Confusion Over ADAS Naming and Upgrade Limits in NEVs Sparks Concern

Currently, competition in the new energy vehicle (NEV) market centers on advanced driver-assistance systems (ADAS). Automakers commonly use personalized numeric naming schemes—such as “3, 5, 7” or “500, 700, 900”—to differentiate ADAS offerings based on computing power, hardware configurations, and pricing. While these naming conventions highlight product differentiation, they obscure clear distinctions between ADAS levels, making it difficult for consumers to accurately understand the functional boundaries of each system. Such naming practices circumvent existing regulatory definitions of ADAS levels, potentially leading users to misjudge their vehicles’ actual capabilities and increasing the risk of safety incidents due to improper operation. Market disputes primarily revolve around the distinction between Level 2 and Level 3 ADAS, with the core issue being whether drivers must remain ready to take over control at all times and how liability is assigned in the event of an accident. Regulators have stepped up efforts to standardize marketing claims related to ADAS. Moreover, although some vehicles support over-the-air (OTA) updates, the ADAS level is jointly determined by hardware architecture and regulatory certification; software updates typically only refine the user experience of existing functionalities. Most Level 2 systems, constrained by their hardware design, cannot be upgraded via OTA to achieve Level 3 capabilities. Furthermore, Level 3 autonomous driving requires rigorous certification, and relevant licenses are still in a pilot phase. Even if a vehicle possesses the underlying hardware potential, any newly unlocked functionality must undergo re-certification before an official upgrade in ADAS level can be confirmed.