# Economic Impact Analysis of the Application of Different
## 6 Conclusions  
Considering the evaluated data, we can draw the following conclusions: \(IRR\) is a more suitable economic indicator, as it is more resilient to variations produced by pavement performance models.  
If the road administrator has access to more than one pavement performance model for a particular pavement parameter, he should follow one of these three approaches:  
1. Use of a performance model that is most suitable for the evaluation of particular pavement sections--if the road administration has access to several deterioration equations for the same parameter, he can add additional levels of classification (classification by climatic conditions, pavement layer thickness, pavement equivalent modulus of elasticity, bearing capacity, etc.). He can then use functions that most truly represent evaluated pavement sections.
2. Picking the best functions based on reliability (most information on pavement construction, traffic loading, high measurement frequency, etc.)--the road administration should pick the most reliable function and use it in all his economic evaluations; thus, any errors and aberrations from a real-time application will copy themselves evenly into all economic analysis results. This lowers the uncertainty by preventing advantages to some projects while handicapping other projects. This will ensure a valid precedence of priority and order of projects in the repair action plan.
3. The average function--multiple deterioration equations of one parameter can be used to calculate an average deterioration equation; this has all the benefits of the second approach described above and is best used if the best function can be reliably identified.  
[PERSON] drafted and wrote the manuscript, [PERSON] lead the APT research an coordinated the research team, [PERSON] performed in-situ measurements and collected the necessary data; [PERSON] performed LCCA for both evaluated models; [PERSON] provided rheological analysis of paving materials and performed fatigue testing necessary for APT, [PERSON] contributed to the final manuscript with, [PERSON] contributed to the final manuscript and provided spelling and grammar corrections. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research received no external funding.  
**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.  
**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.  
**Data Availability Statement:** Main part of the data used in this study can be found in cited publications. Part of the data is available on Slovak Road Administration databank on: [[https://www.cdb.sk/en/](https://www.cdb.sk/en/)]([https://www.cdb.sk/en/](https://www.cdb.sk/en/)) (accessed on 10 October 2021). The data presented in this study are also available on request from the corresponding author.  
**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{