## 3 Proposed Methodology
### Identification of Key Criteria  
In this step, the survey was conducted among a cohort of more than 100 experts and decision-makers specializing in two groups, including academics and professionals in civil engineering and construction management disciplines with a minimum of five years of experience (Group 1) and professionals working in civil and construction industries with a minimum of five years of experience in the roles of project managers and civil engineers (Group 2). A total of 73 individuals completed the survey, resulting in a robust response rate of above 70%. These participants were classified into six distinct occupational categories: civil/structural engineering, architecture, construction, research, education, and other fields. It is worth noting the five-year exclusion was included to obtain more solid answers from those who have gained some level of experience to represent a range of domains within the infrastructure sector. The collected data provided a foundation for a decision matrix that serves as a universal reference for infrastructure projects. Participants rated the importance of criteria and sub-criteria, facilitating trend and pattern analysis across responses. This process enabled the prioritization of each factor, contributing to the development of a comprehensive constructability assessment framework. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Engineering Design** & & & \\
**and Construction** & **Logistics** & **Project Management** & **Regulations** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Aesthetics and Innovation} & Effective Communication & Operation and & Sustainability \\  & and Teamwork & Maintenance & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Construction Type} & Legal and & & \\  & Political Changes & & \\ Construction Duration & Supply Chain & & \\  & & & \\ Design and Complexity & Site Maneuverability & Quality & \\ Material Selection & Procurement and & & \\  & Contract Type & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Criteria and sub-criteria of survey. Finally, the collected responses involved calculating the importance of data to discern trends and patterns across different criteria and sub-criteria to commence the analysis, which consisted of determining the level of importance of each criterion and sub-criteria based on the population portion, ultimately aiding in developing a comprehensive decision matrix as a constructability assessment framework. Figure 2 presents the portion of occupational distribution among the respondents. The present research has collected the categorization of decision-making criteria. Accordingly, experts' opinions on the dominant criteria for constructability-related decision-making have been sought regarding the minimization of overlaps between categories and criteria. The principal emphasis of the survey was to ascertain the degree of recognition given to the main criteria and sub-criteria. As shown in Figure 3, 'Project Management' is the predominant factor in constructability assessment, comprising a substantial percentage of 26.55%. This result underscores the crucial role of effective project management in ensuring constructability. Furthermore, the survey results reveal that 'Regulations' was assigned a noteworthy rating of 25.06%, emphasizing its significance in constructability assessment in second place. 'Logistics' and 'Engineering Design and Construction' placed in the third and fourth spots, receiving ratings of 24.67% and 23.75%, respectively. Subsequently, a robust statistical approach was employed to evaluate the importance of these findings quantitatively. The result is the dedicated number for each factor in their own group, which enables the comparison of their level of impact in decision-making. It is noteworthy that extra integer weights of 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 were specified and applied to the level of importance with 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9, respectively, to make a solid calculation.