Thomas Jonsson 

Okay, so we are ready to kick off. Very Welcome to this session and thank you for spending time on the busy first morning of CES with us. This session is hosted by Veoneer. We are pure play in (inaudible) and active safety founded in 2018. We went live on the stock market on July 2, 2018. We're a spinoff from Waterloo who's been the world leader in automotive safety, particularly passive safety for many decades. We're about a year and a half old as a company but we have decades of experience in automotive safety. We're very happy to host this session we've called it collaborative driving and the future of trust in mobility. Creating trust and mobility is no surprise also the purpose and division of view near we think that trust is fundamental in in order to make the future of driving happen. Collaborative driving is a phrase is a phrase we have used more and more over the last one to two years because we think that the future will be one where the driver will be involved and engaged in the driving for many, many years to come. We will do this as a panel. The panel will be moderated by our Vice President of Research Ola Bostrom, who's been working with the automotive since 1995. And have decades of experience in this field. He will introduce the rest of our distinguished panel. So I will get out of the way we but we will start with some introductory remarks. Some minutes from our chairman, President and CEO of Veoneer, Jan Carlson. Jan was previously with (inaudible) since 1999, and the company CEO since 2017. So again, many decades of experience in this field, he will share his views on the topic at hand before we kick off the panel. So with that, I would like to welcome Jan to the stage. very welcome, Jan please.

 
Jan Carlson 

Thank you, Thomas. I would first like to thank our panelists for taking time in their busy schedules to attend this event. Your own well, very well respected professionals in your areas of expertise and following my brief introductory remarks. I look forward to an interesting discussion. I'm certain that it will give all of us important new insights. I would also like to welcome all of you in the audience. Thank you for spending time with us here today to discuss the future of driving. This is the fifth time we participate to CES first, as (inaudible) and for the last two editions as Veoneer a lot has changed during the five years. To not release the view of automation, of course, and I'll bring it back back to that in a moment. However, one thing has not changed. It is the opportunity for dialogue, sharing of knowledge and learnings that make CES most valuable. And the following panel is clearly one such opportunity. In 2016, and 2017 autonomous driving was what Gartner calls the peak of inflated expectations, or peak hype. We could all feel it. full automation was supposed to be just around the corner and there was a perceived race to free the driver from steering wheel and the responsibility of driving. But as always, after a peak there is only one way to go. And in 2018 and 2019, autonomous driving entered again using the Gartner the trough of disillusionment and OEM suppliers alike for hard to reposition their previous statements on autonomy while retaining their credibility. The good news is that disillusionment is not defined the stage of Gartner's hype cycle and technology that is fundamentals valuable, driven by real needs and generally positive for society, such as automation of vehicles will eventually find its place in the market of consumer electronics. I firmly believe that as we end one decade and enter a new one, we are about to enter the phases of enlightenment and productivity again using the Gartner model when it comes to vehicle automation. And what will those faces look like? for passenger vehicles developed and produced for general use on public roads? There is today and understanding and acceptance that the development of automation will be an evolution rather than a revolution. This is good news for everybody. active safety Adas level two plus level three or whatever you like to call it is fundamentally safety technology. And as such, we must allow it to develop and mature at a pace that the whole ecosystem including OEMs, suppliers, researchers, regular regulators, rating institutes and ensures new innovative startups and others can handle. We in fact, think it's wrong, at least for now to focus on fully automated driving. When we talk about general use and public roads. We strongly believe that the drive will be in the loop for many years to come. Our own studies shows that still in 2030, more than 90% of cars produced will be level zero to level three. We call this collaborative driving, where the interaction and trust between the car and the driver is critical. To be clear, it does not mean that there is No room for research development and companies focus on fully automated driving. It is just so that the development will first be seen in special applications in controlled environments and not in the mass market for cars. That is the focus of the current discussion. Be at vo near also conduct research in this field as we understand that one day further out in time full automation will play an increasingly important role.

 
Jan Carlson 

I briefly mentioned the word trust let me spend some time in further exploring why we think the concept of trust is so fundamental. In 2018, who noted road injuries as the eighth leading cause of death worldwide, traffic collisions resulted in nearly 1.4 million fatalities, over half of which were pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists, and now 15 million people were injured. The fatalities were up 12% from one point 25 million in 2013. As I mentioned previously active safety increased automation and collaborative driving or at the core safety technologies. And as such, the main reason for their development and introduction and new vehicles should break the trend of increasing fatalities. If they don't, they have failed in the Bay in their basic purpose. We firmly believe that they will, and we m be the key to breaking the sad trend of increasing traffic fatalities. Early statistics from the first generally introduced active safety feature autonomous emergency braking confirm this belief. There are of course a number of other features already out in the market such as blind spot detection and most recently different levels of hands of We'll functionality which will also demonstrate here at CES. But the next real step towards truly collaborative driving is the broad introduction of systems where multiple sensors and increased computing power is required in order to provide an improved and safer driving experience. To build such a system with the required levels of quality functionality, user experience, challenge for the years to come.

 
Jan Carlson 

There are many things that need to happen for this development and the benefits that comes with it to happen. Let me focus on five key topics functionality where it's blind spot detection, adaptive cruise control or letting go of the steering wheel for portion of the daily commute. The driver has to know for a fact that the feature works hundred percent out of hundred occasions. We expect this from our brake pedal, and we have to be able to expect this from our active safety solution. user interaction. Today he hampering factor for the benefits of active safety to materialize is the fact that users find systems intrusive or hard to understand and simply turn them off. This must be overcome through better development of user interface and user interaction solution that guide to how the driver and the car should collaborate. Broad the deployment only when is sufficient amount of vehicles have the systems installed will the full benefit be there, especially in the next step of the development when cloud connectivity and the broadcasting of data to vehicles becomes an integrated part of system scalable system architecture this points leads back to the previous one. Only a scalable system based on the same standards interfaces and architectures across vehicles, models and levels of functionality will be able to deliver the economics of scale required to achieve mass deployment and tackle the issue of rising r&d costs. In the automotive industry, ratings and regulations, I think this part is moving in the right direction. rating as regulations should be introduced as a realistic pace, helping the drive to drive the development and should also be the progressive enough to allow new innovation to happen without taking unnecessary risks. The progression of increasingly complex traffic scenarios for full ratings the European cab systems is a good example of what I mean if we as an industry are able to successfully tackle these challenges, we will achieve significantly improved safety as well as new levels of convenience situations for example or daily commute. Let us also not forget the increasing role of connectivity just as connectivity has initially not been recognized as or maybe the key ingredients in many previous technology developments, we see that with the increased speed, capacity and reduced latency offered by 5g networks, real time or near real time data streams to and from vehicles and the aggregation of utilization of data in the cloud will be an integral part to the development in the outline about for me personally, this is actually the first public speech In a new decade, so before I leave the floor to the panel, allow me to a brief reflection of the decade that past and also the one that we just entered. I see the last decade as a decade of preparation. When it comes to active safety and automation of vehicles, starting from 2010, the technology pieces have come to place, the consumer understanding has increased dramatically, ratings and regulations have been put in place and new alliances and structure have appeared to our industry, in a way never seen before. This is taking us into a new decade. we as an industry are now prepared, and I see the decade that just started as a decade of action. It is now when the pieces of the puzzles are in place that we can really lay it out and build the new vehicles with a significantly Different driving experience, eventually changing the whole traffic system and infrastructure. With it comes the current challenge of increasing complexity, and completely new requirements on cooperation and standardization.

 
Jan Carlson 

I'm convinced that when we all work together with a focus on safety, convenience and trust as a basis, the decade ahead will reshape our industry and bring a much better driving experience to hundreds of millions of drivers and occupants across the globe. And at the end, save more lives. Thank you very much. And I would that like to leave the word to Ola for moderating the panel. Thank you very much for listening. Thank you.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Don't. Can you hear me? So, let me first introduce this great panel as you can see here. So I will introduce you one by one and I will also ask you to represent different domain of stakeholders here. So if I start with Michiel from rotting in here, you will then represent the racing community around the world. So, Michiel is the Secretary General of the European new car assessment program the the ancap. He's the person behind numerous safety rating updates over the years To say the least, notably the introduction of crash avoidance technology testing. I continue with Gabi Zijderveld, Gabi, you will represent the AI technology startup community. And Gabi is the chief marketing officer and head of product strategy with Affectiva the company and she has defined and build a new technology category called emotional AI. Bryan Reimer you will represent the academia today. So, Bryan is a research scientist at MIT. He's research seeks to develop theoretical and applied insight into driver behavior.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Continue with Kelly Funkhouser. Kelly will now represent the consumer the end consumer. Kelly's head of connected and automated vehicle at Consumer Reports. She has specialized in cognitive psychology and our testing yearly hundreds of miles in 50 test cars 50 AliExpress or something like that. Yeah, so she has a lot of insight into into driving this course. So, Matthew Avery, you will now represent the ensure that your insurance word Matthew is the Director of Research at Thatcham UK and his current role in both lilius only ensures OEMs Vegas lectures and global ancap Okay, let's begin. So I will start with asking each of you to have a three minutes presentation covering three things who you represent? What is the relative? What is the relevance of what Jan talked about in terms of collaborative driving and, and sort of getting that into the cars? What is the relevance for you representing these, these two? And last, what are your concerns? So, if I start with you, Michiel,

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

Thank you all and good morning, everyone. I think the NCAP  was already introduced in the opening speech here what encap stands for his New Car Assessment Program. The initial NCAP was actually started here in the US 40 years ago as a organization to test and raid vehicles, to actually increase competitiveness between on safety, of course, looking at that time specifically at pastor safety. In the last couple of years, a lot of NCAPs have emerged worldwide. So I'm representing here, NCAPs around the world that all due to more or less the same thing, which is reading cars, providing consumer information, promoting technology to come into the market, and to increase the acceptance of technology. Over the last decade, I would say a number of NCAPs really have made the shift to aid us to include (inaudible) as an important component to safer vehicles. Your NCAP is one of the leaders in that respect. We have been promoting data's already since 2009. And really accelerated in the last couple of years with the introduction of many new technologies. We have been quite successful in the European market. If I look at the last year for instance, we tested roughly 60 cars a model cars in Europe, of those 60 there are 60 that has had eight hours on it. 68 has speed associate 60 cars that had lane assist. There are approximately 57 cars that had AB and pedestrian detection and psychosis detection. So it's really coming on quite fast now. And with that, of course, there is the opportunity also to think about collaborative driving. And that's what we also see in Europe happening. There are pretty much 2025 cars already on the market today that offer so called level two driving assistance, collaborative driving to consumers using the same sense of set basically that is already present to the rating requirements. The reason why endcaps are interested in this is because we see an opportunity also to do the same thing that we have done with safety so effectively as to bring this technology forward in the marketplace to work with the vehicle industry in absence of meaningful regulation, which is currently the state of the art to really work with the vehicle manufacturers and with the suppliers to say, Okay, how can we best test the systems? What is the perfect system? What does it look like? How is the balance between the driver engagement on one hand, and the assistants competence and the other end. So this balance, of course, is very, very delicate and very, very important. And we think we are only at the beginning of understanding the reasons behind it and what is important.

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

Last thing I want to say is that we feel that paper is really going to be the key technology going forward for us. So, we are working with suppliers with vehicle manufacturers to understand how a driver monitoring technology can really improve the driver engagement, how it can help avoid some of the questions that potentially may occur if the balance is incorrect between the vehicle and the driver. So that's really the reason why we think uncaps want to contribute to this this discussion. And we already started to do so we are planning another long Bunch of results this year to follow up the discussion with the vehicle manufacturers. Thank you.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Thank you Michiel. So Gabi.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

So I represent the startup voice, if you will, in this discussion today, at affectiva, where a company that spun out of mit 10 years ago, we build a AI that uses computer vision, machine learning, voice analytics, actually, as well. To understand what's going on with people we as you alluded to, Ola started the field of emotion AI understanding people's nuanced and complex reactions and emotions to a given context. But we've since expanded that, especially for automotive tools. So really understand the drivers state, the cabin state and the state of the other occupants in the vehicle. So it's indeed their reactions, their emotions, but also things such as drowsiness and distraction, which is critically important if we want to improve road safety. Also, some basics of what's happening in the vehicle? Where are people sitting? What objects? Are they using our objects left behind? Is there a child seat in the vehicle? Is there a child potentially left behind? So usually complex problems that using AI, technology startup can address. I think the other point that's relevant for this discussion and concepts of collaborative driving is that the startup ecosystem can bring speed, agility, and innovation to the industry. No need to say that we all know that in certain areas, the automotive industry is very slow. It has to be, especially when we're dealing with safety systems. But in my point of view that's not really sustainable in the long term. And there's more need for innovation at speed, and agility and iteration and improvements at speed. So I think that's what the startup system can bring to the table, if you will. What concerns me though, is especially when you start introducing these ideas, technologies such as AI is incredibly complex, and things that our company looking to achieve and things we have already built, adjust the surface of what needs to be done. It was a tremendous amount of innovation, it still needs to take place. Do we even have the skill set and the expertise in the automotive industry today to really accomplish that? Some companies, such as vieni are quite advanced in that area, lots of machine learning expertise, data science expertise, but it's not quite pervasive in the industry. So skill development is something that concerns me. But maybe more importantly, what concerns me is how do you educate the consumer on all of this? I'm a consumer as well. I'll give you one example. And then I'll wrap a co worker of mine bought a luxury SUV brand not to be mentioned, but one of the very respected brands on the road today. She goes into the dealership she notices because we have an eye for that there was an optical sensor camera in the car. She asked the salesperson What is this camera for? No clue couldn't tell her what it was, what it was doing what it was for? What happens if you put a sticky over that camera? If there's something you're going to break? Is it collecting my data? What are you doing with that data? Is that process locally in real time? Are you storing that and sending that to the cloud? Maybe I don't want you to have my data. I certainly don't want you to send my data to someone else. So how do we in the ecosystem and environment we have today? How do we educate consumers on what these technologies are and how they should collaborate with them?

 
Ola Bostrom 

Thank you. So Brian

 
Bryan Reimer 

I somehow represent the academic community which is quite large, globally, in in in a very complex space of innovation. How do we balance the theoretical aspects of traditional academic sciences? With the applied realities of today we sit here at the Consumer Electronics Show. We're downstairs in the show floor the gee whiz of tomorrow is representative in epic proportion. Yet, how do we get that gee whiz from the showroom floor into our lives. I've been studying driver behavior for over 20 years and looking at the complexity of information coming into the car whether that is from infotainment, automation, active safety in us as consumers, drivers, not equipped with the capabilities necessary to harness this information, the flow of information coming towards us, are we leveraging the features and the capabilities of let alone our smartphones, as opposed to safety features and the convenience technologies that can save our lives as we move from point A to B. So as we look forward from a research perspective, how do we begin in this world of very complex problems, finding new balance between innovation to build new in the fundamental, even more difficult innovations that are required to connect the technology to our lives to have impact? So I've heard some nice statistics recently, especially around the automated driving realm, in really applied to a lot of other areas. 90% of the problem is solved intensity percent of the time, the last 10% the difficult questions, I see a couple smiles out there. So we've been talking over the last decade about how automation is going to replace drivers. I for one have been on the it's an evolution versus a revolution on crossin talked about for some time to be realistic. We're going to Driving for decades to come after the best part of the century. That's not to say there's not going to be a lot more robots running around CES, a decade from now, there's going to be, but automation is not going to have an impact on how we live and move until we can think about how to productize that in a convenient and cost effective way. In the near term and the undertreated health crisis that is on our roads today. We can take the foundations of what have been innovative over the last 10 years, and begin to think about how do we have impact? So when I look to the academic community and the research community at large globally, I say, how do we balance new with impact? taking something off of the shelf and figuring out how do we embed that in a convenient, cost effective way to improve mobility, safety for all. So what worries me the most out there today is that we continue to look for the next gee whiz. What's the brightest light downstairs? What's the best 4k TV or 8k camera out there? We haven't even figured out how to take the one megapixel system and use it most effectively. So how do we encourage technology to become so simple? Someone said to me the other day, I gave them a sound bite it was the eighth grade sound bite. They said no, we need the fourth grade version. Because unless it is intuitive and simplistic, it is not going to have impact. So when we looked at the future of collaborative driving, how do we reinvent the consumers perception of their role, their responsibility to society in moving from point A to point B, and how do we feel the research questions, the complex behavior aspects that we need to integrate humans in that loop?

 
Ola Bostrom 

Thank you, Brian. So Kelly

 
Kelly Funkhouser 

so Excuse me as a representative of the consumers, so the endpoint of all of this wonderful technology. And it's really interesting to see how the evolution evolution of engineering feats are so quickly coming to consumer available vehicles. Just last week, I did a quick check of the technology. And my my awesome team at Consumer Reports, we found that every vehicle that sells a large volume, every manufacturer in the United States had except for two Mitsubishi and Mini has a vehicle for sale to consumers that has the capability of maintaining automated speed. So adaptive cruise control, it can adjust the speed as well as some sort of lane keeping, whether that's their steering braking combination, the performance of those vary significantly, but this isn't technology that we're waiting for, its here now. You can go and buy any of these vehicles out there and have the building blocks of self driving vehicles. So it's it's interesting as consumers begin to adopt the technologies where the where the convergences with the expectations and capabilities of the technology, and also where it's potentially causing more issues or confusion. And it's one of the problems is that there's a lot of confusion and what they're called, who has what, again, how these technologies perform on a scale to whatever your metric is of, you know, how you want the system to behave. And it's not very clear to consumers what these cars are supposed to be doing and also interesting. They don't necessarily think that these cars are doing something that they want to help them so oftentimes they turn off these systems that many of us consider safety systems because they don't find any benefit coming from these systems. They don't like to have an annoyance of beep telling them that they're going over a lane line when they're fully aware and engaged in the driving task and avoiding a pothole or a pedestrian. And we see this as we move forward in these technologies that consumers aren't necessarily wanting to use a lot of these systems or their turn them off. And that confusion often comes from how they're explained to consumers. So we have been leaders in trying to standardize some of the definitions, descriptions and terminology in this area. We work side by side with AAA, National Safety Council, JD Power, we are working with regulators and standards organizations as well so that there is a reference that consumers can go to and say I have this long my vehicle, what does it do? And so we're trying to push that forward so that consumers and the engineers can can meet in the middle and make the product that consumers want and will use and not shut off so that the potential for those systems to be safety systems and help the general population can finally be realized.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Thank you, Kelly. Ok now Matthew.

 
Matthew Avery 

Thank you. Thank you. Well, just like Bryan, I'm obviously representing a huge (inaudible). And I'm blessed, but hopefully not least, but it's a little bit like insurance. It's an afterthought. You know, people think about insurance and it's actually a distressed project, project or product, and that we don't actually want to buy it, but we have to have it. I'm actually wearing two hats if you like professionally because as well as I'm working for fashion, which is a UK insurance funded research organization. But also we do a lot of the testing and build the test procedures and support your own camp because we're members of your own camp, developing the test procedures, that right these vehicles. And that's obviously very important for the consumer. It's also very important for the insurance to understand the potential performance of these systems. Now, automatic driving represents a huge challenge for the insurance industry because they don't know what to make of it. This expectation that these vehicles will be safer, they'll have less crashes. But that's not been the case. So far, we've seen certain US brands appearing to have more crashes now. Is that a product of social media or are they actually having more crashes? So actual pricing is very, very difficult. And this is saying in insurance, which is, there's no such thing as a bad risk, just about premium. So pricing is really, really Really important. And there's an expectation there from the consumer that these vehicles are going to be much cheaper to ensure, because they're going to crash less. So insurance must get cheaper. Well it, probably it might not. Because the problem with the vehicles is, will anyone want to use the technology? Will they switch it on? When will they switch it on? So we need to understand what does the consumer actually think about this technology. And if they don't use it and don't switch it off, then that's not going to affect the premium. In fact, the premium could be worse because this technology is going to cost a lot more to fix. When we look at modern vehicles and compare them with older vehicles. They cost more money to fix because there's more sensors on them more technology. So actually, it's a double edged sword for the insurers. It should cost less but actually, it costs more. So the collaboration part of the church is very much around needing to know what fits To what vehicle? So they need to understand what technologies been fitted to what vehicle. So the need to be working with the vehicle manufacturers to understand that. And also we need to understand what does the consumer actually want to they use it, because if they don't use it, then that's going to affect their premium might be up maybe down, but it's gonna definitely affect it. So we're looking at running projects to understand how people actually use this technology as well. So as a brave new world out there, but there's so much lack of clarity for the insurance community.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Thank you, Matthew. So now let's start the discussion. And I think we'll start with continuing what you brought up here, Matthew about the double edged sword. technology comes with the costs of course. And we heard here that the consumer can switch it off they can sort of not take the option or and so forth. So how do you see? How do you make sure that the end consumer can see the value? See? So sort of how do you make sure that the end consumer buy into this technology that you all talked about and you, you believe is going to make sure you trust them? So, anyone want to start with that? Gabi?

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

Sure. And I think it's two really simple things, first of all, build stuff that actually works. And secondly, explain and show how it adds value to the consumer. So why would I pay extra to get XYZ feature and what does that give me in terms of improved safety or improve perception of safety or maybe a better or more personalized experience? So does two things in my (inaudible).

 
Bryan Reimer 

So I lead the advanced vehicle technologies consortium and MIT we're we're really looking at consumers interaction with production level automation that is technology in the wild. And when we look at really soup to nuts from the first introduction of the technology, all the way to the utilization feedback, their innovations needed all along the way. And we look at individuals who have a strong introduction to technology, understand the benefit, and derive use and benefit from that. But then go out and try to buy it and you walk to the dealers gaviota saying, what am I trying to buy or getting delivered the wrong thing. So very frequently, you want to buy something very simple and you want assisted cruise control and you're going to a dealer and ask for it. You can walk out with the wrong car. So when you provide the introduction, you provide the value along the way that works. And then you provide in, and Veoneer did a really nice job of this their demo feedback along the way why is this working for me now? We can develop and deliver much more complete value proposition. So it's really completing that value proposition from the front end, the back end.

 
Kelly Funkhouser 

So I like the double edged sword, but it's possibly has an additional edge as well. I think there's kind of three edges yet. Yes. So when when we're asking consumers to adopt technology that is supposedly safety technology, it really needs to work well and be reliable in order for them to want it. And it also needs to match their expectations of what the system is trying to do. Otherwise they'll they'll turn it off and turning it off is also another issue. That's the second you know, sharp edge. Some of the systems that we think are safety technology, and in some that aren't, you can either turn them off or sometimes it's really difficult to turn them off or you can't turn them off. vehicles and there's not a clear cut answers to if we determine something as a safety feature, automatic emergency braking, that's we're a big proponent of that we think that every car should have that standard. But if it were to not work in the way that consumers expect it to, or it has a lot of false alerts, then if it's really difficult to turn that system off, it's also really difficult to turn it back on again. And so if they're in these situations where they're in stop and go traffic or lots of Lane Departure type of situations, they may turn off the system, but then they also have to be able to turn that back on. And so that's that's the second edge but but the third one really is getting back to the standard safety equipment. So that's why it's so important for manufacturers to make these systems standard equipment on their vehicles because we hear about consumers all the time, going into dealerships, and they asked for something, they're there. They want the safety technology people really want this stuff. They, they go in there, they asked for it. And there is a lot of confusion with sales people with some of the dealers and what the technology is what it does. And we often hear of people leaving the dealer without that technology on their vehicle. And so that is why it is fundamental to start to get some of these safety technologies standard and the vehicles, which, you know, there are some technologies, some features that maybe aren't necessarily safety or haven't been vetted. We don't have, you know, the longitudinal data to show how well they work. But but it's pretty easy to identify those ones that everyone should have across the board.

 
Matthew Avery 

I think there are ways of vehicle manufacturers marketing this technology, and the cell is maybe easier than it appears. So something like a be obviously many cases that employs the radar which is actually going to enable the ICC facility which is a comfort for each year as well as the safety feature keeping headway and I I'm just taking some of the burden away from driving, just like we've got now with the very latest vehicles have some have got driver monitoring systems on. And those driver monitoring systems are very useful to stop you, you know, becoming distracted or impaired driving or stop using a cell phone, which is a safety cell. But also, there's a comfort feature. So, you know, certain vehicles you can get into and the car recognizes who you are, because it's got some sort of camera device that's recognizing you and says, you know, hello, Matthew, I've set the car to how you want it. So the consumers actually getting something they think, yeah, I'm glad I paid for that. Because actually, I can see that working every day. The fact is, the real reason we want them to have that is because it's going to stop them maybe crashing the car. But if they think they're getting something that makes their life easier. That's the way to do it. Absolutely.

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

No, yes, I think as long as the technology intuitive it will sell itself. That's what we know from blindspots, for instance, is a very simple technology, not too intrusive people like it. So it basically sells itself. So I think we should not forget about the first point, which is that the technology itself should be really very intuitive should be really helping the driver and that should not be easy or not, would not be difficult to use the technology in the vehicle. And and I want a second, her point is basically that things as we can make things standard is much better than making optional. These technologies are very, very difficult to understand in the first place. So to actually believe that consumers would really understand and see the benefit from that point of view, theoretically, maybe very difficult, and maybe maybe too far, I think, too far fetched. So I think it's better approach to make sure that these technologies come as a standard package with the vehicle and that they become very intuitive, and then people will like them and will use them automatically.

 
Bryan Reimer 

I think that's where collaboration among the industry and setting some standards that may you know, so the Europeans may think See this is not optimal Americans may see this is not the one in the Asians may see this not optimal, but standard convenience, safety packages that are ubiquitous are far more powerful than any optimal solution that we're going to argue about for the next decade.

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

That leads back to the question of data. So what what is the data in the real world? What is it telling us as far as what works and what doesn't work? And as long as we don't have that, it's very difficult.

 
Bryan Reimer 

And we're all deep in the data. And the data is really hard, because we're all focused on what's next as opposed to understanding the foundations of what's here. And how do we begin to look at more of how this is being used. Try to make some good educated guesses everybody wants the answers all we can give them as good guesses.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

May I throw maybe a controversial thought out there? Because I do wholeheartedly agree with everything that's been said. I mean, Michiel especially to your point as well, right, don't First of all, we all agree this stuff just really needs to work. It needs to be intuitive and easy to use. I think also, car manufacturers are technology providers and technology providers need to offer up a lot more transparency and clarity to consumers and make it easier for consumers to get educated on how all these advanced systems work. But here's the here's the controversial thought. And I think about this as a consumer myself. In this day and age, having a we really not reached the point that there's maybe also responsibility for the consumer to ask the right questions, and to educate themselves. And and none of us like hearing this. But the same goes for our mobile phones, right? All this stuff we download, we really know what this is, and what data it's collecting on us. And maybe in this day and age.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

And maybe this is the next generation, right or digitally native, but maybe we need to be more conscious and aware of what stuff is really doing and how we should use it, how we should collaborate with it, and and empower ourselves to ask the right questions.

 
Kelly Funkhouser 

So so this is a really interesting topic to me. And because it seems like we come to these conferences and all these shows where technology is being debuted. And oftentimes the conversation is how do we get consumers to trust this technology because it will be safer for them. It's a lot to ask someone to blindly trust technology without demonstrating that it should be trusted. And that again, comes from matching what they want the technology to do, how they benefit from it, and how reliable that technology is before the trust can come. And to the second part, you know, I think that it's it's unfair to ask general consumers, regular people to dive into all of this craziness of technology when I live and breathe this every day. I struggle to grasp at the nuances in how something is engineered how changing a setting for you know, if you want this system to be an early intervention or a late intervention and how that interacts done with another feature, I think that onus really needs to be on the manufacturers. And the focus should be to make that an in vehicle experience. So, you know, we go online, and we read all of these fascinating technologies, we can go and read the owner's manual, even though no one does. But as soon as you're in the cockpit of that vehicle, you need to have that readily available. And the intuitive nature needs to be present while you are experiencing the system. And learning it ahead of time isn't always the right answer.

 
Bryan Reimer 

And I think what you're hitting it Kelly is really key. Sorry, Matthew, is that I think as innovators as manufacturers designers often forget that trust is the coveted commodity. If we don't do trust it, we're not going to use it. And trust is built over time. It doesn't occur instantly. It's a relationship. You build a relationship over time. And you know what? Something happens. The roads trust, it takes a lot longer to rebuild that. So you're building a relationship, a collaboration with the technologies around us, you know, what if my smartphone always failed? I wouldn't trust it. My schedule.

 
Matthew Avery 

And I think I think one of the, you know, potential opportunities here is something vehicle manufacturers don't like but that standardization. I mean, calling things common names will be helpful. I mean, we in Europe, we've got about 63 different names brand names for a big we know is a bit but you know, you ask us consumer says now I haven't got I've got auto break. That's it's all mines bright support, the oldest the same thing. So telling the country seemed trying to educate them as to what these systems are and get the vehicle manufacturers to play ball that's controversial, just like we see with the application of the systems having a standardized way for them to work. Like we've got the, you know, indicators on the left and the wipers on the right, that's a really good bit of standardization would be very useful with this technology. So people begin to understand, you know, I know what that means. I know what that light means. And that's going to broaden the adoption of this because people are understand, yeah, I've got that on my vehicle.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Can you get can you get (inaudible) for a feature which you can turn off?

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

Not an NCAP. Not anymore. So yeah, we tried to tackle that by making it at least default on make it very difficult to turn it off. And by each journey, it has to start again. But we realized that that's also has a downside for some consumers. If the system is not well designed, not intuitive. It will come on every time and consumers are really getting irritated by it. So we get a lot of flack as well for trying to push that. Yes. So that's the balance here between trying to do the best for, for the society ultimately, and making sure that the vehicle manufacturers take responsibility to, to design it properly. And versus you know, allowing it to be switched off

 
Ola Bostrom 

 And building trust

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

And building trust. Exactly.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

Yes, it brings it back to the fundamentals of stuff just has to work.

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

I think Jan, your example of the of the iPhone is really good because if you buy a new iPhone, there is no manual nowadays. I mean, there's nothing it's so intuitive that you can use an iPhone

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

Is it? I need to ask my 13 year olds how to how to use my phone.

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

I think it's intuitive enough for you to make calls and emails, okay.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

Okay, but the basics, but you talk about the advanced capabilities.

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

100 pages of instructions that you have to read, but nobody does. So it's still a huge gain to be made there as well.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

Oh, absolutely.

 
Bryan Reimer 

But I think it also comes down to is we look at consumer interaction with technologies, the consumer is not the engineer, we often build these systems through the lens of engineering in, quite frankly, when we look out in this room here, we are all not engineers the same like, which means that the perception of how this stuff's going to be used are all individuals. It needs to be personalized, how we all want to learn about it is different too.

 
Kelly Funkhouser 

So So it's, you know, how its engineered and how it's going to be used really comes down to, you know, hearing from consumers hearing from regular people how they are using these because I often hear the reason that some manufacturers don't want to standardize their their terminology for a features because there's behaves wildly different than automaker be right? And and that's fair, completely fair, causes a lot of confusion, but it also you know, needs to stop automakers need to try to explain this again in in the vehicle to consumers what it's doing. And also not have multiple systems that do kind of sort of the same thing. So Lane Keeping technologies, there's lots of different systems out there. Most cars these days have multiple systems for one of them is you know, you turn it on and it'll help keep you on the road as you start to depart the roadway itself or go into a curve, another one, you know, activates and apply steering or braking as soon as you hit that lane line or go across it. Some others you know, let's throw in a new term instead of line keeping. Let's see lane centering. Well, what is lane centering? Is it trying to keep me in the center Lane? How is that different than the one that's trying to keep me in the lane, but not the center of the lane? It's very confusing. And then I can, you know, adjust all of these settings and it's, it's, it's getting a little bit crazy out there. And coming from the engineering side I hear all the time. Well, they are two systems. They're two completely different system. Made by two different departments almost. But to consumers, they they can't understand that nor should they have to understand those differences. And so aligning the experience of turning on us system, a link keeping system and having the customization parameters so that I can go and make it do what I want. I don't want it to turn on until I hit the landline, I want it to keep me in the center that is way more easy to understand and use from a consumer perspective and having all of these buttons and different settings.

 
Matthew Avery 

I mean, and that gives the insurance industry a huge headache, because not only we've got different systems, but some of the systems Yes, you can turn off. So how do they know whether it's being used or not. And so if someone is going to turn the system off, then the insurers can't really use that information to affect the premium. So it's a big challenge there and there needs to be a degree of standardization these systems need to be fitted to vehicles to enable insurers to be able to price the effect of those systems, but then also feed back into the market because then the data is able to illustrate yes, these systems are working, the systems aren't at the moment issuers can't do that, because they have no idea whether what the crash risk of one because different to another because of technology, or because people are not using it, or it's bad technology. So it's very, very difficult. And this is this whole issue is going to get much worse, as we've seen manufacturers introducing over the air updates. And that's a huge challenge because from insurance perspective, that's what I'm worrying at the moment. The insurance, the car insurance on the Friday is not necessarily the car that's been driven on the Monday because over the weekend, there was an over the air update that changed the performance of that vehicle. Did they get better did it get worse? Who knows?

 
Bryan Reimer 

In some in some of our research data, we see those changes even at the dealer level being in installed a new consumer education with it. So all of a sudden you sit in the car you walk out of a service change and you're driving something different. So we don't drive a vehicle Brand X anymore. We drive a vehicle Brand X with software version x, y. So when we think about this, we're thinking about a level of complexity here that we have no simple solutions for if we keep running down the same path we've been running down, so I sat in the vehicle this morning with the new Google based infotainment system you know bringing basically what I have my smartphone my smartphone intuitively infotainment, the car saying Finally, it's only taken us how many years to simplify this to something that is intuitive, understandable. So I think we're going to see a renovation in the next 10 years all infotainment the car, you know, Google's obviously there, Alexa is there I'm sure Apple show up. And as we integrate safety features into that type of simplicity. You know, the perfect The technologies may not be there, and the same across all vehicle brands. But whether they're on and off the connectivity to that information, that'll happen.

 
Ola Bostrom 

So, we have only a few minutes left. So before I will ask you each to make a key takeaway from here, including what you have learned from from this preparation and the discussion, but before you do that, I will ask myself try to summarize what we heard here. Using using that my notes here, so what I hear is that we need to build stuff that not only works, but they should also be easy to use. Building trust between not only the consumer and the car, but the other way around as well. And do that over time and eventually standardize everything that has With safety, at least that is my my personal view. And over here, so But now, Michiel, if you start in that order again, what is your key takeaway? And what did you learn?

 
Michiel van Ratingen 

For starters, I think the complexity of the issues is actually even bigger than I thought. To start with. I think there's so many things that we don't really know that we should try to find out first, before we actually try to deploy this in a volume scale. So I think the data is going to be really, really critical the data about what us what consumers like how they enter interface with the vehicle. And so I think that's going to be the key thing that I've learned from today is that we should actually pay much more attention to that part of the of the equation, the data, the data, yes.

 
Gabi Zijderveld 

So one thing I took away from the conversation is that I'm not even thinking about all these complex advanced AI systems that will deploy in next several years, what I've learned is that even today and the vehicles that have been on the road for years now there is huge amounts of confusion. And I do relate that back to my own experiences, right? Like I have a Volkswagen that's five years old, nothing interesting. I like it, the basic car light comes on. I have no clue what it is. And I can't even find the page in the manual that's supposed to tell me what the day is. Because what's that thing called isn't a warning and alert and notification of light? And so even what we have on the road today confuses the heck out of people.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Yeah, so less confusion. Right.

 
Bryan Reimer 

So when we look throughout the automotive ecosystem from ensures that the OEM suppliers I think there's going to be winners and losers in the next decade to a greater degree than there's been in the past. I think the market is going to reward those who develop intuitive innovation and penalize those who don't. The social media challenges of today, allow us to move information waves That they didn't allow five years ago. So when it doesn't work, we're going to see a penalty that we never saw before. And when it does work, we're going to see a new reward,

 
Ola Bostrom 

reward and penalize. Kelly?

 
Kelly Funkhouser 

So I think the in vehicle experience, the HMI is absolutely key to to solving a lot of these problems, or at least trying to, and I think that we don't give regular people, you know, as much benefit as benefit of the doubt as we could be. And we're, we're seeing all these systems, the instrument cluster is giving us very, very little information about what is actually going on in the vehicle. And yet, we see all these demos here at CES where we see boundary boxes and an object recognition and classification and, and I find that the systems that give me a little bit more information are easier for me to make my own judgment of trust. So that does that car. See the other car that I see and I'm making these checks back and forth. And that can build trust that can build user expectations and understanding how the systems work. And then which will lead to when you shouldn't use them and all of those things. And I would like to see perhaps, you know, a little bit more of more information, going to drivers,

 
Ola Bostrom 

more information. Thank you. And any words, Matthew?

 
Matthew Avery 

Well, I mean, two things. Firstly, I think, as Bryan was saying, we can't carry on doing the way things that we were before. We've got to find new ways of doing it, because this technology, we've just got to look downstairs, he's, he's coming thick and fast, and we've got to find new ways of doing this. And the final thing for me is we've got to involve the consumer in this because we've got to understand what do they actually want? Are we forcing things on the consumer? Do they actually want the stuff? We've got a listen.

 
Ola Bostrom 

Okay, so thank you for listening. And thank you, dear panel for a great discussing

CTATECH-PROD1