# Automated Evaluation of C-ITS Message Content for Enhanced Compliance and Reliability
## 3 Results
### Scenario 2  
In this scenario, the third-party OBU was configured to broadcast CAMs (Cooperative Awareness Messages) with the following setup:  
* Station Type: \"cyclist\",
* Vehicle Role: \"commercial\". The main objective was to verify that the third-party OBU correctly transmitted CAMs according to the relevant standards. The C-ITS SIM system, acting as a receiver, logged the messages to assess their compliance with the expected parameters and configurations. During the test, a total of 294 CAMs were transmitted by the third-party OBU. These were logged by C-ITS SIM and analyzed by [PERSON] to ensure that all parameters were broadcasted correctly. The results are summarized in Table 2.  
We can see that the results for Scenario 2 are relatively similar to those of the first scenario. This indicates that the third-party OBU used in this scenario was configured in a similar manner. This outcome is not unexpected, given that the third-party OBU also lacks certain confidence parameters. Specifically, the following points should be considered for this type of OBU when deploying it in traffic:  
* Confidence parameters missing: Parameters such as semiMajor, semiMinor, altitude, heading, speed, longitudinalAcceleration, curvature, and yawRate Confidence were not set. These confidence parameters are essential for precise data interpretation and should ideally be included to ensure accurate vehicle information. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline
**Container** & **Total** & **OK** & **Warning** & **Error** \\ \hline Header & 3 & 3 & 0 & 0 \\ CAM & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ basic & 8 & 2 & 6 & 0 \\ highFrequency & 15 & 3 & 12 & 0 \\ lowFrequency & 3 & 3 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline Total & 30 & 12 & 18 & 0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: CAM analysis summary for Scenario 1, showing the number of parameters evaluated for each container. The ‘Total’ column represents the total parameters analyzed, ‘OK’ indicates those received without issues, and ‘Warning’ highlights parameters that triggered warnings due to unavailable values. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline
**Container** & **Total** & **OK** & **Warning** & **Error** \\ \hline Header & 3 & 3 & 0 & 0 \\ CAM & 1 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ basic & 8 & 2 & 6 & 0 \\ highFrequency & 15 & 3 & 12 & 0 \\ lowFrequency & 3 & 3 & 0 & 0 \\ \hline Total & 30 & 12 & 18 & 0 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: CAM analysis summary for Scenario 2, showing the number of parameters evaluated for each container. The ‘Total’ column represents the total parameters analyzed, ‘OK’ indicates those received without issues, and ‘Warning’ highlights parameters that triggered warnings due to unavailable values. * Parameters affected by stationary status: The parameters driveDirection, longitudinalAccelerationValue, and yawRate were absent or marked as unavailable. In this scenario, this is acceptable because the OBU was stationary during testing. For stationary OBUs, unavailable values for dynamic parameters are generally acceptable. * Default values for vehicle-specific parameters: Parameters like vehicleLengthValue, vehicleLengthConfidenceIndication, and vehicleWidth were marked as unavailable. This is expected because the OBU was not configured for a specific vehicle. These parameters will be filled once the OBU is installed in an actual vehicle, with unavailable being the default value before proper installation. This evaluation highlights that while the third-party OBU's configuration aligns with the expected setup, the lack of certain parameters and the use of default values reflect its non-specific, generic state. When deploying such OBUs in a real-world environment, it is important to configure these parameters appropriately to ensure full compliance with traffic standards and accurate data reporting. In conclusion, despite the missing confidence parameters and the use of default values for some vehicle-specific parameters, the third-party OBU conforms to the relevant standards.