Abstract
Blockchain knowledge signifies a useful fundamental knowledge to safeguard faith in transboundary transmittals for main banks and financial institutions. In the study of group decisionmaking, the most important issue is how to coordinate opinions from different blockchains to reach a compromise under uncertainty. To tackle uncertainties surrounding multiattribute group decisionmaking (MAGDM) problems in reallife scenes, we introduce a trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy set which generalizes trapezoidal fuzzy sets and fermatean fuzzy sets. The trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy model enables the degrees of membership, abstention, and nonmembership to be expressed by linguistic terms. We define the operational laws of trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy numbers, and Einstein aggregation operator based on the trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy number. This makes it more flexible and descriptive to model the attitudes of Blockchain knowledge in MAGDM applications. Since multiinput arguments are interconnected and Blockchain knowledge has a lot of options perception, we also define the TOPSIS technique to facilitate the fusion of trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy information. With the aid of the trapezoidal fermatean fuzzyTOPSIS technique, the main goal of this research is to present a general MAGDM framework by integrating the step with the complex proportional assessment. A trapezoidal fermatean positive ideal solution always wants the maximum value of the benefit criteria and the minimum value of the cost criteria. On the other hand, the trapezoidal fermatean negative ideal solution always wants the maximum value of the cost criteria and the minimum value of the benefit criteria. An integrated trapezoidal fermatean fuzzyTOPSIS framework is established. In the proposed decision framework, the trapezoidal fermatean fuzzyTOPSIS method is utilized to identify the subjective weights of decision attributes, and the trapezoidal fermatean fuzzyTOPSIS approach is used to rank alternatives. Lastly, a case study concerning blockchain knowledge assessment is presented to demonstrate that the suggested scheme is feasible and effective. Furthermore, sensitivity and comparison analyses are conducted to show the robustness and superiority of the proposed method.
1 Introduction
Since the advent of Bitcoin in 2008, the indispensable folder plan of a blockchain has conventional wide care (Gupta 2017). A blockchain is a circulated archive skill that contains the greatest data consecutively on peertopeer systems. Since separately contributors can admittance the complete catalog and important annals (Chen 2018), the dealings container be preserved by a collection of bulges, and thus, a reliable third gathering can be eradicated when standards change (Beck and MullerBloch 2017; Birch et al. 2016; Lin et al. 2017). Moreover, as the dispersed archive is of extraordinary clearness, sanctuary, immutability, and decentralization, the blockchain has been practicing in the areas of finances, medication, Internet of Belongings (Li et al. 2017), and reproduction intellect (Zhang et al. 2021), for requests such as economic dealings (Wang et al. 2019; Varma 2019), fitness overhaul data organization (Yaqoob et al. 2021), source cable organization (Liu et al. 2019), and management actions such as translucent elective and numerical autographs. Using this system, one can produce truthful alphanumeric chronicles (Lemieux 2016), condense business budget, confirm data photographs, develop the reimbursement stretch to comprehend efficient methods (Holotiuk et al. 2019), portion data midst members, stop repeated or falsified dealings (Hoy 2017), and inferior the dangers of scheme failure (Ozkan et al. 2019). Individuals encounter their vital needs such as warming and illumination with the assistance of vitality. On the other hand, vitality is considered one of the foremost important crude materials in industrial production. Vitality may be a significant calculate for the maintainable development of the nations.
An object from Harvard Commercial Appraisal declared that a blockchain prepared to set and law companies what the Internet fixed to television (Ito et al. 2017). The monetary facility arena develops an innovator in the examination of substructures and commercial replicas based on blockchains (Beck and MüllerBloch 2017), and frequent main sets and fiscal organizations have assumed blockchain skill in doings, such as defrayal and defrayal, crossborder payment, numerical promoting, source chain economics, recognition journalism, user individuality confirmation and explanation sympathy (Beck et al. 2016). In addition, numerous blockchain startups have industrialized blockchain technology explanations for doings in major sets and economic organizations. In this situation, the difficulty of the assortment of a fitting blockchain skill provider by a major bank or financial organization, based on several criteria, has appeared. Owing to the intricacy of blockchain technology, which comprises inconsistent and discordant criteria such as the rate and speediness, effectiveness and risk, and deficient perception and understanding of the specific decisionmaker, blockchain skill provider variety for chief sets is observed as definitive multicriteria group decisionmaking problematic.
Because of the complicacy of blockchain skill and inadequate data and involvement of the DMs, the criteria or substitutes frequently cannot be assessed as finished crisp values. Zadeh (1965) started the fuzzy set principle by applying the membership degree to define indecision. Then, many delays were industrialized. Turksen (1986) protracted this method to an intervalvalued fuzzy set that portrayed the membership degree. Atanassov (1986) and Atanassov and Gargov (1989) presented an intuitionistic fuzzy set and an intervalvalued intuitionistic fuzzy (IVIF) set, which detained an idea of the nonmembership grade and satisfied the resultant complaint: the synopsis of membership and nonmembership gradations is not developed than 1.
Zhou and Chen (2021) revolutionized fact workers to designate members' risk favorites concerning a blockchain and then prejudiced succeeding rudiments indoors the decision matrix. However, the damage boldness level dislikes animatedly reproduced the DM's thinking in the current methods and the DMs' mental alteration concerning the blockchain program.
Aslam et al. (2022) presented concurrent access control and monitoring of ERP, private permissioned Blockchain using Proof of Elapsed Time consensus is more suitable. The study also investigated the bottleneck issue of transaction processing rates (TPR) of Blockchain consensus, specifically ERP's TPR. Alam et al. (2022) introduced the finally comes up with various implementation requirements in Government, Health, Finance, Economics, and Energy. Qahtan et al. (2022) introduced employed to benchmark blockchainbased IoT healthcare Industry 4.0 systems through the combined gray relational analysis technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (GRATOPSIS) and the bald eagle search (BES) optimization method.
Shuaib et al. (2022a) presented avoiding conflict and to support Environmental Sustainability. These traditional land registry applications also lack identity parameters due to weaknesses in identity solutions. A secure and reliable digital identity solution is the need of the hour. Selfsovereign identity (SSI), a new concept, is becoming more popular as a secure and reliable identity solution for users based on identity principles. SSI provides users with a way to control their personal information and consent for it to be used in various ways. In addition, the user's identity details are stored in a decentralized manner, which helps to overcome the problems with digital identity solutions. Shuaib et al. (2022b) presented a design to overcome these limitations and provide a secure, reliable, and efficient identity solution that gives complete control to the users over their personal identity information. Shuaib et al. (2022c) presented examined the current land registry model and its shortcomings. It explains the various blockchain types and their characteristics. It further evaluates the usability of blockchain technology in different aspects of the land registry. Identity management is one of such weaknesses in the blockchainbased land registry model that has been assessed in detail. Identity issues of blockchainbased models have been further evaluated on defined criteria. Rahmani et al. (2022) presented the centralization, huge overhead, trust evidence, less adaptive, and inaccuracy. This systematic review has been performed in six stages: identifying the research question, research methods, screening the related articles, abstract and keyword examination, data retrieval, and mapping processing. Atlas, the software is used to analyze the relevant articles based on keywords. A total of 70 codes and 262 quotations are compiled, and furthermore, these quotations are categorized using manual coding. Bhatia et al. (2022) introduction to train endtoend segmentation of pixels into vessel and background classes.
This technique reflects both the impartial valuations regarding the consistent criteria and the individual risk outlooks concerning blockchain skills. We describe a set of criteria to lengthily degree the blockchain technology benefactors' performance regarding the crossborder transmittal for chief sets in contract with the available works and stunning topographies of blockchain skill. We assume the TOPSIS, which can precisely define the unclearness and misgivings in rulings due to insufficient assumption and participation related to the blockchain, to acquire the criterion weights with TrFF data. We adventure the TrFF TOPSIS technique to discover the comprehensive sovereignty grade for each claimant, and dynamic the candidates in reducing order seeing the DM's risk desire concerning a blockchain by conclusive the decrease issue of the offended. We appliance compassion training by changing the lessening factor arithmetic value and secondary the consequences with individuals got using the contemporary TrFFPIS and TrFFNIS technique to authenticate its success and suitability of our obtainable mixture method.
The rest of the paper is summarized in Sect. 2, which we offer about the properties of fundamental ideas. Section 3, we exhibit of TrFFNs and operational laws. Section 4, we define the MCDM based on the TrFF TOPSIS technique. Section 5, the request for the developed technique in GDM is a visible example. Section 6, we considered comparative analysis. Finally, a material conclusion is certain in Sect. 7.
1.1 Literature review
This section concisely appraisals the standards and methods for measuring blockchain technologies, stages, crops, and suppliers. This places the basis to create the criteria to choose the suitable blockchain technology supplier for main sets or financial organizations which means relating blockchain skills throughout the procedure of crossborder transmittal.
A blockchain is a type that consists of a growing list of records, called blocks, that are securely linked together using cryptography. Each block contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block, a timestamp, and transaction data (generally represented as a Merkle tree, where data nodes are represented by leaves). The timestamp proves that the transaction data existed when the block was created. Since each block contains information about the block before it, they effectively form a chain (compare linked list data structure), with each additional block linking to the ones before it. Consequently, blockchain transactions are irreversible in that, once they are recorded, the data in any given block cannot be altered retroactively without altering all subsequent blocks.
However, many researchers (50, 51) employed in the arena of smearing digital individuality explanations for blockchainbased property archive schemes inveterate the subject of noncompliance with numerical identity values. So though emerging a unique explanation for a blockchainbased land archive organization, these subjects need attention (52, 53).
Blockchains are typically managed by a computer network for use as a public distributed ledger, where nodes collectively adhere to a consensus algorithm protocol to add and validate new transaction blocks. Although blockchain records are not unalterable, since blockchain forks are possible, blockchains may be considered secure by design and exemplify a distributed computing system with high Byzantine fault tolerance.
Owed to the existence of developing technology, a methodical evaluative criteria scheme for the presentation assessment of blockchain skill suppliers has not been recognized, though academics have browbeaten sure standards to assess blockchain technologies, crops, or facilities. Tang et al. (2019) invented a usual assessment scheschementing 3 main criteria and 11 subclubcriteria selected schemes for a suitable community blockchain, in which skill, credit, and applied action remained the key issues. Özkan et al. (2019) created a usual assessment to assess the blockchain skill risk. The safety matter was the greatest dangerous risk at the primary equal, and cyberattacks, confidentiality subjects, and exercise prices were the greatest dangerous dangers at the extra equal. Jin et al. (2019) assessed sustainable blockchain skiskillseing the price, generation, concert, and aftersales facility. Farshidi et al. (2020) obtainable an order of standards, counting functionality, flexibility, and compatibility with obtainable software foodstuffs, to choose a blockchain stage. Colak et al. (2020) offered a multicriteria evaluative style to measure blockchain skills used in a stock hawser system. Yoon et al. (2020) struggled to discover the issues manipulating the alteration of blockchain technology inside the nautical logistics arena and recognized pertinent alteration variables in footings of ecological, structural, economic, and practical issues. Ozdemir et al. (2019) proposed rudimentary criteria to measure a blockchain request in tourism, which comprised the blockchain supremacy form, stages, agreement kind, operation of cryptocurrency, keen agreements, and marks.
As designated in Table 1, price (85.71%), ability (78.57%), creation and facility excellence (64.29%), and safety (64.29%) exhibition high rank. Though, binary limits are originating in the existing criteria for blockchain agendas. Pertinent danger issues are not devoted to rank in existing poetry. Meanwhile, crossborder payment is an important procedure in financial organizations, the supplies for speed, care, and correctness are severe. Blockchain founded on confusion processes and encryption skills can protect the safety of the transmittal. However, the whole staff must contribute to the control to attain an agreement, which leads to little competence and a minor amount of dealings per additional (Tang et al. 2019). Hence, it is crucial to exploit the assessment of blockchain suppliers, seeing the high presentation and little apparent danger. Care and jeopardy switch are binary features of one driver, so we container shape the chief criteria called refuge risk. Technological equality, creation and facility excellence, fiscal issues, and safety danger are stared as the chief criteria and a crucial essential to finding pertinent subcriteria to measure the presentation of blockchain skill suppliers relating to the available criteria and exclusive features of crossborder transmittals in financial establishments. From this assessment, this item proposes to shape graded evaluative criteria for chief series or economic foundations that propose to relate blockchain technology in crossborder settlement slog. The criteria for the scientific smooth can be divided into fundamental skill, scalability, interoperability, and dispensation rapidity. The criteria for the creation and facility excellence can be divided into the generation of the creation, rudimentary facility, after deals facility, and additional service. The fiscal influence can be segmented into Table 1.
First, incomplete devices use fuzzy data to measure blockchain presentation. Among the current works regarding blockchain knowledge valuation, Çolak et al. (2020), Bai and Sarkis (2020), and Karaşan et al. (2021) used hesitant fuzzy data. Owing to the absence of information and skills concerning blockchain skills, rulings relating to the criteria might not be precise, and the crisp numbers might not exactly reflect the DMs' rulings (Tables 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7).
1.2 Novelties
In this article, we mark an effort to integrate and speech the following ideas:

i.
To describe innovative operational law for trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy data which is a valuable complement of standing operational law and examined their arithmetical possessions.

ii.
To present new operators like trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy data fuzzy aggregation operators.

iii.
Proposition of MCGDM strategy in TrFF environment.

iv.
To demonstrate the proposed method, we solved a numerical problem based on a reallife problem.

v.
A sensitivity analysis is performed to show the utility and efficiency of the designed method.
1.3 Contributions and structure
This research has contributed to the exploration of MAGDM under uncertainty in the following aspects:

The TrFF is introdTFS as a new generalization in TrFS theory to tackle the complexities in numerical data by combing the TrFN terms and FFN.

The TrFFE operator, TrFF TOPSIS technique are proposed by the integration MAGDM.

A MAGDM innovation for blockchain assessment in TrFF based on the TrFF TOPSIS technique is established.

An assessment framework of the blockchain selection scheme using the proposed MAGDM innovation is constructed.
The essential innovations of this object associated with the current blockchain evaluative standards and approaches container be drawn as surveys:

A sequence of regular standards is created to choose the appropriate blockchain skill supplier for main sets or financial organizations, which can contribute to the DMs smearing the blockchain to the crossborder transmittal action.

The TrFF sets are practical in the presentation assessment of the blockchain skill workers, which can reproduce additional unstated and clear rulings and favorites of the DMs and exhibition a better scope compared to the additional trapezoidal formation fuzzy sets to precisely get the decisionmaking marks.

TrFF TOPSIS technique is applied to evaluate the blockchain skill workers sighted the DMs' risk favorite completed the blockchain skill and seeing the decrease limit near damage, which things the supremacy results of one additional, and to precisely get the best supplier.

A TrFF TOPSIS technique is recognized to language MCGDM problems and delivers an arranged and reliable program to language blockchain skill supplier variety problems.
1.4 Motivation

i.
TrFFSs in TOPSIS (with MCDM concept) have been implemented in a reallife blockchain assessment problem for manufacturing in the literature. Considering the blockchain width, this study will lead future studies in this field.

ii.
For TrFFTOPSIS computations, a new linguistic scale under Fermatean fuzzy documentation has also been developed for experts to disclose their judgments easily. The scope of information uncertainty covered by trapezoidal Fermatean fuzzy is broader than that of conventional trapezoidal fuzzy number, and Fermatean fuzzy number, which is instrumental in avoiding potential information missed in qualitative conversion to quantification. Scholars may benefit from this scale in future studies. In addition, TrFFTOPSIS uses PIS and NIS as reference points for distance calculation, which can obtain more potential information.

iii.
Practitioners in the industry can adapt the case application presented in this study for their risk assessment processes. From this point, good practice is demonstrated with detailed steps from expert judgments to risk preventive measure suggestions.

iv.
A comparative analysis is provided to test the solidity of the proposed approach. To do this, crisp, intuitionistic fuzzy, and FFs are applied to the problem. Analysis results are not exactly the same as TrFFTOPSIS. Since the TrFFs measure both the membership and nonmembership, but crisp, fuzzy, and gray theories only consider the membership.
To initiate with of all, there are frequent considers within the script on source cable management. Predominantly in advanced an extended time, susceptibility in decisionsmaking procedures for as well as many criteria has extended. This condition completes a feasible decisionmaking grip certainly more worrying. Then, there's a mounting necessitate for additional complete study plans for this make. In other arguments, seeing MCDM policies lengthily with characteristic fuzzy numbers might donate to intensifying the skill in this concoct. The main position is connected to the scheming of the TrFFTOPSIS feelings of the joining blockchain. For this reason, selected criteria are measured by four varied authorities. In this organization, assumed standards are assessed to entire the joining outlines by seeing the blockchain feelings (Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11).
2 Preliminaries
Definition 2.1
Zadeh (1965) Let \(H\) be a universe of discourse. Then the fuzzy set can be defined as: \(J = \{ h,\,\mu_{J} (h)h \in H\} .\) A fuzzy set in a set \(H\) is denoted by \(\mu_{J} \;\;:\;\;H \to I\), where \(I = [0,\,1]\). The function \(\mu_{J(h)}\) denotes the degree of membership of the element \(h\) to the set \(H\). The collection of all fuzzy subsets of \(H\) is denoted by \(I^{H}\). Define a relation on \(I^{H}\) as follows: \((\forall \mu ,\,\eta \in I^{H} )(\mu \le \eta \Leftrightarrow (\forall h \in H)(\mu (h) \le \eta (h))).\)
2.1 FFN and operational laws
Definition 2.1.1
The fixed set \(C\) and the FFN \(A\) is defined in \(A = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\langle \varsigma_{A} (x),} \\ {\chi_{A} (x)\rangle } \\ {:\;\;x \in C} \\ \end{array} } \right\},\) where \(\varsigma_{A} (x)\) and \(\chi_{A} (x)\) represent the MED and NOMED, and \(\varsigma_{A} (x) \in [0,\,1]\), \(\chi_{A} (x) \in [0,\,1]\) and \(0 \le \varsigma_{A} (x)^{3} + \chi_{A} (x)^{3} \le 1.\) The degree of indeterminacy is defined as \(\pi_{A} (x) = \sqrt[3]{{(\varsigma_{A} (x)^{3} + \chi_{A} (x)^{3}  \varsigma_{A} (x)^{3} \chi_{A} (x)^{3} )}}.\) The FFN is denoted as \(A = \langle \varsigma_{A} ,\,\chi_{A} \rangle .\)
Definition 2.1.2
Let \(a_{1} = \left\{ {\varsigma_{1} ,\,\chi_{1} } \right\}\) and \(a_{2} = \left\{ {\varsigma_{2} ,\,\chi_{2} } \right\}\) be two FFNs, \(\lambda > 0\), then.
Definition 2.1.3
Let \(a = \left\{ {\varsigma ,\,\chi } \right\}\) be the FFNs, then the score function is \(a = \varsigma_{\alpha }^{3}  \chi_{\alpha }^{3} .\)
Definition 2.1.4
Let \(a = \left\{ {\varsigma ,\,\chi } \right\}\) be the FFNs, then the accuracy function is \(a = \varsigma_{\alpha }^{3} + \chi_{\alpha }^{3} .\)
2.2 FF TOPSIS technique
Step 1: Describe the FF decision matrix.
Step 2: Describe the FEFWA operator and \(\xi = \left( {\xi_{1} ,\,\xi_{2} ,...,\,\xi_{n} } \right).\)
Step 3: To construct a normalized FF TOPSIS decision matrix. The normalized value \(\beta_{ij}\) is calculated as follows:
Step 4: To construct the weighted normalized FF TOPSIS decision matrix by multiplying the normalized FF TOPSIS decision matrix by its associated weights. The weighted normalized value is given by \(v_{ij} w_{j} = B_{j}\).
Step 5: To find the + ve FF ideal solution and the veFF ideal solution. It is shown as under:
Step 6: Separation of each candidate from the positive FF ideal solution that is given as under:
Separation of each candidate from the negative FF ideal solution that is given as under:
Step 7: To compute closeness relative to the ideal solution. Relative closeness to the ideal solution is comprehended by the Equation.
3 TrFFN and operational laws
Definition 3.1
Let \(a_{1} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[\eta_{1} ,\,\kappa_{1} ,\,\varsigma_{1} ,\,\delta_{1} ],} \\ {[\Lambda_{1} ,\,\Upsilon_{1} ,\,\vartheta_{1} ,\,\Theta_{1} ]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\) and \(a_{2} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[\eta_{2} ,\,\kappa_{2} ,\,\varsigma_{2} ,\,\delta_{2} ],} \\ {[\Lambda_{2} ,\,\Upsilon_{2} ,\,\vartheta_{2} ,\,\Theta_{2} ]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\) be two TrFFNs and \(\lambda > 0,\) then.
Definition 3.2
The TrFFNs are \(a = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[\eta ,\,\kappa ,\,\varsigma ,\,\delta ],} \\ {[\Lambda ,\,\Upsilon ,\,\vartheta ,\,\Theta ]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\) , then the score function \(\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{H}\) is define as: \(\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{H} = \tfrac{{\left\{ {[\eta^{3} + \kappa^{3} + \varsigma^{3} + \delta^{3} ]  [\Lambda^{3} + \Upsilon^{3} + \vartheta^{3} + \Theta^{3} ]} \right\}}}{8}.\)
Definition 3.3
The TrFFNs are \(a = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[\eta ,\,\kappa ,\,\varsigma ,\,\delta ],} \\ {[\Lambda ,\,\Upsilon ,\,\vartheta ,\,\Theta ]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\) , then the accuracy function \(\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{H}\) is define as: \(\overset{\lower0.5em\hbox{$\smash{\scriptscriptstyle\smile}$}}{H} = \tfrac{{\left\{ {[\eta^{3} + \kappa^{3} + \varsigma^{3} + \delta^{3} ] + [\Lambda^{3} + \Upsilon^{3} + \vartheta^{3} + \Theta^{3} ]} \right\}}}{8}.\)
Definition 3.4
The gathering of TrFFNs are \(c_{j} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[\eta ,\,\kappa ,\,\varsigma ,\,\delta ],} \\ {[\Lambda ,\,\Upsilon ,\,\vartheta ,\,\Theta ]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\) and the weight vector is \(\Delta = (\Delta_{1} ,\,\Delta_{2} ,...,\,\Delta_{n} )^{T}\) with \(\Delta_{j} \in [0,\,1]\) and \(\mathop \sum \nolimits_{j = 1}^{n} \Delta_{j} = 1\) . Then TrEFFWA \(\left( {c_{1} ,\,c_{2} ,...,\,c_{n} } \right) = \mathop \oplus \nolimits_{j = 1}^{n} \Delta_{j} c_{j}\) is said TrEFFWA operator.
Theorem 3.5
The collection of TrFFNs are \(a_{j} = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[\mu ,\,S,\,G,\,H],} \\ {[\nu ,\,F,\,M,\,N]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\) and the weight vector is \(\xi = (\xi_{1} ,\,\xi_{2} ,...,\,\xi_{n} )^{T}\) with \(\xi_{j} \in [0,\,1]\) and \(\mathop \sum \nolimits_{j = 1}^{n} \xi_{j} = 1\) . Then it is said TrEFFWA operator and TrEFFWA \ \(\left( {a_{1} ,\,a_{2} ,...,\,a_{n} } \right) = \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\sqrt[3]{{\tfrac{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }}  \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}}},\,\sqrt[3]{{\tfrac{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + S_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }}  \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  \mu_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}}}} \\ {,\,\sqrt[3]{{\tfrac{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + G_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }}  \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  G_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + G_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  G_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}}},\,\sqrt[3]{{\tfrac{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + H_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }}  \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  H_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1 + H_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (1  H_{j}^{3} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}}}} \\ \end{array} } \right),} \\ {\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\tfrac{{2\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (\nu_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (2 + \nu_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (\nu_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }},\,\tfrac{{2\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (F_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (2 + F_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (F_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }},} \\ {\tfrac{{2\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (M_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (2 + M_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (M_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }},\,\tfrac{{2\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (N_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}{{\mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (2 + N_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} + \mathop \prod \limits_{j = 1}^{n} (N_{j} )^{{\xi_{j} }} }}} \\ \end{array} } \right)} \\ \end{array} } \right].\)
4 TrFFAHPTOPSIS method for blockchain procedure selection
This section offerings an original mixture technique joining AHP with TOPSIS by using TrFF data to discourse blockchain skill provider collection difficulties for main banks or monetary organizations. First, a hierarchical evaluative criteria scheme is constructed in the opinion of the works appraisal and single features of a blockchain, which can ration together a great presentation and apparent hazards. Following, the AHP is comprehensive to the TrFF setting to fast DMs' doubts of the pairwise assessment finished applicable criteria, and the container is consumed to classify the consistent criterion weights of the blockchain skill suppliers. Then, the TOPSIS system is extended to the TrFF scenario to increase the general supremacy grades of the suppliers seeing the DMs' risk dislike concerning blockchain technology, and the position consequences can rapid both impartial valuations regarding the criteria and DMs' supple personal risk brashness finished the blockchain. Therefore, the planned TrFFAHPTOPSIS method can widely reflect material topographies of blockchain skill and DMs' reasoning and emotional performance and more effectually address the blockchain skill worker collection problem. The process flow of the recommended TrFFAHPTOPSIS method is accessible in Fig. 3.
4.1 Depiction of the blockchain skill supplier assortment problem
Blockchain supplier selection, as a characteristic MCDM problem, is applied through a collection of decision matrices. Let \(A = \{ A_{1} ,\,A_{2} ,...,\,A_{n} \}\) represent sure latent blockchain skill providers \(PS = \{ PS_{1} ,\,PS_{2} ,...,\,PS_{n} \}\) denote significant evaluative criteria delivered by numerous experts \(DM = \{ DM_{1} ,\,DM_{2} ,...,\,DM_{n} \} ,\) and the corresponding rank of specialists is denoted \(\Delta = (\Delta_{1} ,\,\Delta_{2} ,...,\,\Delta_{n} )^{T}\) satisfying the environments \(\mathop \sum \nolimits_{j = 1}^{n} \Delta_{j} = 1\). Moreover, the rank of the evaluative criteria is represented by \(W = (W_{1} ,\,W_{2} , \cdots ,\,W_{n} )^{T}\), meeting the following situations: \(\mathop \sum \nolimits_{j = 1}^{n} W_{j} = 1\). Each component in the decision matrix means the applicable candidate's evaluative assessment on a convinced criterion from the DM.
4.2 TrFFAHPTOPSIS technique
Step 1: Describe the TrFF decision matrix.
Step 2: Describe the TrEFFWA operator and \(\xi = \left( {\xi_{1} ,\,\xi_{2} ,...,\,\xi_{n} } \right).\)
Step 3: To construct a normalized TrFF TOPSIS decision matrix\(.\) The normalized value \(\beta_{ij}\) is calculated as: \(\beta = \left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\left[ {\tfrac{{\mu_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (\mu_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }},\,\tfrac{{S_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (S_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }},\,\tfrac{{G_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (G_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }},\,\tfrac{{H_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (H_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }}} \right],} \\ {\left[ {\tfrac{{\nu_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (\nu_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }},\,\tfrac{{F_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (F_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }},\,\tfrac{{M_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (M_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }},\,\tfrac{{N_{j}^{3} }}{{^{3} \sqrt {\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{n} (N_{j}^{3} )^{2} } }}} \right]} \\ \end{array} } \right\}\)Step 4: To construct the entropy weights. \(H_{j} = \tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2  1}\left\{ {\sin \tfrac{\pi (1 + B  C)}{4} + \sin \tfrac{\pi (1 + B  C)}{4}  1} \right\}\).
Step 5: To construct the weighted normalized TrFF TOPSIS decision matrix by multiplying the normalized TrFF TOPSIS decision matrix by its associated weights. The weighted normalized value is given by \(v_{ij} w_{j} = H_{j}\).
Step 6: To find the + ve TrFF ideal solution and the ve TrFF ideal solution. It is shown as under:
Step 7: Separation of each candidate from the positive TrFF ideal solution that is given as under:
Separation of each candidate from the negative TrFF ideal solution that is given as under:\( q_{i}^{  } \langle [B^{  } ,{\mkern 1mu} B^{ + } ],{\mkern 1mu} \eta \rangle = \left\langle {\tfrac{1}{8}\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {\left {\mu _{{ij}}  \mu _{j} } \right + \left {S_{{ij}}  S_{j} } \right + \left {G_{{ij}}  G_{j} } \right + \left {H_{{ij}}  H_{j} } \right} \\ {\left {\upsilon _{{ij}}  \upsilon _{j} } \right + \left {F_{{ij}}  F_{j} } \right + \left {M_{{ij}}  M_{j} } \right + \left {N_{{ij}}  N_{j} } \right} \\ \end{array} } \right)} \right\rangle . \)
Step 8: The relative closeness to the ideal solution is comprehended by the equation.
5 Case study
TEFOOD is a community permissioned nourishment traceability system that enables all supply chain participants blockchainbased farmtotable and customer trace of the food's data. The FoodChain (TEFOOD's blockchain) is a community permissioned blockchain that lets supply chain performers and patrons to uphold chief bulges to disperse traceability data. Clienteles of TEFOOD consume the suppleness to improvement painstaking visions into the nourishment manufacturing's supply chain.
TFD is TEERC FOOD's symbolic, which is typically castoff on the ethereal stage. Its assignment is to offer slide in the nourishment supply cable by nursing the items finished the whole source chain (farm, computers or abattoir, distributor, shop) and given that tools to clienteles, supply chain companies, and administration activities to study around food past and excellence. The TEFOOD goals to upsurge customer faith and make contact, get better supply chain information to recover working efficiency, obey with spread rubrics, defend their makes from forging, and perform earlier creation memories.
TEFood system includes of dissimilar fields:
Empathy Gears: It comprises 1D/2D barcodes/RFID ear labels, safety closures and tag stickers. Traceability tackles: It contains of a B2B traceability management moveable app, web app, dominant system, outside interfaces, and journalism tools. Trade and customer gears comprise B2C new harvest past vision moveable app, and web app, trade side nourishment antiquity numerical signage gears. Nationwide cattle organization solutions: It contains of cattle management and implementation schemes. Farm organization gears: These gears are founded upon the categoryspecific (Inoculation, nourishing, manures, vegetable defense crops, etc.). Food care gears: These gears comprise a Scam organization scheme, Food disorder device gear, and Meat excellence graphic examination scheme. To classify the followed bodily substances (crops, sites, etc.), the scheme gears dissimilar documentations resources: malleable closures with QR ciphers, malleable credentials labels with RFID, and paperbased marker label with QR ciphers).
For traceability, it delivers dissimilar customer requests: moveable app used by B2B and client to image documentation resources and appeal/arrive data, Web App for the client who fixes not usage the moveable app to admission the creation history, IoT API for nourishment businesses that allow to syndicate data conventional from the devices and Exposed Border for supply chain businesses who custom software now to lever invention's information'sFOOD suggestions binary execution representations, remote or formal.
In Isolated application, a scheme is recycled to suggestion their doings though in Official application, establishments or community government, the scheme is rummagesale to suggestion a collection of businesses (physically or manufacturing group related). TEFOOD originates with the filled set of gears and requests wanted for the entire supply chain to tool nourishment traceability by endwise working discernibility and procedure switch.
TEFOOD existence absorbed on nourishment track ability, delivers sole answers in agrarian industry.
It is lone the tractability answer that proposals dissimilar facilities B2B(BusinesstoBusiness), B2C(BusinesstoConsumer) and B2A (BusinesstoAuthorities), helping businesses, customers and establishments.
It shapes customer faith as they are talented to path the source of the nourishment creation counting all dispensation the creation experienced.
Due to good track ability and sensors, the nourishment creation that are dirty can be isolated at initial phase before it spreads to shop, plummeting numerous foodborne disease.
Controlling forms have actual viewpoint of the nourishment marketplace that assistance to recover food care regulatory nursing and implementation.
One of the curb TEFOOD is that TFD symbolic that innings on the Ethereal net has little deal/second (15 TPS) which is comparatively slow. Likewise TEFOOD has to expression a straight and unintended rivalry form dissimilar contestants businesses like: AMbrosus, WABI, MOD, WTC. Also TEFOOD consuming big statistics of customers in Hungary and Vietnam, it is stressed to become contact in global marketplace.
5.1 Numerical application of TrFF TOPSIS method
The Array of HBL in Pakistan is dedicated to applying investment founded on large statistics. To understand suitable, protected, and real crossborder remittances, the Array of HBL in Pakistan means to choice the best blockchain skill supplier. A decision group connecting four DMs is shaped to select a suitable supplier from four before screened suppliers \((PS_{1} ,\,PS_{2} ,\,PS_{3}\) and \(PS_{4} ).\) The hierarchical evaluative criteria scheme to measure the presentation of the blockchain skill providers, which comprises four chief criteria ( \(GBU_{1} :\) technical close \(GBU_{2}\): produce and amenity, \(GBU_{3}\): economic issue, and \(GBU_{4}\): safety jeopardy). To source passable flexibility inside the assessment of the standards of the four criteria of each optional manufacturing, rulers are allowable to exploit TrFFNs.
Step 1: Describe the TrFF decision matrix.
Step 2: Describe the TrEFFWA operator and \(\xi = \left( {0.23,\,0.24,\,0.25,\,0.28} \right).\)
Step 3: To construct a normalized TrFF TOPSIS decision matrix.
Step 4: To construct the entropy weights.\(\begin{gathered} H_{1} = 0.0231,\,H_{2} = 0.3123,\, \hfill \\ H_{3} = 0.0109,\,H_{4} = 0.0088. \hfill \\ \end{gathered}\)
Step 5: To construct the weighted normalized TrFF TOPSIS decision matrix.
Step 6: To find positive TrFF ideal solution \(\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0099,} \\ {0.0091,} \\ {0.0121,} \\ {0.0130],} \\ {[0.0140,} \\ {0.0141,} \\ {0.0142,} \\ {0.039]} \\ \end{array} } \right],\,\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.2172,} \\ {0.1248,} \\ {0.1123,} \\ {0.1189],} \\ {[0.1896,} \\ {0.1893,} \\ {0.1892,} \\ {0.0041]} \\ \end{array} } \right],\,\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0028,} \\ {0.0044,} \\ {0.0042,} \\ {0.0067],} \\ {[0.0065,} \\ {0.0066,} \\ {0.0066,} \\ {0.0014]} \\ \end{array} } \right],\,\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0036,} \\ {0.0037,} \\ {0.0035,} \\ {0.0055],} \\ {[0.0019,} \\ {0.0053,} \\ {0.0053,} \\ {0.0053]} \\ \end{array} } \right]\) To find negative TrFF ideal solution.
\(\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0032,} \\ {0.0037,} \\ {0.0035,} \\ {0.0036],} \\ {[0.0143,} \\ {0.0144,} \\ {0.0145,} \\ {0.0147]} \\ \end{array} } \right],\,\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0239,} \\ {0.0461,} \\ {0.0405,} \\ {0.0067],} \\ {[0.2151,} \\ {0.1945,} \\ {0.1961,} \\ {0.2141]} \\ \end{array} } \right],\,\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0016,} \\ {0.0017,} \\ {0.0019,} \\ {0.0004],} \\ {[0.0067,} \\ {0.0068,} \\ {0.0068,} \\ {0.0067]} \\ \end{array} } \right],\,\left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} {[0.0007,} \\ {0.0015,} \\ {0.0017,} \\ {0.0017],} \\ {[0.0055,} \\ {0.0056,} \\ {0.0055,} \\ {0.0056]} \\ \end{array} } \right]\) Step 7: To separate every candidate from + ve TrFF ideal solution. It is as under:\(\begin{gathered} q_{1}^{ + } = {0}{\text{.0655}},\,q_{2}^{ + } = 0.{1685},\, \hfill \\ q_{3}^{ + } = 0.0043,\,q_{4}^{ + } = 0.0047. \hfill \\ \end{gathered}\)
To separation each candidate from ve TrFF ideal solution. It is as under:
Step 8: The closeness of solution of the problem under consideration is given by the following equations.
6 Comparison analysis
To favor and customary up feasibility of the optional plan, its comparison with another plan inferior upon IFSs (Atanassov and Gargov 1989) and FFWG statistics (Varma 2019) is showed with cases. Other plans are strange cases of our method plan that's originated on TrFFN to the similar descriptive situation.
6.1 IFN with existing technique
Step 1: IF decision matrix is Table 8 in given below (Table 9).
Step 2: Describe the IFWA operator and \((0.1,\,0.2,\,0.3,\,0.4).\)
Now applying given formula.
Step 3: The score function is
Step 4: Given the ranking \(\eta_{4} > \eta_{3} > \eta_{1} > \eta_{2}\) and the \(\eta_{4}\) is the best.
6.2 FF number with existing technique
Step 1: The FF decision matrix is given in Table 10.
Step 2: The FFWG operator and \((0.1,\,0.2,\,0.3,\,0.4).\)
Applying given formula.
Step 3: The score function is
Step 4: Find the ranking \(\eta_{1} > \eta_{2} > \eta_{3} > \eta_{4}\) and \(\eta_{1}\) is the best.
Moreover, we discuss some experiments study to reinforce our claim of developing an improved framework for TrFFbased MCDA concerns.
In (Tang et al. 2019) and (Senapati and Yager 2020), the alternatives are ranked using the relative closeness coefficient and suitability index, respectively, between the overall value of the alternatives and the ideal alternative. This is not sufficient to conclude how good or bad an alternative is. In the TrFF TOPSIS method, the benefit and the cost criteria are both considered with proposed AOs on TrFFSs which comprise a more precise outcome compared with simply dealing with benefit or cost criteria. In the meantime, it increases the practicality of assessment data and the precision of outcomes as well.
The main benefit of the introduced TrFF model is capable of assessing any MCDA issues with uncertainty through TrFFNs as well as IFs and FFNs (Atanassov and Gargov 1989; Senapati and Yager 2019a) as described in the previous sections.
The proposed TrFF framework, which is utility or scoring degreebased model for MCDA, selects an option with the highest utility degree; therefore, the concern is how to assess the prior multicriteria utility degree for an appropriate decision setting, whereas the extant models, which are compromise degree models, select an option which is nearest to the ideal solution.
The proposed TrFF technique is one of the robust and novel MCDA utility measuring methods. This framework is a combination of TrFFWA operator. The ranking of TrFFTOPSIS technique is strengthening than PIS and NIS. The proposed method enables to reach the highest accurateness of assessment for utilizing the proposed approach for optimization of weighted AOs.
All the existing AOs utilize different operations on FFNs and IFS information, it is necessary to propose some neutral AOs about them due to that we are neutral in several issues and need to be treated fairly. Here, we have implemented TrEFFWA aggregation operators to get more reasonable outcomes.
7 Conclusion
The analysis part for valuation of data in a numerous existing extension of FSs is limited, making it hard to manage with the problem of evaluating blockchain technology under a complex condition, which is full of hesitations. To overcome this difficulty, we have employed a new generalization of FSs, called as TrFFNs. We define TrFF data based on decisionmaking. Define the Einstein aggregation operator and operational laws. We apply the Einstein operator on TrFFTOPSIS technique, based on the TrFEFWA operator, a general framework has been developed for MAGDM with TrFFTOPSIS data. The suggested TrFF TOPSIS decision framework combines TrFF with TOPSIS in the assessment process, to determine the subjective weights of attributes and to evaluate blockchain strategies. To determine the normalized solution of every value, TrFFTOPSIS uses PIS and NIS as the reference points for distance calculation, which will provide more potential information’s, realistic case study on the assessment of blockchain technology and demonstrate the practicality and validity of the suggested technique.
It is perceived that the method proposed in this work stretches a massive variety for articulating assessment data, which facilitates DEs in evaluating blockchain technology efficiently and flexibly. The experimental findings suggest that using our technique to establish the finalized blockchain technology selection scheme depending on the ranking outcomes is acceptable and adequate. Furthermore, the outcomes of an analysis of different approaches demonstrate that this approach has substantial benefits in terms of exploring multilayer diverse relationships between attributes and reducing the influence of immense importance of assessment information (Tables 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15).
This research also linkup a collection of data with a relationship, which indicated that the selection of simulated data is addressed in our suggested research. In future studies, we plan to extend the proposed structure further by introducing new characteristics, including the use of TrFF probabilistic aggregations. Additionally, we will discuss additional decisionmaking aspects like cluster analysis, performance analysis, sustainable city logistics, risk investment assessment, Wireless Sensor Networks, capital budgeting techniques, home buying process, and other domains under the uncertain environment.
Data availability
All the data used in this study are artificial and can be used in any research project by just citing this article.
References
Alam S, Shuaib M, Khan WZ, Garg S, Kaddoum G, Hossain MS, Zikria YB (2021) Blockchainbased Initiatives: current state and challenges. Comput Netw 198:108395
Alkan N, Kahraman C (2022) Prioritization of supply chain digital transformation strategies using multiexpert Fermatean fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Informatica 20:1–33
Aslam T, Maqbool A, Akhtar M, Mirza A, Khan MA, Khan WZ, Alam S (2022) Blockchain based enhanced ERP transaction integrity architecture and PoET consensus. Computers, Mater Continua 70(1):1089–1109
Atanassov KT, Gargov G (1989) Interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 31(3):343–349
Aydin S (2021) A novel multiexpert mabac method based on Fermatean fuzzy sets. J MultipleValued Logic Soft Comput 37:89
Bai C, Sarkis J (2020) A supply chain transparency and sustainability technology appraisal model for blockchain technology. Int J Prod Res 58(7):2142–2162
Beck R, MüllerBloch C (2017) Blockchain as radical innovation: a framework for engaging with distributed ledgers as incumbent organization. In: 2017 Hawaii International conference on system sciences (HICSS), 5390–5399.
Bhatia, S., Alam, S., Shuaib, M., Alhameed, M. H., Jeribi, F., & Alsuwailem, R. I. (2022). Retinal vessel extraction via assisted multichannel feature map and Unet. Frontiers in Public Health, 10: 15
Birch D, Brown RG, Parulava S (2016) Towards ambient accountability in financial services: shared ledgers, translucent transactions and the technological legacy of the great financial crisis. J Paym Strategy Syst 10(2):118–131
Bundesverband, B. (2017). Blockchain Opportunities and Challenges of a New Digital Infrastructure for Germany.
Chen Y (2018) Blockchain tokens and the potential demonstration of entrepreneurship and innovation. Business Horizons 61:567
Colak M, Kaya İ, Özkan B, Budak A, Karaşan A (2020) A multicriteria evaluation model based on hesitant fuzzy sets for blockchain technology in supply chain management. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 38(1):935–946
Farshidi S, Jansen S, Espana S, Verkleij J (2020) Decision support for blockchain platform selection: three industry case studies. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 67(4):1109–1128
Gül S (2021) Fermatean fuzzy set extensions of SAW, ARAS, and VIKOR with applications in COVID19 testing laboratory selection problem. Expert Syst 38(8):e12769
Gupta V (2017) A brief history of blockchain. Harv Bus Rev. Accessed 28 Feb.
Holotiuk F, Pisani F, Moormann F (2019) Radicalness of blockchain: an assessment based on its impact on the payments industry. Technol Anal Strateg 31(8):915–928
Hoy MB (2017) An introduction to the blockchain and its implications for libraries and medicine. Med RefServ Q 36(3):273–279
Ito J, Narula N, Ali R (2017) The blockchain will do to the financial system what the Internet did to media. Harv Bus Rev.
Jin F, Pei L, Chen H, Langari R, Liu J (2019) A novel decisionmaking model with Pythagorean fuzzy linguistic information measures and its application to a sustainable blockchain product assessment problem. Sustainability 20(11):1–17
Kaczorowska M (2019) Blockchainbased land registration: possibilities and challenges. Masaryk UJL & Tech 13:339
Kahraman C, Oztaysi B, Onar SC, and Otay I (2020) A literature review on the extensions of intuitionistic fuzzy sets. In Developments of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Computation and Robotics: Proceedings of the 14th International FLINS Conference (FLINS 2020) (pp. 199–207).
Karaşan A, Kaya İ, Erdoğan M, Çolakc M (2021) A multicriteria decision making methodology based on twodimensional uncertainty by hesitant zfuzzy linguistic terms with an application for blockchain isk evaluation. Appl Soft Comput.
KeshavarzGhorabaee M, Amiri M, HashemiTabatabaei M, Zavadskas EK, Kaklauskas A (2020) A new decisionmaking approach based on Fermatean fuzzy sets and WASPAS for green construction supplier evaluation. Mathematics 8(12):2202
Lemieux VL (2016) Trusting records: is Blockchain technology the answer? Rec Manag J 26(2):110–139
Lin YP, Petway JR, Anthony J, Mukhtar H, Liao SW, Chou CF, Ho YF (2017) Blockchain: the evolutionary next step for ICT Eagriculture. Environments 4(3):50
Liu L, Li F, Qi E (2019) Research on risk avoidance and coordination of supply chain subject based on blockchain technology. Sustainability 11(7):1–14
Li XQ, Jiang P, Chen T, Luo XP, Wen QY (2017) A survey on the security of blockchain systems. Future Gener Comput Syst 107:841–853
Mehdi N (2020). Blockchain: an emerging opportunity for surveyors?. Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors.
Ozdemir AI, Ar IM, Erol I (2019) Assessment of blockchain applications in travel and tourism industry.
Ozkan B, Kaya İ, Erdoğan M, Karaşan A (2019) Evaluating blockchain risks by using a MCDM methodology based on Pythagorean fuzzy sets. In: 2019 international conference on intelligent and fuzzy systems (ICIFS), pp 935–943.
Qahtan S, Sharif KY, Zaidan AA, Alsattar HA, Albahri OS, Zaidan BB, Mohammed RT (2022) Novel multi security and privacy benchmarking framework for blockchainbased IoT healthcare industry systems. IEEE Trans Industrial Inf 18(9):6415–6423
Rahmani MKI, Shuaib M, Alam S, Siddiqui ST, Ahmad S, Bhatia S, Mashat A (2022) Blockchainbased trust management framework for cloud computingbased internet of medical things (IoMT): a systematic review. Comput Intell Neurosci 453:465
Rani P, Mishra AR, Deveci M, Antucheviciene J (2022) New complex proportional assessment approach using Einstein aggregation operators and improved score function for intervalvalued Fermatean fuzzy sets. Comput Ind Eng 169:108165
Senapati T, Yager RR (2019a) Fermatean fuzzy weighted averaging/geometric operators and its application in multicriteria decisionmaking methods. Eng Appl Artif Intell 85:112–121
Senapati T, Yager RR (2019b) Some new operations over Fermatean fuzzy numbers and application of Fermatean fuzzy WPM in multiple criteria decision making. Informatica 30:391–412
Senapati T, Yager RR (2020) Fermatean fuzzy sets. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput 11:663–674
Sergi D, & Sari IU (2020). Fuzzy capital budgeting using fermatean fuzzy sets. In International Conference on Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems (pp. 448–456). Springer, Cham.
Shuaib M, Hassan NH, Usman S, Alam S, Bhatia S, Agarwal P, Idrees SM (2022) Land registry framework based on selfsovereign identity (SSI) for environmental sustainability. Sustainability 14(9):5400
Shuaib M, Hassan NH, Usman S, Alam S, Bhatia S, Mashat A, Kumar M (2022) Selfsovereign identity solution for blockchainbased land registry system: a comparison. Mobile Inf Syst 25:4653
Shuaib M, Hafizah Hassan N, Usman S, Alam S, Bhatia S, Koundal D, Belay A (2022) Identity model for blockchainbased land registry system: A comparison. Wireless Commun Mobile Comput 65:846
Sindhu MS, Siddique I, Ahsan M, Jarad F, Altunok T (2022) An Approach of DecisionMaking under the Framework of Fermatean Fuzzy Sets. Math Probl Eng 2022:1–9
Sylvester G (2019). Eagriculture in action: blockchain for agriculture, opportunities and challenges. FAO.
Tang H, Shi Y, Dong P (2019) Public blockchain evaluation using entropy and TOPSIS. Expert Syst Appl 117(1):204–210
Turksen IB (1986) Interval valued fuzzy sets based on normal forms. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(2):191–210
Varma JR (2019) Blockchain in finance. J Decis Makers 44(1):1–11
Wang R, Lin Z, Luo H (2019) Blockchain, bank credit and SME financing. Qual Quant 53(3):1127–1140
Yager RR (2016) Generalized orthopair fuzzy sets. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 25(5):1222–1230
Yaqoob I, Salah K, Jayaraman R, AIHammadi Y (2021) Blockchain for healthcare data management:opportunities, challenges, and future recommendations. Neural Comput Appl 34:11475
Yoon JH, Kim JS, Park HG (2020) A study on the priorities of blockchain adoption for port logistics in Korea using AHP: focused on Busan and Incheon ports. J Int Trade Commer 16(1):1–24
Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inform. Control 8(3):338–353
Zhang Z, Ning H, Shi F, Farha F, Xu Y, Xu J, Zhang F, Raymond Choo K (2021) Artificial intelligence in cyber security: research advances, challenges, and opportunities. Artif Intell Rev 55:1029
Zhou F, Chen TY (2021) An extended Pythagorean fuzzy VIKOR method with risk preference and a novel generalized distance measure for multicriteria decisionmaking problems. Neural Comput Appl 33:11821–11844
Zhou F, Chen TY (2022) A hybrid approach combining AHP with TODIM for blockchain technology provider selection under the Pythagorean fuzzy scenario. Artificial Intelligence Review 55:1–33
Acknowledgements
The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University, Abha 61413, Saudi Arabia for funding this work through research groups program under grant number R.G. P1/129/43.
Funding
The authors have not disclosed any funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally. Authorship Details: First and corresponding author: AF, assistant professor of math, the University of Faisalabad. Second author: ZM, Department of Management Studies, The University of Faisalabad, Faisalabad Third Author: FA, Department of mathematics, Hazara University, Mansehra, Pakistan fourth author: MhA, Department of Mathematics, College of Sciences, King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper. Compliance with Ethical Standards: This study is not supported by any source or any organizations. Ethical approval: This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. It is declared that the authors have no competing interests.
Consent to participate
Equal all authors participated in this study with their consent. (OR download the consent form from the net and send it to the journal after getting signed by all authors, if asked by the journal).
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author selfarchiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Fahmi, A., Maqbool, Z., Amin, F. et al. Blockchain knowledge selection under the trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy number. Soft Comput 27, 3601–3621 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s0050002207611w
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s0050002207611w
Keywords
 Blockchain knowledge
 Trapezoidal fuzzy set
 Aggregation operators
 Multiattribute decision making
 Trapezoidal fermatean fuzzy TOPSIS technique