# A Multi-Objective Evaluation Method for Smart Highway Operation and Management
## 3 Establishment of the Smart Highway Evaluation Framework
### Hierarchical Design of the Framework  
Due to the intricate nature of the smart highway system, its evaluation entails various aspects. Hence, a suitable evaluation system should incorporate a multi-tiered, hierarchical weighting structure to comprehensively evaluate diverse dimensions.  
Figure 3: Establishment process of the evaluation system.  
In this paper, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is utilized to design the evaluation system for smart highways, systematically dividing the indicator system into the Target Level (Level A), Guideline Level (Level B), and Indicator Level (Level C). The Target Level assesses the purpose of the evaluation system and the issues it addresses, thereby establishing the logical framework for evaluating smart highways. The Guideline Level and Indicator Level can be further broken down into sub-levels according to specific evaluation content. The Guideline Level addresses the diversity of evaluations and evaluation criteria, along with data accessibility and the future requirements of smart highways. The Indicator Level examines the parameters and sources of content essential for decision analysis. The ultimate objective is to conduct a direct evaluation of the smart highway's condition using practical and quantifiable data derived from real engineering projects.  
The Delphi method [46] is an approach that integrates opinions from multiple experts. It is utilized to mitigate subjective factors in establishing indicators and to further enhance the initial reference model. The process entails soliciting expert judgments through questionnaires, and then compiling and summarizing the feedback without revealing individual responses. If significant inconsistencies are present in the results, additional rounds of expert opinions are sought. This iterative process aids in converging expert opinions, resulting in a progressively growing consensus and objectivity in the composite opinions [47]. In this study, 12 road maintenance and inspection experts with substantial frontline work experience and managerial expertise were invited for consultation. The expertise of the experts was assessed based on objective criteria including qualifications and academic achievements, as well as subjective factors like evaluation experience and professionalism. Each expert possessed over 5 years of professional experience, and held technical titles at the engineer level or higher. It is advisable to appoint these experts to constitute an expert panel responsible for presenting the smart highway framework system to all peers. Furthermore, the experts received pertinent information to inform their deliberations. Subsequently, upon gathering anonymous feedback from the questionnaire survey, the experts were requested to offer additional feedback in two consecutive rounds. This process promotes greater consistency in expert opinions, facilitating the acquisition of the most optimal and appropriate viewpoints while mitigating potential biases.  
After conducting initial research, an overarching framework for the evaluation system was formulated, as illustrated in Figure 4. The evaluation system's target layer is segmented into three key indicators: \"Facility structure\", \"Electromechanical facilities\", and \"Operation services\". This segmentation approach primarily considers the current industry model and regulatory framework governing highway operation and management in China. The three main indicators provide a comprehensive description and evaluation of smart highways from construction and operational viewpoints. This segmentation is coherent with the organizational structure of current management departments, thereby streamlining subsequent implementation processes.