## 4 Methodology

Table 1: Descriptors according to the AHP method [53]. Figure 5: The structure of determining transport service in the region (authors). For the assessment of significance or suitability, it is recommended to use a point scale equipped with the so-called descriptors (see Table 1). To more finely distinguish the elements within the compared pairs, it is also possible to use the values 2, 4, 6, and 8 in the \"Number of points\" column. Owing to the technical specifics of the AHP method (and the practical use of the proposed multicriteria analysis system), it is necessary to define the selection criteria of the service system on the line such that they can be divided into several common groups (two to four general criteria), which may subsequently include two to four logically related subcriteria. The proposed breakdown of the proposed criteria is presented in Table 2.  
The criteria do not include the fare amount (or the costs to users of the transport system), as they are assumed to be the same for all service variants. _Multicriteria Analysis Methods_  
Multicriteria evaluation is a comprehensive evaluation method that minimises the degree of subjectivity when choosing a suitable alternative (e.g., routing or modal characteristics of a public passenger transport line). For example, in [55], a multicriteria evaluation of the potential of introducing high-speed railway routes in Turkey was presented. In the case of multicriteria evaluation, it is important to consider the aspects of different evaluation criteria and assign weights to individual criteria. This method has also been used in previous research [56]. Using a multicriteria evaluation tool, the authors developed a solution for optimising public transport performance. The task of multicriteria evaluation is to describe objective reality when selecting a variant using standard procedures and thus formalise the given decision-making problem (convert it to a mathematical model of a multicriteria decision-making situation). If the proposal allows for several variants of line management in a certain area, it will not make sense to assess transport service systems using individual lines. It is also necessary to separate a segment from the network--a complete set of transport routes--which is affected by the variant line solution; however, it is valid that this variability in the line solution does not affect the routing of the lines in the rest of the network. In this case, each permissible transport service system (as a variant within the multicriteria analysis) must be defined for the segment and not for individual lines. Multicriteria analysis consists of two basic steps, which are the determination of criteria weights and the evaluation of the overall usefulness of individual variants. Several methods are available to determine the weights of the criteria and the optimal variant. Although the AHP method is one of the most objective and accurate methods of multicriteria decision making, it has several shortcomings. One of the most serious problems is the burden of \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**General Criteria** & **Subcriteria** \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Availability of boarding and alighting points} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Status of boarding, alighting, and transfer points} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Regularity and even daily coverage} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Integration potential} \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Passenger safety} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Quality of transport from the perspective of a passenger} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{on board} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Travel comfort} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Operational reliability} \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Public sector costs} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Demand for subsidies} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Infrastructure investment} \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{Impact on the environment} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Socioeconomic development of the area} \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{Transport problems caused} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}