| Recurring |
one_organization |
(a) The software failure incident having happened again at one_organization:
The incident involving the Acronis SIT Autonomous self-driving car crashing into a wall during the Roborace in the UK can be considered a software failure within the same organization. This incident showcases a failure in the software controlling the vehicle, leading to a crash before the race even began [106708].
(b) The software failure incident having happened again at multiple_organization:
There is no specific mention in the provided article about similar incidents happening at other organizations or with their products and services. Therefore, it is unknown if similar software failure incidents have occurred at multiple organizations based on the information available. |
| Phase (Design/Operation) |
design, operation |
(a) The software failure incident in the article can be attributed to the design phase. The incident occurred during a Roborace event in the UK where a self-driving car, the Acronis SIT Autonomous, unexpectedly accelerated and crashed into a wall before even starting the race. The article mentions that the vehicle hit the pit-lane barrier due to the AI making an unexpected turn to the right, indicating a design flaw in the system's programming or decision-making algorithms [106708].
(b) The software failure incident can also be linked to the operation phase. The article describes how the Acronis SIT Autonomous vehicle, operated by a Swiss team, was gearing up for the race when the AI hit the accelerator and made the unexpected turn, leading to the crash. This indicates that the failure was a result of the operation or execution of the system during the event, possibly due to a miscommunication or misinterpretation of commands by the AI system [106708]. |
| Boundary (Internal/External) |
within_system |
(a) The software failure incident in the article is primarily within_system. The incident occurred during a Roborace event in the UK where a self-driving car, the Acronis SIT Autonomous, unexpectedly accelerated and crashed into a wall before the race even started. The failure was attributed to the AI of the vehicle hitting the accelerator and making an unexpected turn, leading to the collision with the pit-lane barrier. The incident resulted in damage to the front-end components of the vehicle, including the AI camera, LIDAR system, and sensors responsible for determining the direction of travel [106708]. |
| Nature (Human/Non-human) |
non-human_actions |
(a) The software failure incident in the Roborace involving the Acronis SIT Autonomous vehicle crashing into a wall was due to non-human actions. The incident occurred when the AI of the vehicle hit the accelerator and made an unexpected turn to the right, resulting in the vehicle hitting the pit-lane barrier [106708].
(b) The article does not provide information indicating that the software failure incident was due to contributing factors introduced by human actions. |
| Dimension (Hardware/Software) |
hardware, software |
(a) The software failure incident in the article was primarily due to hardware issues. The self-driving car operated by the Swiss team experienced a failure when the AI hit the accelerator and made an unexpected turn, resulting in the vehicle smashing into a pit-lane barrier and damaging the front-end components like the AI camera, LIDAR system, and sensors [106708].
(b) The software failure incident also had contributing factors originating in software. The article mentions that the Roborace showcased six cars built with the same technology but using different software. The specific software running on the Acronis SIT Autonomous vehicle likely played a role in the unexpected turn that led to the crash [106708]. |
| Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) |
non-malicious |
(a) The software failure incident described in the articles does not appear to be malicious. It was a non-malicious failure where the self-driving car operated by the Swiss team, Acronis SIT Autonomous, experienced a glitch or error that caused it to accelerate unexpectedly and crash into a wall during the Roborace event in the UK [106708]. The incident was described as an unexpected turn to the right that led to the collision with the pit-lane barrier, resulting in damage to the front-end components of the vehicle such as the AI camera, LIDAR system, and sensors [106708]. The commentators at the event expressed surprise and disappointment at the outcome, indicating that the incident was not intentional but rather a result of a software or technical issue [106708]. |
| Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) |
accidental_decisions |
(a) The intent of the software failure incident was not due to poor decisions but rather an accidental decision made by the AI in the self-driving car during the Roborace incident. The AI in the Acronis SIT Autonomous vehicle hit the accelerator and made an unexpected turn to the right, resulting in the car smashing into a wall [106708]. This accidental decision led to the failure during the race. |
| Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) |
development_incompetence, accidental |
(a) The software failure incident in the Roborace where the Acronis SIT Autonomous vehicle crashed into a wall can be attributed to development incompetence. The incident occurred as the AI hit the accelerator and made an unexpected turn to the right, hitting the pit-lane barrier [106708]. This failure showcases the challenges and limitations that autonomous vehicles still face, despite advancements in technology and AI solutions designed for accurate results.
(b) The software failure incident can also be considered accidental as it was not intentional for the vehicle to crash into the wall. The unexpected turn taken by the AI, resulting in the collision, can be seen as an accidental failure during the race [106708]. |
| Duration |
temporary |
(a) The software failure incident described in the articles seems to be temporary. The incident occurred during a Roborace event in the UK where a self-driving car, the Acronis SIT Autonomous, unexpectedly accelerated and crashed into a wall before the race even started. The failure was attributed to the AI hitting the accelerator and making an unexpected turn, leading to the collision [106708]. This incident was a one-time event during the race and not a permanent failure caused by all circumstances. |
| Behaviour |
crash, omission, other |
(a) crash: The software failure incident in the article resulted in a crash where the self-driving car operated by the Acronis SIT Autonomous team smashed into a wall during a Roborace event in the UK. The AI hit the accelerator unexpectedly, causing the vehicle to make a sharp right turn and collide with the pit-lane barrier, leading to a physical crash [106708].
(b) omission: The software failure incident can also be categorized as an omission failure as the self-driving car omitted to perform its intended function of navigating through the raceway without hitting any obstacles. Instead, the vehicle failed to avoid the real obstacle (pit-lane barrier) and crashed into it, indicating an omission of the expected behavior [106708].
(c) timing: There is no specific mention of a timing-related failure in the incident described in the article.
(d) value: The software failure incident did not involve a value-related failure where the system performed its intended functions incorrectly.
(e) byzantine: The software failure incident does not align with a byzantine failure where the system behaves erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions.
(f) other: The other behavior observed in this software failure incident is a deviation from the expected behavior during a competitive event. The self-driving car's unexpected turn and subsequent crash deviated from the planned course of action, leading to a disruptive and unexpected outcome in the race [106708]. |