Volume 11 , Issue 1 , PP: 08-21, 2023 | Cite this article as | XML | Html | PDF | Full Length Article
Nada A. Nabeeh 1 * , Alshaimaa A. Tantawy 2
Doi: https://doi.org/10.54216/JCIM.110101
Applications that are enabled by blockchain technology have been infused with a decentralized system without the need for intermediate entities. Blockchain technology indicates opportunities with various technologies and applications. Recently, a meteoric rise in the amount of interest has been indicated by academics in blockchain technology. Nevertheless, the acceptance of this blockchain technology paradigm in corporate distributed systems is not exactly promising. Executives and technocrats in a business are required to engage in multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) with operating uncertainty factors for the acceptance of new technologies. The proposed model aims to develop a model to identify and keep track of major elements that contribute to the sluggish pace for blockchain technology to be adopted by the general public. The study applied the Evaluation Based on the Distance from Average Solution (EDAS) approach to its interval-valued neutrosophic variant, which has the benefit of concurrently with the consideration of a decision maker's truthiness, falsity, and indeterminacy. The EDAS considers the distances of alternatives from the actual solutions considered by each criterion. In addition, the proposed model illustrated the use of neutrosophic theory with the EDAS method to rank blockchain technology in enterprise-distributed applications in uncertain conditions to aid decision-makers in optimal solutions. A numerical case study is illustrated to show the effectiveness of the proposed model in aiding decision-makers to achieve optimal solutions in uncertain conditions.
Blockchain Technology , Enterprises , Secure Distributed Applications , Uncertainty , EDAS , MCDM , Neutrosophic Sets
[1] I. Erol, I. M. Ar, I. Peker, and C. Searcy, “Alleviating the impact of the barriers to circular economy adoption through blockchain: an investigation using an integrated MCDM-based QFD with hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets,” Comput. Ind. Eng., vol. 165, p. 107962, 2022.
[2] S. Çıkmak, B. Kantoğlu, and G. Kırbaç, “Evaluation of the effects of blockchain technology characteristics on SCOR model supply chain performance measurement attributes using an integrated fuzzy MCDM methodology,” Int. J. Logist. Res. Appl., pp. 1–31, 2023.
[3] Z. H. Munim, S. Balasubramaniyan, M. Kouhizadeh, and N. U. I. Hossain, “Assessing blockchain technology adoption in the Norwegian oil and gas industry using Bayesian Best Worst Method,” J. Ind. Inf. Integr., vol. 28, p. 100346, 2022.
[4] B. Özkan, İ. Kaya, M. Erdoğan, and A. Karaşan, “Evaluating blockchain risks by using a MCDM methodology based on pythagorean fuzzy sets,” in Intelligent and Fuzzy Techniques in Big Data Analytics and Decision Making: Proceedings of the INFUS 2019 Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, July 23-25, 2019, Springer, 2020, pp. 935–943.
[5] I. Erol, A. Oztel, C. Searcy, and İ. T. Medeni, “Selecting the most suitable blockchain platform: A case study on the healthcare industry using a novel rough MCDM framework,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 186, p. 122132, 2023.
[6] E. Filatovas, M. Marcozzi, L. Mostarda, and R. Paulavičius, “A MCDM-based framework for blockchain consensus protocol selection,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 204, p. 117609, 2022.
[7] S. Zafar, Z. Alamgir, and M. H. Rehman, “An effective blockchain evaluation system based on entropy-CRITIC weight method and MCDM techniques,” Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl., vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 3110–3123, 2021.
[8] M. Kaska and A. C. Tolga, “Blockchain software selection for a maritime organization with MCDM method,” in Intelligent and Fuzzy Techniques: Smart and Innovative Solutions: Proceedings of the INFUS 2020 Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, July 21-23, 2020, Springer, 2021, pp. 543–549.
[9] I. Peker, I. M. AR, I. Erol, and C. Searcy, “Leveraging blockchain in response to a pandemic through disaster risk management: an IF-MCDM framework,” Oper. Manag. Res., pp. 1–26, 2022.
[10] M. Çolak, I. Kaya, B. Özkan, A. Budak, and A. Karaşan, “A multi-criteria evaluation model based on hesitant fuzzy sets for blockchain technology in supply chain management,” J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 935–946, 2020.
[11] Z. A. Siddiqui and M. Haroon, “Research on significant factors affecting adoption of blockchain technology for enterprise distributed applications based on integrated MCDM FCEM-MULTIMOORA-FG method,” Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., vol. 118, p. 105699, 2023.
[12] N. A. Nabeeh, M. Abdel-Basset, and G. Soliman, “A model for evaluating green credit rating and its impact on sustainability performance,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 280, p. 124299, 2021.
[13] M. Abdel-Basset, V. Chang, and N. A. Nabeeh, “An intelligent framework using disruptive technologies for COVID-19 analysis,” Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change, vol. 163, p. 120431, 2021.
[14] A. Abdel-Monem, A. A. Gawad, and H. Rashad, Blockchain Risk Evaluation on Enterprise Systems using an Intelligent MCDM based model, vol. 38. Infinite Study, 2020.
[15] S. Broumi, A. Bakali, and A. Bahnasse, “Neutrosophic sets: An overview,” 2018.
[16] M. Abdel-Basset, M. Mohamed, M. Elhoseny, F. Chiclana, and A. E.-N. H. Zaied, “Cosine similarity measures of bipolar neutrosophic set for diagnosis of bipolar disorder diseases,” Artif. Intell. Med., vol. 101, p. 101735, 2019.
[17] A. Ur Rahman, M. Saeed, S. S. Alodhaibi, and H. A. El-Wahed Khaifa, “Decision making algorithmic approaches based on parameterization of neutrosophic set under hypersoft set environment with fuzzy, intuitionistic fuzzy and neutrosophic settings,” Comput. Model. Eng. Sci., vol. 128, no. 2, pp. 743–777, 2021.
[18] M. Abdel-Basset, A. Gamal, G. Manogaran, L. H. Son, and H. V. Long, “A novel group decision making model based on neutrosophic sets for heart disease diagnosis,” Multimed. Tools Appl., vol. 79, no. 15, pp. 9977–10002, 2020.
[19] X. Peng and J. Dai, “A bibliometric analysis of neutrosophic set: two decades review from 1998 to 2017,” Artif. Intell. Rev., vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 199–255, 2020.
[20] A. Karaşan, C. Kahraman, and E. Boltürk, “Interval-valued neutrosophic EDAS method: an application to prioritization of social responsibility projects,” in Fuzzy Multi-criteria Decision-Making Using Neutrosophic Sets, Springer, 2019, pp. 455–485.
[21] I. Irvanizam et al., “An improved EDAS method based on bipolar neutrosophic set and its application in group decision-making,” Appl. Comput. Intell. Soft Comput., vol. 2021, pp. 1–16, 2021.
[22] S. Ashraf, S. Ahmad, M. Naeem, M. Riaz, and M. Alam, “Novel EDAS methodology based on single-valued neutrosophic Aczel-Alsina aggregation information and their application in complex decision-making,” Complexity, vol. 2022, 2022.
[23] A. Karaşan and C. Kahraman, “A novel interval-valued neutrosophic EDAS method: prioritization of the United Nations national sustainable development goals,” Soft Comput., vol. 22, pp. 4891–4906, 2018.
[24] D. Stanujkić et al., “A single-valued neutrosophic extension of the EDAS method,” Axioms, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 245, 2021.
[25] D. Xu, X. Cui, and H. Xian, “An extended EDAS method with a single-valued complex neutrosophic set and its application in green supplier selection,” Mathematics, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 282, 2020.
[26] Ö. F. Görçün, D. Pamucar, and S. Biswas, “The blockchain technology selection in the logistics industry using a novel MCDM framework based on Fermatean fuzzy sets and Dombi aggregation,” Inf. Sci. (Ny)., vol. 635, pp. 345–374, 2023.
[27] S. Farshidi, S. Jansen, S. España, and J. Verkleij, “Decision support for blockchain platform selection: Three industry case studies,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag., vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 1109–1128, 2020.
[28] M. Krstić, G. P. Agnusdei, P. P. Miglietta, and S. Tadić, “Evaluation of the smart reverse logistics development scenarios using a novel MCDM model,” Clean. Environ. Syst., vol. 7, p. 100099, 2022.
[29] N. Van Thanh, “Blockchain Development Services Provider Assessment Model for a Logistics Organizations,” Processes, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 1209, 2022.
[30] N. A. Nabeeh et al., “A Neutrosophic Evaluation Model for Blockchain Technology in Supply Chain Management,” in 2022 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), IEEE, 2022, pp. 1–8.
[31] N. A. Nabeeh, M. Abdel-Basset, A. Gamal, and V. Chang, “Evaluation of production of digital twins based on blockchain technology,” Electronics, vol. 11, no. 8, p. 1268, 2022.
[32] A. Karaşan and C. Kahraman, “Interval-valued neutrosophic extension of EDAS method,” in Advances in Fuzzy Logic and Technology 2017: Proceedings of: EUSFLAT-2017–The 10th Conference of the European Society for Fuzzy Logic and Technology, September 11-15, 2017, Warsaw, Poland IWIFSGN’2017–The Sixteenth International Workshop on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets and Generalized Nets, September 13-15, 2017, Warsaw, Poland, Volume 2 10, Springer, 2018, pp. 343–357.
