# Criteria for Route Evaluation of Automated Buses
## 4 Results of the Expert Interview
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline \hline
**Road Infrastructure** & **Junctions** & **Objects** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Localization and** \\ **Communication** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **Stability and** \\ **Authorization of the ODD** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Lane width & Intersection & Traffic volume & Mobile date & Construction sites \\ \hline Gradient & Traffic lights & Traffic diversity & Number of satellites & Anululance service \\ Underpassence & Roundabout & \begin{tabular}{c}rafted vehicles \\ \end{tabular} & Vegetation/buildings & Vegetation/mass \\ \hline Continuity of the road & T-junction & Static obstacles & & Street lighting \\ \hline Bicycle lane & Pedestrian crossing & Pedestrian zone & Rivers/ditches/water \\ \hline Sidewalk & Road priority & Parallel bus line & & Number of accidents \\ \hline Public transport stops & Railway crossing & Traffic signs & & Spatial organization \\ \hline Lane-marking & & \begin{tabular}{c} Road signs \\ (gravel, girt) \\ \end{tabular} & & Historical preservation area \\ \hline Number of lanes & & No-parking zone & Weight restriction \\ \hline Road surface & & No-stopping zone & Rain \\ \hline Tram tracks & & Maximum speed & Temperature \\ \hline Curve & & One-way street & Wind \\ \hline Delivery areas & & Areas with high passenger traffic & Fog \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|} \hline \hline  & & \begin{tabular}{c} Show \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \begin{tabular}{|c|c|} \hline \hline  & & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Dust \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Legend:
\begin{tabular}{c} Multi-bus-minutes-certifi \\ \end{tabular} & green = must-have criteria & orange = should-have criteria & yellow = can \\ \hline have criteria. & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Criteria influencing the use of an automated bus according to the expert interviews. However, the experts did mention the criterion \"railway crossing\" as a new criterion, which had already led to a great deal of coordination with the railway operator in some operations with automated buses. The category \"objects\" includes all criteria related to static and dynamic objects in the road traffic environment and their speeds. The criterion \"maximum speed\", for example, refers to the applicable speed limit on a road (see Table 1 in the Appendix A). The criterion \"areas with heavy pedestrian traffic\" was mentioned by the experts for the first time in comparison to the work of [PERSON] et al. [29]. These include, for example, schools, churches, or train stations. The three criteria in the area of localization and communication were confirmed by the experts: \"mobile data connection\", \"number of satellites\", and \"vegetation/buildings\". All criteria that could influence the operational design domain and the licensing of automated buses are summarized in the fifth category. These include, in particular, weather-related criteria, such as rain, temperature and snow. Furthermore, construction sites and emergency service stations mean that automated buses have to adapt to new road layouts and priority for emergency vehicles. The criteria \"spatial organization\", \"historical preservation area\", and \"weight restriction\" primarily relate to the licensing of vehicles. Compared to the original criteria from the literature and [PERSON] et al., the experts added \"wind\", \"fog\", \"snow\", \"dust\", \"dirty roads\", and \"low sun\" [29]. In addition to identifying the criteria, the expert interviews also explored the direction of their impact (see Table 1 in the Appendix A) and their respective weighting. Experts assessed the influence of each criterion on a scale of low (one point), medium (two points), and high (three points). If a criterion was not mentioned by an expert, it was assigned zero points. The assessments provided by each expert were summed up to determine the total influence of each criterion.