# Measures and Methods for the Evaluation of ATO Algorithms
## 6 Future Research Perspectives  
In this work, an approach was presented which emphasizes the importance of testing ATO algorithms for their performance behaviour in different challenging situations, while having shown the applicability of the approach, an improvement of the approach, as well as the other components of the framework based on the shortcomings described in the previous section, is desirable. This also includes the detailed testing of the different influencing factors to evaluate their actual impact on the performance.  
The more specific definition of standards can be seen as a further opportunity for improvement. Here, the definition of a uniform scenario format, for example, based on the layer model, or the consideration of already existing formats is possible.  
In general, the question remains open which level of performance can and needs to be expected under varying operating conditions. In this context, the KPIs can provide an important indication of the values to be achieved, but the definition of these criteria for performance only seems to make sense with simultaneous consideration of the real routes existing in the network and their characteristics.  
For the indicators of comfort, stopping accuracy, and possibly punctuality, generally applicable values can be defined and have been already partially provided in the scope of this approach. The evaluation of the energy demand, capacity and the individual indicators of the safety KPI is route-dependent and will have to be substantiated by empirical values and feasible targets.  
Lastly, if the specifications for ATO over ETCS are finally realized a further analysis of the interfaces defined within those specifications can be worthwhile. These interfaces have to certainly include messages, status updates and variables which need to be sent out by the ATO onboard or trackside unit. Because of the therefore necessary standardization, useful data might be available generally. This data could allow more extensive ATO performance analyses but is limited to systems under the ATO over ETCS concept.  
Conceptualization, P.B.; methodology, P.B.; software, P.B.; validation, P.B.; investigation, P.B.; writing--original draft preparation, B.J. and P.B.; writing--review and editing, B.J. and P.B.; visualization, P.B.; supervision, B.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research received no external funding.  
Not applicable.  
We would like to thank [PERSON] from ProRail, the railway infrastructure manager in The Netherlands, for supporting this work through thorough discussions and the internship opportunity with ProRail.  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.  
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:  
6 LM 6-layer model  
ADAS  Advanced Driver Assistance System  
ASAM  Association for Standardization of Automation and Measuring Systems  
ATO  Automatic Train Operation  
ATP  automatic train protection  
AV  Automatic vehicle  
BEA  Basic Energy Analysis  
CTP  critical timing point  
DAS  Driver Advisory System  
ETCS  European Train Control System  
GoA  Grade of Automation  
ISO  International Standardization Organization  
KPI  Key performance indicator  
MA  Movement Authority  
ODD  Operational Design Domain  
PSD  platform screen doors  
SAE  Society of Automotive Engineers  
SBB  Schweizerische Bundesbahnen  
TSI  Technical Specifications for Interoperability