CASE STUDY ON AUTONOMOUS VECHILES

HEALTHCARE WARFARE

HISTORY:
Like most daily use machines, vehicles were
once under the domain of mechanical engineering. However,
the extraordinary advancements in IoT and embedded systems
have made most of them intelligent innovative devices that
work with the help of the internet. These technological
advancements have transformed traditional automobiles into
fully functional, intelligent machines from old-fashioned travel
sources, which also provide ease while traveling. The
advancements in automation and opportunities offered by
cutting-edge technology serve as the base for intelligent
vehicles. These intelligent vehicles are in high demand as we
move forward with a focus on safety and making daily life more
convenient. These vehicles support features like sensing the
environment, connecting to the internet, obeying traffic
guidelines, navigating by themselves, making quick decisions,
ensuring pedestrian and passenger safety, parking, etc. Such
machines are called autonomous vehicles. They are currently
regarded as the topmost level in developing intelligent vehicles.
The fundamental motivation behind the research and
development of autonomous vehicles are: the need for more
driving safety, an increasing population that also leads to an
increase in vehicles on the road, expanding infrastructure, the
comfort of depending on machines for tasks like driving, and
the demand for
 \
optimization of resources and time management. With the
population growing, a very stressful impact has been created
on our roads, infrastructure, open spaces, fuel stations, and
resources.

Daigram:

Briefy:
Their approach also includes a cubic spline interpolation technique that generates
a path based on GPS data. Compared to the traditional method of the cubic polynomial fitting
algorithm, the curve fit path by the cubic spline interpolation technique is much smoother and more
satisfied with the vehicle motion pattern. They use LabVIEW to simulate their path planning and lane
detection models. They use images of curved and straight lanes where the proposed path based on
their method is highlighted in green. They compare the pure pursuit trajectory planning method and
frenet optimized trajectory planning method on the simulator to test results. They also test out their
approach on a small model. In another paper entitled ‘‘Navigation Engine Design for Automated
Driving Using INS/GNSS/3D LiDAR-SLAM and Integrity Assessment,’’ a multisensor fusion system is
proposed [24]. This multisensor fusion system, along with an INS, a GNSS, and a LiDAR system,
would be used to implement a 3D SLAM. This multisensor fusion system is proposed as an
improvement over the conventional INS GNSS and odometer system as it compensates for
drawbacks in the previous system. It helps to remove the INS-drift by using a highly integrated INS-
aiding LiDAR-SLAM so that the performance. It also increases robustness by adjusting to different
environments because it uses the INS’s initial values. The proposed FDE also contributes to the
SLAM by eliminating failure solutions like algorithm divergence and any local solutions. High dynamic
movement is dealt with using the SLAM model. A central fusion filter benefits from integrity
assessments to avoid failure measurements in the updating process based on INS-aiding SLAM,
consequently increasing reliability and accuracy. As a result of this multisensor design, a variety of
situations can be dealt with, including long-term GNSS outages, deep urban areas, and highways.
The results of this proposed system have an accuracy of under 1 m in challenging scenarios. The
paper proposes such a design because, according to the authors, an automated driving system will
soon require a multisensor fusion system to meet the high accuracy requirements. Figure
5 demonstrates overtaking a moving vehicle using an optimal path.

Principles:
Principle #1:Photo: Janne Hellsten/CC BY
(Flickr)
Self-driving cars could reduce vehicle-related fatalities—machines
may make fewer errors than humans—but it’s not a guaranteed
outcome. Policy must improve the safety of all road users, whether
they are driving, walking, or biking.
Principle #2: Cleaner vehicles

S
Photo: Kārlis Dambrāns/CC BY (Flickr)
By making transportation more convenient, self-driving vehicles
could increase the number of miles that people travel, creating more
vehicle pollution. To avoid this outcome, policy must ensure that
self-driving technology is paired with clean, low-carbon vehicles,
such as plug-in electrics and fuel efficient gasoline-hybrids. Policy
must also incentivize ride hailing services like Uber or Lyft to
maximize the number of passengers for each trip and minimize
trips with no passengers.
Principle #3: Integrated transit

Photo: Robert Couse-Baker/CC BY (Flickr)

Self-driving vehicles will likely make driving easier for many—but
they shouldn’t replace mass transit options like buses or subways.
Instead, self-driving cars should connect transit hubs, provide
public transit services to communities not currently served, and
generally be used to improve public transportation.
Principle #4: Improved access

Photo: Oran Viriyincy/CC BY-SA (Flickr)

In its current form, the US transportation system fails to serve all
communities equally, with disadvantages arising based on income,
age, race, disability, and geography. Policy should ensure that the
widespread adoption of self-driving cars doesn’t perpetuate or
worsen existing inequalities but instead gives all people access to
clean, affordable transportation options.
Principle #5: Just transition

Photo: Wikimedia
Self-driving technology will create jobs for some and reduce
employment opportunities for others, especially in the trucking and
taxi industries. Policy should support career pathways and
transitions for affected individuals, and ensure that new jobs are
made available to underrepresented populations.
Principle #6: Secure sharing

Photo: IBM Systems Lab Services/CC BY (Flickr)

Whether self-driving vehicles improve public health, decrease traffic
congestion, and reduce climate change will depend on informed,
science-based policy. This will require a robust research agenda and
accessible data on the performance and operation of self-driving
vehicles. Policy must facilitate open data-sharing, while ensuring
that appropriate privacy and cybersecurity protections are in place.
Principle #7: Livable cities
 Photo: Jason Thien/CC BY (Flickr)
Autonomous vehicles could exacerbate sprawl, congestion, and
pollution— or they could lead to more shared rides and fewer cars,
freeing up public space. Policy should prioritize the needs of the
whole community, not just individual vehicles.
Read more about our principles by downloading the policy brief >
The Union of Concerned Scientists has worked on transportation-
related policy issues for decades, and advocates for equitable, low-
pollution vehicles, fuels, and infrastructure. Learn more about our
work here.
Advantage:
 Increased road safety
 Reduce driver workload
 Lower fuel consumption
 Fewer traffic jams

Disadvantage:

 Data protection issues. The first problem that arises,

is in that, being connected all the time with the whole environment, it
 can become a cyber problem of data protection. Even the correct
handling of road networks can be compromised.
 High cost of implementation. Autonomous vehicle infrastructure
revolves around 5G network coverage, which is still expensive, so it
may take governments considerable time to invest in sufficient
infrastructure for optimal performance of autonomous vehicles.
 High cost of vehicles. Although significant progress has been made
in reducing the cost of producing their implements, these cuts are not
low enough to make them a financially viable alternative for the
average family. It will be some years before they become an everyday
reality within the reach of the middle class.

2. CASE STUDY ONTOLOGY WHERE

ETHICS IS STAKE

ontology

Ontology, the philosophical study of being in general, or of what

applies neutrally to everything that is real. It was called “first philosophy”
by Aristotle in Book IV of his Metaphysics. The
Latin term ontologia (“science of being”) was felicitously invented by the
German philosopher Jacob Lorhard (Lorhardus) and first appeared in his
work Ogdoas Scholastica (1st ed.) in 1606. It entered general circulation
after being popularized by the German rationalist philosopher Christian
Wolff in his Latin writings, especially Philosophia Prima sive
Ontologia (1730; “First Philosophy or Ontology”).
History and scope : olff contrasted ontology, or
general metaphysics, which applied to all things,
with special metaphysical theories such as those of
the soul, of bodies, or of God. Wolff claimed that
ontology was an a priori discipline that could reveal
the essences of things, a view strongly criticized
later in the 18th century by David
Hume and Immanuel Kant. In the early 20th
century the term was adopted by the German
founder of phenomenology, Edmund Husserl, who
called Wolff’s general metaphysics “formal
ontology” and contrasted it with special
“regional ontologies,” such as the ontologies of
nature, mathematics, mind, culture, and religion.
After renewed criticism and eclipse under the
antimetaphysical movement known as logical
positivism, ontology was revived in the mid-20th
century by the American philosopher W.V.O.
Quine. By the end of the century, largely as the
result of Quine’s work, it had regained its status as
a central discipline of philosophy.
DAIGRAM: