According to a study released Tuesday by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), many operators of semi-automatic motor vehicles drive as if their autos are fully automatic, despite the accident risks of doing so.

The study, based on a survey of 600 users of Cadillac’s Super Cruise system, Nissan/Infiniti’s ProPilot system and Tesla’s Autopilot system, found that drivers were able to engage in non-driving activities, such as eating or texting, while using Driver Assistance. were more likely. system

On top of that, more than half of Super Cruise drivers (52%), two in five Autopilot drivers (42%), and 12% of ProPilot drivers told surveyors they were comfortable treating their vehicles as full self-driving autos. Were.

“The big picture message here is that early adopters of these systems still have a poor understanding of the technology’s limitations,” IIHS President David Harkey said in a statement.

“It’s possible that systems design and marketing are compounding these misconceptions,” he said.

understanding the gap

IIHS is not alone in finding gaps in consumer understanding of the capabilities of driver-assistance technology. Studies by JD Power, a consumer research, data and analytics firm based in Troy, Mich., have yielded similar results.

“We found that 56% of consumers classify the driver-assisted technology available today as fully automated self-driving,” said Lisa Burr, JDP’s senior manager of auto benchmarking and mobility development.

“It’s worrying because we know today those systems are there to assist the driver,” she told TechNewsWorld. “The driver still has overall responsibility for the vehicle.”

IIHS explained that current partial automation systems assist drivers through adaptive cruise control — which can control speed to maintain a safe distance behind a vehicle — and lane centering, which allows a vehicle to navigate its travel lane. Keeps it focused.

It noted that existing systems are not designed to make it safe for human drivers to replace or perform other tasks that may divert their attention from the road. Track tests and real-world accidents have provided ample evidence that systems struggle to recognize and respond to normal driving conditions and road features.

marketing promotion

One factor contributing to consumer misconceptions about the capabilities of computer-assisted driving systems may be marketing.

“Tesla, the way they’ve marketed autopilot over the years and Elon Musk talked about autopilot, has created the impression that these types of systems are far more capable than they really are,” head of E. Analyst Sam Abulesmid said. –Mobility at Guidehouse Insights, a market intelligence company in Detroit.

“Since Musk has been projected as a genius by a lot of people in the media, people are inclined to believe him, even if everything he says is bullshit,” he told TechNewsWorld.

Mike Ramsey, Gartner’s vice president and analyst for automotive and smart mobility, agreed that marketing has played a role in consumer expectations about driver assistance systems. “Tesla names their system Autopilot, which means the vehicle will fly by itself,” he told TechNewsWorld.

“It is implied that the vehicle is driving itself,” he said. “It’s not really driving itself. It’s essentially cruise control with added functionality.”

some supervision required

The way these systems are designed, they do not place firm limits on driver behavior, so drivers do not know what they can and cannot do, observed IIHS research scientist and report author Alexandra Muller.

“It adds to the confusion,” she told TechNewsWorld. “These systems seem highly capable – and they are – but their capabilities are not a replacement for a driver. This message seems to have been lost.”

“These systems are not self-driving,” she said. “They often encounter situations that require driver intervention.”

Müller maintained the idea that drivers always have to be ready to intervene and be prepared to monitor these systems is not something humans are very good at doing. “We’re not very good at monitoring and maintaining a vigil to monitor what these technologies are doing constantly,” she said.

“The more capable these systems are, the more difficult it is to monitor them because the driver is no longer physically involved in the operation of the vehicle,” she continued.

“It’s natural that people would want to do other things to stay alert, but doing anything other than driving means the driver is no longer involved in driving the vehicle.”

distracted driver

If there’s one thing humans aren’t good at, it’s overseeing automation, Abuelsamid argued. “Whenever something is working most of the time, man becomes complacent,” he said.

“It’s hard to stay mentally engaged in a job you’re not physically engaged in,” he said. “By allowing the driver to be hands-free, you’re reducing some of the traditional driver workload, but you’re creating new cognitive workloads for the brain.”

“No one has figured out how to address it,” he said. “Maybe nothing short of full automation is a good idea.”

Driver-assistive systems can be an invitation to distracted driving. “If you tell consumers they can take their hand off the steering wheel and take their foot off the pedals and the vehicle will self-powered, you’re inviting them to ignore,” Ramsey said.

On the other hand, he pointed out that even without these systems, distracted drivers are everywhere. “People are already driving distracted by their phones, so these technologies have become essential to prevent accidents,” he said. “Systems are already accommodating to existing distractions.”

need for better communication

Burr said the auto industry needs a better way to communicate with consumers about the capabilities of driver-assistance systems. “We cannot continue to rely on the dealer’s or owner’s manual,” she said.

“No part of the automotive industry can do this alone,” he continued. “Automakers play an important role in this, but as a whole, consumers are not distinguishing between these levels of automation.”

“It is important for the industry as a whole to provide many learning opportunities to close this gap,” he said.

Abuelsamid advocates adding an active driver monitoring system to ensure drivers are attentive to road conditions while the driver-assistance system is activated.

“Knowing what the limits of a system are and putting systems in place to reduce the potential for customer abuse is really important,” he warned.

Using no-code technology instead of dedicated code programmers could become the future of software development in the retail marketing and related software-manufacturing industries. But it is not a one-size-fits-all solution for all use cases.

No-code, a method of creating software applications that requires little to no programming skills, lets workers within an occupation build an application without formal programming knowledge or training in a particular programming language.

In essence, the no-code platform enables users to create software applications such as online forms or even fully functional websites, or to add functionality to an existing site or app.

It’s important to clarify that many different applications of no-code platforms exist, according to Christian Brink Fredriksson, CEO of Leapworks, a global provider of automation software.

No-code platforms are fairly new. Therefore companies planning to adopt a no-code approach should thoroughly examine and test the no-code tools on the market to ensure that the selected products live up to their claims.

“There are a lot of platforms today that claim to be, but there are actually no codes, or they lack the power needed to do what they say they would do without additional coding,” he told TechNewsWorld.

Leapworks has developed a test automation product that is accessible and easy to maintain. Its secret sauce is providing faster results at a lower cost, requiring fewer specialist resources than traditional test automation approaches.

“At Leapworks, we have democratized automation with our fully visual, no-code test automation platform that enables testers and everyday business users to create, maintain and scale automated software tests in any kind of technology. Makes it easier to do,” Frederickson said. This enables enterprises to rapidly adopt and scale automation.

Security remains top concern

An explicit inquiry about no-code platforms should consider how no-code technology addresses the security problems that affect both proprietary and open-source programming.

If designed well, no-code platforms can be safe and secure, Fredrickson said. When coding manually from scratch, it is easy to introduce bugs and vulnerabilities that hackers can exploit.

“Since no-code platforms are designed to automate the creation of apps or to perform functions in an automated manner, they are inherently more consistent,” he explained.

Of course, the no-code platform itself has to be secure. Before choosing a solution, organizations should conduct a thorough security audit and select a solution that is ISO-27001 and SOC-2 compliant, he recommended.

Coding Pros and Non-Pros alike

No-code platforms are primarily meant only for programmers or IT coders to use in-house instead of outsourced software developers. Both use cases come into play successfully.

No-code platforms are certainly useful for IT coders and programmers, but the primary value of no-code test platforms is to expand the ability to build and test applications for people who are not trained as software developers. , offered Fredriksen.

For example, Leapworks makes it easy for testers and everyday business users to set up and maintain large-scale test automation. This empowers quality assurance teams to experience shorter test cycles and an immediate return on investment.

Benefits for DevOps

Speeding up testing is a huge advantage, noted Fredriksen, because hand-coding poses a huge bottleneck, even for an experienced DevOps team. While testers are extremely skilled at designing tests and understanding the inherent complexity of software, they are not traditionally trained to code.

He set a good example.

Leapworks co-founder and chief product officer Klaus Topholt worked at an investment bank before joining Fredriksen to found Leapworks in 2015. The test was important as the bank relied on rapid trading at high volumes. If the quality of the software was poor, it could literally lead to the bankruptcy of the institution.

“Klaus decided to create a simplified programming language for creating tests so that testers could install them, speeding up the process. But he quickly found that testing and programming are completely different domains, and, frankly, It’s not fair to force testers, who are already highly skilled, to learn extremely complex programming skills,” Fredrickson explained.

During discussions with the testing team, Klaus and his colleagues began using a whiteboard to create a flowchart. Everyone immediately understood what this meant.

lesson learned

Flow charts were such a simple, clear way to express something complex. So, it was clear that this was the way forward to enable model testers to create their own sophisticated tests without coding.

“The lesson was, if you give testers something as intuitive as a flow chart to create automated tests, you’ll save a lot of time and remove bottlenecks, because you’re not relying on the developers’ time and expertise. are,” Frederickson said.

Klaus left the investment bank to found Leapworks and became a no-code platform. They built a visual language that enables business users to automate testing using a flowchart model.

Leapwork co-founders Klaus Topholt and Christian Brink Friedrichsen

Leapworks CPO and Co-Founder Klaus Topholt (L) | Christian Brink Fredriksson, CEO and co-founder of Leapworks (Image Credit: Leapworks)

“It democratizes automation because it is so easy for non-coders to use and maintain, which in turn empowers businesses to scale up their automation efforts and accelerate the development process,” Fredrickson said.

No-code Q&A

Headquartered in Copenhagen, Denmark, last year Leapworks raised $62 million in the largest Series B funding round ever in Danish history. The round was led by KKR and Salesforce Ventures.

Leapworks is used by Global 2000 companies – including NASA, Mercedes-Benz and PayPal – for robotic process automation, test automation, and application monitoring.

We asked Fredriksen to reveal more details about the inner workings of the no-code solution.

TechNewsWorld: How can companies add automation to their testing processes?

Christian Brink Fredrickson: Release is a way to include automated tests as an integral part of moving from one stage of the process to another.

For example, when a developer tests code in a development server, a series of automated tests must be triggered as part of the same process that generates the build.

These regression tests can identify large bugs early, so the developer can fix them quickly, while the code is still fresh in the developer’s mind.

Then, as the code progresses to testing and, eventually, production, again, a series of automated tests must be launched: extensive regression testing, verification of its visual appearance, performance, and so on.

It is important that business users – such as a business analyst or a tester in a QA department – have the ability to implement this automation. That’s where no-code is so important.

How does no-code differ from low-code solutions?

Fredriksen: No-code doesn’t really involve any code. If you want non-developers to use the platform, you have to no-code it. Less code may speed up development, but you’ll still need someone with developer skills to use it.

Which is more beneficial for Enterprise and DevOps, no-code or low-code?

Fredriksen: No-code empowers enterprises and DevOps teams to implement automation at scale, ultimately enhancing software delivery performance. Low-code solutions still require you to know how to code to maintain the software.

No-code allows anyone to automate a workflow. Using no-code, developers and technically skilled workers can focus on high-value tasks, and QA professionals such as testers can maintain testing automatically and easily.

Surveys have shown that testing is the one that slows down the development process the most. If you want to make a serious impact on DevOps, you really should consider using a no-code platform.

Is no-code a threat to software and website developers?

Fredriksen: I would argue the exact opposite. No-code has the potential to open up new opportunities for developers. More software is being created and optimized than ever before, and yet we are in the midst of a serious developer shortage, with 64% of companies experiencing a software engineer shortage.

Instead of relying on code-based approaches and forcing businesses to search for talent externally, no-code allows companies to use their existing resources to build and test software. Technological resources are then free to focus on more complete, higher-value tasks, such as accelerating innovation and digital transformation.

Where do you see no-code technology going?

Fredriksen: AI is a powerful technology, but its short-term effects are a bit high. We believe that the challenge to limit the capabilities of artificial intelligence today is human-to-AI communication.

It should be possible to tell the computer what you want it to do, without any technical details on how to do it. Essentially, we need to be able to give requirements to the AI ​​for a task, and then the AI ​​can handle the rest.

We at Leapwork have made great strides on this problem. There is still much more work to be done.