## 4 Derive Assessment Templates
### Derive Attributes for KETs  
The general safety objectives include potential hazards during a generalised ADS operation, including internal system and external environmental hazards. The process denoted three in Figure 4 deals with assessing the risks associated with identified hazards [33; 34; 35], relevant to the reliance of KETs by analysing the likelihood and severity of potential incidents or accidents. Furthermore, strategies and measures, such as safety implementation, are devised to alleviate these identified risks. To evaluate the influence exerted by KETs on the ODD of an ADS, the ISO 34503 \"Test scenarios for Automated Driving Systems--Specification for operational design domain\" is used as a baseline [8]. ISO 34503 applies to ADS levels 3-4 and provides requirements for a hierarchical taxonomy that identifies the ODD, considering static and dynamic attributes. ISO 34503 proposes dividing the operating conditions into three primary attributes: scenery, environmental conditions, and dynamic elements. Scenery refers to nonmoving elements; dynamic elements represent moving elements in the operating environment; and environmental conditions encompass factors between geographical and temporal attributes, including meteorological weather parameters relevant to the ODD. The hierarchy in ISO 34503 provides a base set of attributes that can be expanded based on stakeholder needs. To better incorporate KETs into the ODD taxonomy, the connectivity category in ISO 34503 can be refined to include communication, positioning, and cybersecurity. Communication requirements can include coverage, latency, throughput, and predictability, as listed in Table 1. Positioning requirements encompass absolute and relative positioning with subattributes like accuracy, precision, and refresh rate integrity, as shown in Table 2. Cybersecurity requirements can be derived based on the categorisation proposed by [PERSON] [36], as presented in Table 3. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l p{227.6 pt}} \hline \hline
**Attributes** & **Description** \\ \hline Coverage & The geographic area or range within a carrier’s defined service. Indicates the solution’s ability to establish and maintain connectivity. \\ \hline Latency & Time delay between a message being sent by a sender and being received by the intended recipient. Indicates the responsiveness of the communication solution. \\ \hline Throughput & Number of data packets that can be transferred within a specific time. Indicates the solution’s capacity to handle data traffic. \\ \hline Predictability & Consistency and reliability of solution performance. Indicates the ability to pre-empt and plan for degraded coverage, latency, and throughput. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: When assessing a V2X communication solution, the following attributes should be considered. Numerous vital questions still need to be addressed and recognised, including supporting cooperative functions and allocating responsibilities to ensure a safe implementation across multiple brands. Additionally, considerations of interdependence within the ODD must be examined, including the specification and testing of supported vehicle velocities and establishing a trusted chain of external data sources. These external data sources should have a seamless chain of trust and consistent uncertainty measurements and also assessments of common time-base solutions for synchronised cooperative ADS. While the attributes presented in Tables 1-3 may not cover all the gathered requirements, and in all likelihood, not all relevant concerns are addressed, they provide useful patterns and attribute families to analyse the performance of KETs and map them to the ODD. Additional research is required to delve into coverage and comprehensiveness when mapping an ODD to specific isolated technology elements, encompassing specification and testing.