! It Consists of: Efficient Port Authority Bus Terminal – 223 Departure Gates – Readily Accommodates 700 Buses/hr 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 PA Bus Terminal Direct Access/Egress to Exclusive Lanes in the Lincoln Tunnel 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 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 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 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 The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System

Pieces are Connected by: “495-viaduct” Counter-flow Exclusive Bus Lane (XBL) (XBL) – 2.5 miles The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System

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

Pieces are Connected by: “495-viaduct” Counter-flow Exclusive Bus Lane (XBL Movie) (XBL Movie) – Daily (6am->10am): 1,800 Buses; 65,000 pax – Peak Hour: 700 Buses; 35,000 pax – Peak Hour: At Capacity! » Physical Driver Limit » Av. 5 sec. headway The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System

– Additional Demand Exists for “BRT 2 NYC” – How to increase capacity of XBL? “Take a 2 nd Lane”? – Political suicide! Widen the Viaduct and Helix? – Very expensive/disruptive How about Driver Assistance? – Extend Bus 2.0 Technology 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 AssistDistronic PlusTraffic Jam Assist even at an incremental $100,000/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 $10B ARC rail tunnel Institutionally manageable: – All Express Buses are leased for 1$/yr from PANY&NJ – Facilities (XBL, LT, PABT) are controlled by PANY&NJ DoT Ideal test facility available: – Ft. Monmouth Improving The World’s Best Bus Rapid Transit System

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

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”FMERAredeveloping Focus is on attracting high-tech industry The “Fort” needs a mobility system. FMEDA is receptive to incorporating an innovative mobility system Next generation “La Rochelle” system would be idealLa Rochelle Because it is being redeveloped as a “new town” it can accommodate itself to be an ideal site for testing more advanced driverless systems.

How about Saving “The State”??? Each year my students lay out a NJ-wide PRT network Objective: to effectively serve essentially all NJ travel demand (all 30x10 6 daily non-walk trips) Place “every” demand point within “5 minute walk” of a station; all stations interconnected; maintain existing NJ Transit Rail and express bus operations ) Typically: – ~10,000 stations (> $25B) – ~10,000 miles of guideway (>$100B) – ~750,000 PRT vehicles (>$75B) – Optimistic cost: ~$200B

Far-term Opportunities for Driverless Transit Biggest Issues – How to get started – How to evolve – Cost & complexity of guideway What if ???? – Use existing streets automatedTaxi (aTaxi) – Curb-side aTaxi stands offering on-demand shared-ride services Ability to get started and evolve to – ~10,000 aTaxi stands – ~750,000 aTaxis – Offering peak hours: stand2stand shared aTaxi service else: stand2stand shared services and door2door premium service

Where might We End Up?

“Pixelated” New Jersey 2 (“1/2 mile square; 0.25mi 2 ) “Pixelated” New Jersey 2 (“1/2 mile square; 0.25mi 2 ) aTaxi Concept – (PRT) Model Personal Rapid Transit Model aTaxis operate between aTaxiStands Autonomous vehicles wait for walk-up customers Located in “center” of each pixel (max ¼ mile walk) Departure is Delayed to facilitate ride-sharing Vehicles are shared to Common Pixel destinations aTaxi Concept – SPT Model Smart Para Transit Transit Model aTaxis circulate to pick up riders in 9-Pixel area (1.5 miles on side) Vehicles are shared to Common 9-Pixel Destinations

“Pixelated” New Jersey 2 (“1/2 mile square; 0.25mi 2 ) “Pixelated” New Jersey 2 (“1/2 mile square; 0.25mi 2 ) aTaxi Concept – SPT Model Smart Para Transit Transit Model aTaxi Concept – (PRT) Model Personal Rapid Transit Model Ref: Ref:

State-wide automatedTaxi (aTaxi) Serves essentially all NJ travel demand (32M trips/day) Shared ridership potential:

State-wide automatedTaxi (aTaxi) Serves essentially all NJ travel demand (32M trips/day) Shared ridership potential:

State-wide automatedTaxi (aTaxi) Fleet size (Instantaneous Repositioning)

State-wide automatedTaxi (aTaxi) Abel to serve essentially all NJ travel demand (32M trips/day) Shared ridership allows – Peak hour; peak direction: Av. vehicle occupancies to can reach ~ 3 p/v and eliminate much of the congestion – Essentially all congestion disappears with appropriate implications on the environment – Required fleet-size under 2M aTaxis (about half) (3.71 registered automobiles in NJ (2009)

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

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. I’ve Tried…

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 Trip Synthesizer Project Overview

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.

Synthesize from publically available data: “every” NJ Traveler on a typical day NJ_Resident file – 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

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

2010 Population Level – 8,791,894 individuals distributed 118,654 Blocks. CountyPopulationCensus BlocksMedian Pop/ BlockAverage Pop/Block ATL 274,549 5, BER 905,116 11, BUR 448,734 7, CAM 513,657 7, CAP 97,265 3, CUM 156,898 2, ESS 783,969 6, GLO 288,288 4, HUD 634,266 3, HUN 128,349 2, MER 366,513 4, MID 809,858 9, MON 630,380 10, MOR 492,276 6, OCE 576,567 10, PAS 501,226 4, SAL 66,083 1, SOM 323,444 3, SUS 149,265 2, UNI 536,499 6, WAR 108,692 2, Total 8,791, ,

Publically available data: Distributions of Demographic Characteristics – Age – Gender – Household size – Name (Last, First) Ages (varying linearly over interval):input:output: [0,49]67.5% [50,64]18.0%17.9% [65,79]12.0%12.1% [80,100]2.5% Gender:Input:Output: female51.3% Household:Size:Probability:cdf:Expectation: couple couple couple couple couple couple + grandparent: single woman single mom single mom single mom single mom single man single dad single dad single dad

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 ATL 274,549 BER 905,116 BUR 448,734 CAM 513,657 CAP 97,265 CUM 156,898 ESS 783,969 GLO 288,288 HUD 634,266 HUN 128,349 MER 366,513 MID 809,858 MON 630,380 MOR 492,276 OCE 576,567 PAS 501,226 SAL 66,083 SOM 323,444 SUS 149,265 UNI 536,499 WAR 108,692 NYC 86,418 PHL 18,586 BUC 99,865 SOU 13,772 NOR 5,046 WES 6,531 ROC 32,737 Total: 9,054,849

Assigning a Daily Activity (Trip) Tour to Each Person

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 All Trips Home County TripsTripMilesAverageTM #Miles ATL 936,585 27,723, BER 3,075,434 40,006, BUC 250,006 9,725, BUR 1,525,713 37,274, CAM 1,746,906 27,523, CAP 333,690 11,026, CUM 532,897 18,766, ESS 2,663,517 29,307, GLO 980,302 23,790, HUD 2,153,677 18,580, HUN 437,598 13,044, MER 1,248,183 22,410, MID 2,753,142 47,579, MON 2,144,477 50,862, MOR 1,677,161 33,746, NOR 12, , NYC 215,915 4,131, OCE 1,964,014 63,174, PAS 1,704,184 22,641, PHL 46,468 1,367, ROC 81,740 2,163, SAL 225,725 8,239, SOM 1,099,927 21,799, SOU 34,493 2,468, SUS 508,674 16,572, UNI 1,824,093 21,860, WAR 371,169 13,012, WES 16, , Total 32,862, ,178,

Overview of Data Production 1.Generate population 2.Assign work places 3.Assign schools 4.Assign tours / activity patterns 5.Assign other trips 6.Assign arrival / departure times ORF 467 Fall Project Overview

Intra-pixel Trips Warren County Population: 108,692

New Jersey Summary Data ItemValue Area (mi 2 )8,061 # of Pixels Generating at Least One O_Trip21,643 Area of Pixels (mi 2 )5,411 % of Open Space32.9% # of Pixels Generating 95% of O_Trips9,519 # of Pixels Generating 50% of O_Trips1,310 # of Intra-Pixel Trips447,102 # of O_Walk Trips1,943,803 # of All O_Trips32,862,668 Avg. All O_TripLength (miles)19.6 # of O_aTaxi Trips30,471,763 Avg. O_aTaxiTripLength (miles)20.7 Median O_aTaxiTripLength (miles) % O_aTaxiTripLength (miles)38.0

NJ Transit Train Station “Consumer-shed” NJ Transit Train Station “Consumer-shed”

“Manhattan Customer-shed” Regions for NJ Transit Train Stations Yellow Lines connect 0.25 mi 2 areas to nearest NJT Train Station where Distance is a “Manhattan Metric” = |  x|+  y| Yellow Lines connect 0.25 mi 2 areas to nearest NJT Train Station where Distance is a “Manhattan Metric” = |  x|+  y| Trenton Princeton Hamilton New Brunswick Princeton Jct. Metuchen Edison Metro Park

“Manhattan Customer-shed” Regions for NJ Transit Train Stations Yellow Lines connect 0.25 mi 2 areas to nearest NJT Train Station where Distance is a “Manhattan Metric” = |  x|+  y| Yellow Lines connect 0.25 mi 2 areas to nearest NJT Train Station where Distance is a “Manhattan Metric” = |  x|+  y| Princeton Hamilton New Brunswick Princeton Jct. Edison

Discussion!

Thank You