来源：环球网 四维图新表示，未来公司重点将围绕算法迭代、数据闭环构建与成本结构优化，持续提升辅助驾驶系统 的可靠性与性价比，助力合作车企实现核心技术能力的"全栈可控"。有评论认为，在智能驾驶竞争逐渐 进入规模化、平民化阶段的背景下，四维图新这类兼具软件算法、硬件整合与量产经验的供应商，将在 行业格局重构过程中扮演关键角色。 近日，四维图新基于地平线征程®6B芯片研发的下一代辅助驾驶系统已顺利完成底层平台开发，并进入 与客户共同推进的量产项目联合研发阶段。 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the monthly OTA (Over-the-Air) monitoring report, highlighting the significant increase in OTA updates across various automotive brands, with a focus on advancements in driver assistance technologies and user feedback on new features [1][4]. Industry Overview: OTA Data Summary - In July 2025, the industry updated a total of 833 features, a substantial increase from 507 in the previous month, with a focus on "driving assistance" technologies [4]. - New energy vehicle brands accounted for 382 updates, up from 133 the previous month, indicating a competitive landscape in autonomous driving features [6][7]. - Domestic brands contributed 450 updates, showing a stable performance in OTA functionality over the past year, maintaining a monthly range of 250 to 400 updates [9]. - Joint venture and luxury brands saw a drastic decline, with only one update from Buick, highlighting a slowdown in their technological advancements [11]. User Feedback: New Features - Users expressed satisfaction with the new "human-machine co-driving mode," which improved the overall experience of the NGP (Navigation Guided Pilot) system by reducing the need for manual intervention [21][22]. - The addition of an ACC (Adaptive Cruise Control) switch was positively received, as it reduced instances of unexpected system downgrades during driving [25]. - Users reported that the new features enhanced the driving experience, particularly in complex traffic situations, leading to increased usage of the NGP system [23][24]. Upcoming OTA Updates - Several brands have scheduled significant OTA updates for late 2025, including advanced driving assistance features and improvements in user interface and experience [17][18]. - Notable upcoming updates include the introduction of full-scene connectivity for Huawei ADS 4.0 and various enhancements across multiple vehicle models [17]. Summary of OTA Activities - The report outlines various OTA activities across brands, indicating a trend towards continuous improvement and feature enhancement in the automotive sector [31][42].

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the news is the release of a draft notification by the State Administration for Market Regulation and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology aimed at strengthening the recall and supervision of intelligent connected new energy vehicles, particularly focusing on the promotion and use of Level 2 (L2) driver assistance systems [1] - The draft includes requirements for software upgrades to address current issues and aims to prevent safety hazards associated with over-the-air (OTA) updates, which may conceal defects rather than resolve them [1] - The new regulations are intended to standardize OTA practices among companies, reducing chaotic competition and ensuring that software upgrades are adequately verified before implementation [1] Group 2 - Strengthening driver training is deemed necessary as traditional driving schools focus on conventional driving skills, while future systems require drivers to develop a safety awareness regarding the use of driver assistance and automated systems [2] - The interaction between drivers and Level 3 (L3) conditional automated driving systems necessitates specific skills that drivers must learn, as these systems may prompt drivers to take control of the vehicle [4] - China possesses significant advantages in advancing towards higher levels of automation (L3, L4, L5), including a comprehensive supply chain for intelligent connected new energy vehicles and a rich talent pool of engineers in the field [5][6] Group 3 - The competitive nature of the Chinese automotive market fosters rapid technological iteration, positioning the country to potentially lead in future technological developments [6] - The stability of policies regarding new energy and intelligent connected vehicles in China contrasts with other countries, allowing for sustained progress in the automotive industry [6]

Core Viewpoint - The recent auxiliary driving program by Dongche Di reveals that the current level of auxiliary driving technology is insufficient, with an average pass rate of only 35.74% across 36 popular models tested in various scenarios, highlighting the gap between auxiliary and fully autonomous driving capabilities [1][2][3] Group 1: Current State of Auxiliary Driving Technology - The average pass rate for auxiliary driving functions in the tested models was only 35.74%, with no model achieving a complete pass [1] - The Ministry of Public Security has stated that all vehicles sold in China with "smart driving" systems are still in the auxiliary driving phase and do not possess "autonomous driving" capabilities [1][2] - The penetration rate of L2-level auxiliary driving has exceeded 50%, but this growth comes with significant risks of consumer misunderstanding due to misleading marketing [2][6] Group 2: Consumer Awareness and Misleading Marketing - Misleading marketing practices by some automakers blur the lines between auxiliary and autonomous driving, potentially leading consumers to misuse these systems [2][7] - There have been incidents where drivers engaged in dangerous behaviors, such as using their phones or sleeping while relying on auxiliary driving features, due to misconceptions about the technology [2][3] - The program emphasizes the need for clear communication regarding the limitations and appropriate use of auxiliary driving systems to prevent accidents [6][8] Group 3: Industry Responsibility and Regulation - Automakers are urged to adhere to responsible marketing practices and clearly define the capabilities and limitations of their auxiliary driving systems [7][9] - Regulatory bodies have begun to enforce guidelines that require automakers to avoid ambiguous language in their advertising, promoting a clearer understanding of the technology [7][8] - The industry must prioritize safety and transparency, ensuring that consumers are well-informed about the actual capabilities of auxiliary driving systems [9]

Core Viewpoint - The recent closed testing of 36 popular models equipped with driver assistance systems revealed a shocking average pass rate of only 35.73%, highlighting a significant gap between manufacturer claims and actual performance [1][2]. Group 1: Testing Results and Industry Reaction - None of the 36 tested models achieved a full score, raising concerns about the reliability of the technology [1]. - The testing results have sparked controversy, with some technical bloggers questioning the rigor of the testing methods and the design of the scenarios [1]. - Several car manufacturers have publicly refrained from commenting on the test results, implying disagreement with the findings [1]. Group 2: Regulatory and Policy Implications - The head of the Traffic Management Bureau of the Ministry of Public Security stated that currently sold vehicles in China with "smart driving" systems do not possess "autonomous driving" capabilities [1]. - The Ministry of Public Security plans to collaborate with the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology to conduct comprehensive tests to clarify system capabilities and safety measures [1]. - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology emphasized the importance of developing a robust testing framework for intelligent connected vehicles [1][2]. Group 3: Future Directions for the Industry - The improvement of the intelligent driving testing system is essential to meet industry needs and enhance consumer understanding of technology limits [2]. - Long-term safety in intelligent driving requires both accelerated technological advancements and a stable testing framework [2]. - The resolution of the current controversy could serve as a catalyst for the industry to transition from "wild growth" to "regulated development" [2].

Group 1 - A recent closed testing of 36 popular models equipped with driver assistance systems revealed that none achieved a perfect score, with an overall average pass rate of only 35.73% [1] - The test results starkly contrast with the claims made by automakers, leading to widespread controversy and skepticism regarding the testing methods and processes [1] - The debate surrounding the test has transcended technical issues, highlighting deeper industry contradictions regarding the rapid evolution of smart driving technology and the need for a more robust testing framework [1] Group 2 - The head of the Traffic Management Bureau of the Ministry of Public Security stated that currently sold vehicles in China with "smart driving" systems do not possess "autonomous driving" capabilities [1] - Future efforts will focus on conducting comprehensive tests to clarify the boundaries of system functions and safety response measures, aiming to eliminate exaggeration and false advertising [1] - The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology emphasized the importance of validating combined driving assistance tests during a recent meeting, indicating a push for improved testing standards [1][2] Group 3 - The improvement of the smart driving testing system requires acceleration to meet industry needs and enhance information symmetry, allowing consumers to better understand the capabilities and limitations of smart driving [2] - Long-term safety in smart driving relies on both rapid technological advancements and the establishment of a reliable testing framework [2] - The controversy sparked by the testing may serve as a catalyst for the industry to transition from "chaotic growth" to "regulated development," with a focus on clear standards and responsibilities for automakers [2]

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent auxiliary driving simulation tests conducted by the automotive information platform Dongche Di, highlighting the performance of various car brands and the implications for safety and technology in the industry [1][2]. Group 1: Test Results and Industry Response - The simulation tests involved 15 scenarios using nearly 40 models from over 20 brands, revealing that only 47% of vehicles could safely navigate a construction site at night, and 58% could effectively stop for a child unexpectedly crossing the road [1]. - Tesla achieved the best results in the tests, with 15 out of 36 vehicles receiving a "0 pass" rating in the high-speed accident scenario simulation [2]. - Industry leaders, including Lantu and AITO, expressed concerns about the testing methods and the need for improved technology in recognizing non-standard obstacles [3][4]. Group 2: Safety and Regulatory Considerations - The article emphasizes that L2 level auxiliary driving is not equivalent to autonomous driving, and drivers remain the primary safety responsibility [1][5]. - The head of the Traffic Management Bureau highlighted that all current "smart driving" systems in the market are still in the auxiliary driving phase, requiring human control [5][6]. - There are calls for stricter industry standards, including mandatory "failure backup capabilities" and a focus on the "worst-case scenario pass rate" to enhance safety measures [4].

Core Viewpoint - The automotive testing landscape is becoming increasingly competitive and controversial, with various companies and media outlets conducting their own tests to showcase their capabilities and influence consumer perception [3][4][14]. Group 1: Testing Events and Results - The "Dongche Smart Refinement Field" program by Dongche Di has sparked significant discussion, with all participating products failing to pass the tests [3][4]. - The tests simulated real-world driving scenarios, including highway and urban environments, using nearly 40 models from over 20 brands, with Tesla achieving the best results [4][5]. - Critics argue that the testing scenarios designed by Dongche Di have limitations and do not reflect the reliability of systems in all conditions [8][10]. Group 2: Industry Reactions - Major automotive brands, including Huawei and Geely, have publicly criticized the testing results, claiming they are misleading and lack scientific rigor [11][12]. - In response to the backlash, Dongche Di announced a second round of testing, which generated significant attention and engagement [13][14]. - The competitive nature of the automotive industry has led companies to conduct their own tests to validate their technologies and performance [17][21]. Group 3: Standards and Regulations - The automotive industry is governed by various testing standards, including mandatory national standards and recommended standards, which are crucial for vehicle safety and performance [25][26]. - Companies often exceed national standards in their self-conducted tests to highlight their technological advantages [30][34]. - The emergence of third-party testing centers has raised questions about the impartiality and reliability of test results, as different organizations may produce varying outcomes [33][38]. Group 4: Media and Public Perception - The rise of new media and social platforms has intensified the focus on automotive testing, with some media outlets conducting tests that lack standardized methodologies [40][42]. - There are concerns that some media tests prioritize sensationalism over accuracy, potentially misleading consumers [41][53]. - The automotive testing environment is characterized by a mix of genuine assessments and commercial interests, leading to calls for more standardized and transparent testing practices [52][54].

Core Insights - The recent evaluation of advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS) by Dongche Di sparked significant discussion, revealing that the average pass rate for nearly 40 tested models was only 35.74% across 15 simulated high-risk scenarios [1][3] Group 1: Test Results and Industry Response - Dongche Di's program tested over 40 models from popular brands, including Tesla, NIO, and BYD, in various urban and highway scenarios, with a disappointing overall performance [1] - Tesla's Model X and Model 3 performed notably well, passing 5 out of 6 highway scenarios and 8 out of 9 urban scenarios, respectively [3] - Tesla CEO Elon Musk claimed that the company achieved the "highest score" in the tests despite lacking local training data, emphasizing ongoing improvements in safety standards [3][6] Group 2: Industry Perspectives - Various automotive companies, including AITO and Zhijie, declined to comment on the evaluation results, indicating a cautious approach to public relations [8] - Lantu Automotive's executive highlighted the common technical challenges faced by the industry, particularly in extreme scenarios, and stressed the need for improved reliability in ADAS technology [9][10] - The evaluation results prompted Dongche Di to clarify that the tests were not meant for ranking but to educate consumers about the limitations of ADAS and the importance of driver responsibility [12][13] Group 3: Regulatory and Safety Considerations - The Chinese authorities reiterated that current ADAS systems do not equate to fully autonomous driving, emphasizing that drivers remain the primary responsible party [13][14] - The government plans to enhance regulations surrounding ADAS, including clearer definitions of system capabilities and responsibilities for manufacturers [14][15]

Core Viewpoint - The evaluation of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) by Dongche Di has sparked significant discussion, revealing that the average pass rate for nearly 40 tested models is only 35.74% across various simulated high-risk scenarios [2][17]. Group 1: Evaluation Results - Dongche Di's program tested over 40 models from popular brands, including Tesla, in 15 high-risk driving scenarios, with a disappointing average pass rate of 35.74% [2]. - Tesla's Model X and Model 3 performed notably well, passing 5 out of 6 highway scenarios and 8 out of 9 urban scenarios for Model X, while Model 3 passed 5 [4]. Group 2: Industry Reactions - Elon Musk claimed Tesla achieved the "highest score" in the tests despite lacking local training data, emphasizing the company's commitment to improving safety standards [4][9]. - Tesla's VP, Tao Lin, stated that the focus should remain on safety rather than rankings, highlighting the ongoing pursuit of higher safety standards [8]. Group 3: Industry Challenges - Lantu Automotive's CBO pointed out that the testing reflects common technical bottlenecks in the industry, particularly in high-speed avoidance and recognition of non-standard obstacles [13]. - The industry is transitioning from hardware competition to software reliability, necessitating improvements in technical capabilities [13]. Group 4: Regulatory Insights - The Chinese Ministry of Public Security clarified that current "smart driving" systems do not equate to full automation, emphasizing that drivers remain responsible for vehicle operation [17][19]. - The ministry plans to enhance management of car manufacturers, legal frameworks, and public awareness regarding the limitations of ADAS [18][19].