| Recurring |
one_organization, multiple_organization |
(a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization:
- The incident involving a Tesla Model 3 crashing into a truck while using the Autopilot driver assistant feature is not the first time such incidents have occurred. There have been reports of thousands of close calls experienced by Tesla owners while using the Autopilot feature [99673].
- The Autopilot feature has been criticized as a 'half-baked, non-market-ready product' that requires constant data collection to improve its functionality [99673].
(b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization:
- The article mentions that there have been reports from Tesla owners revealing many close calls they have had while driving on Autopilot, indicating that similar incidents may have occurred with other Tesla vehicles [99673].
- The article also references a Bloomberg survey where 1,600 people shared their close calls with the Autopilot feature, suggesting that similar incidents may have happened with other Tesla vehicles as well [99673]. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident related to the design phase can be seen in the incident involving the Tesla Model 3 crashing into a truck in Taiwan while the Autopilot driver assistant feature was activated [99673]. The reports indicate that the Autopilot feature, which is a part of the design of the Tesla system, was allegedly active during the incident. This suggests a failure in the design phase where the system did not effectively detect the overturned truck, leading to the collision.
(b) The software failure incident related to the operation phase is evident in the various close calls and dangerous situations experienced by Tesla Model 3 owners while using the Autopilot feature [99673]. Owners reported instances of the system glitching, phantom braking, failing to stop for road hazards, and making risky choices during unusual situations. These issues highlight failures in the operation of the system, either due to misuse or limitations in the system's ability to handle real-world scenarios effectively. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system, outside_system |
(a) The software failure incident related to the Tesla Model 3 crashing into an overturned truck on a highway in Taiwan can be categorized as within_system. The incident occurred while the driver was using the Autopilot driver assistant feature, which is an internal system feature of the Tesla vehicle. The driver reportedly did not see the overturned truck while cruising with the Autopilot feature activated, and the emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second, indicating a failure within the system's functionality [99673].
(b) Additionally, the incident also highlights potential issues with the Autopilot feature itself, as there have been reports of close calls and dangerous situations experienced by Tesla owners using the Autopilot system. Some owners described instances where the Autopilot sensors triggered brakes unexpectedly, leading to potentially hazardous situations. This suggests that external factors such as road conditions, traffic scenarios, and sensor accuracy could contribute to failures originating from outside the system [99673]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions, human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions:
- The incident involving the Tesla Model 3 crashing into an overturned truck on a highway in Taiwan was attributed to the Autopilot driver assistant feature being activated, which led to the car not detecting the truck in time [Article 99673].
- The emergency automatic braking system of the Tesla was applied at the last second due to smoke coming from the tires moments before the collision, indicating a non-human action in response to the detected hazard [Article 99673].
- The Tesla's sensors detected a hazard from afar and avoided a crash with no human input, showcasing the automated response of the system [Article 99673].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions:
- The driver of the Tesla was reported to have said that the auxiliary system was activated, and the self-driving state was not adopted, suggesting a human decision to engage the Autopilot feature [Article 99673].
- Some Tesla owners reported close calls and dangerous situations while using the Autopilot feature, indicating potential human reliance on the system despite its known limitations [Article 99673].
- Instances were shared where drivers had to override the Autopilot system's actions through human intervention, such as jamming the foot on the accelerator to prevent a rear-end accident triggered by the system [Article 99673]. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware, software |
(a) The software failure incident occurring due to hardware:
- The incident involving the Tesla Model 3 crashing into a truck on a highway in Taiwan was attributed to the driver not seeing the overturned truck while using the Autopilot driver assistant feature [99673].
- The footage showed that the car's emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second due to smoke coming from the tires moments before the collision, indicating a hardware-related issue [99673].
(b) The software failure incident occurring due to software:
- The incident highlighted the use of Tesla's Autopilot feature, which allows the vehicle to steer, accelerate, and brake automatically within a lane [99673].
- Reports mentioned that the Autopilot feature was allegedly active during the crash, suggesting a potential software-related failure [99673].
- The article discussed how the Autopilot system has been criticized as a 'half-baked, non-market-ready product' that requires constant data collection to improve, indicating software-related challenges [99673].
- Owners shared experiences of close calls and dangerous situations with the Autopilot feature, illustrating the software's potential glitches and gray areas [99673].
- The survey conducted by Bloomberg revealed instances where the Autopilot feature triggered brakes unexpectedly, leading to potentially dangerous situations, showcasing software-related issues [99673]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The incident involving the Tesla Model 3 crashing into an overturned truck on a highway in Taiwan was not malicious. The failure was non-malicious and was attributed to the driver using the Autopilot driver assistant feature, which did not detect the overturned truck in time to prevent the collision. The driver reportedly did not see the truck while the Autopilot feature was activated, and the emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second, indicating a failure in the system to detect and respond to the hazard in a timely manner [99673].
(b) The incident highlights a non-malicious software failure where the Autopilot feature of the Tesla Model 3 did not function as intended, leading to a collision. The system's limitations and glitches, as reported by other Tesla owners in the survey, also point to non-malicious failures in the software that can put drivers in dangerous situations [99673]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
poor_decisions, accidental_decisions |
(a) poor_decisions: The incident involving the Tesla Model 3 crashing into an overturned truck on a highway in Taiwan was related to poor decisions. The driver was reported to be cruising with the Autopilot driver assistant feature activated, and the emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second due to smoke coming from the tires moments before the collision. Despite the feature being allegedly active during the incident, the emergency brake system was not soon enough to prevent the crash. Additionally, there have been reports of close calls and dangerous situations experienced by Tesla owners using the Autopilot feature, indicating potential risks associated with relying on the system [99673].
(b) accidental_decisions: The incident also involved accidental decisions or unintended consequences. For example, one Model 3 owner described a situation where the Autopilot sensors suddenly triggered the brakes on a clear highway, leading to a potentially dangerous scenario that required the driver's quick intervention to avoid an accident. Other owners shared experiences of the Autopilot system making risky choices or behaving unexpectedly in certain situations, such as phantom braking or failing to stop for road hazards. These accidental decisions or behaviors of the Autopilot feature contributed to instances where drivers felt their safety was compromised [99673]. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the article seems to be related to development incompetence. The incident involved a Tesla Model 3 crashing into a truck while the Autopilot driver assistant feature was activated. The Autopilot system has been criticized as a 'half-baked, non-market-ready product that requires constant data collection to improve.' There have been reports of close calls and dangerous situations experienced by Tesla owners using the Autopilot feature, indicating potential issues with the development and testing of the software [99673].
(b) The software failure incident could also be considered accidental as the driver of the Tesla Model 3 did not see the overturned truck while cruising with the Autopilot driver assistant feature activated. The emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second due to smoke coming from the tires moments before the collision, suggesting an unexpected situation that led to the failure [99673]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
The software failure incident described in the articles can be categorized as a temporary failure. The incident occurred when the driver of the Tesla Model 3 was cruising with the Autopilot driver assistant feature activated, and the emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second before the collision with the overturned truck [99673]. This indicates that the failure was due to contributing factors introduced by certain circumstances (such as the Autopilot feature being active) rather than being a permanent failure inherent to the software under all circumstances. |
| Behaviour |
omission, timing, value, byzantine, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in the article resulted in a crash where the Tesla Model 3 collided with an overturned truck on the highway in Taiwan. The Autopilot feature was active at the time of the incident, and the emergency automatic braking system was applied at the last second before the collision occurred [99673].
(b) omission: The Autopilot feature in the Tesla Model 3 omitted to detect the overturned truck on the highway, leading to the collision. The driver did not see the truck while cruising with the Autopilot driver assistant feature activated [99673].
(c) timing: The emergency automatic braking system in the Tesla Model 3 was applied at the last second, indicating a timing issue where the system responded too late to prevent the collision. This was due to smoke coming from the tires moments before the crash [99673].
(d) value: The Autopilot feature in the Tesla Model 3 was reported to have performed incorrectly in various instances, such as triggering brakes suddenly without a clear hazard, causing risky choices in unusual situations, and braking violently when detecting slower cars in different lanes. These instances indicate a failure in performing the intended functions correctly [99673].
(e) byzantine: The Autopilot feature in the Tesla Model 3 exhibited inconsistent responses and interactions, as reported by different owners in the survey. While some owners experienced phantom braking and risky decisions, others praised the system for avoiding crashes and hazards effectively. This inconsistency in behavior points towards a byzantine failure mode [99673].
(f) other: The software failure incident also involved the Tesla Model 3's Autopilot feature being described as a 'half-baked, non-market-ready product' that requires constant data collection to improve. This characterization suggests a broader issue with the system's overall readiness and reliability, which could be categorized as another type of behavior beyond the options provided [99673]. |