Supply Chain Forum: An International Journal

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tscf20

Evaluation of security metrics in AIoT and

blockchain-based supply chain by Neutrosophic
decision-making method

Alireza Aliahmadi & Hamed Nozari

To cite this article: Alireza Aliahmadi & Hamed Nozari (2023) Evaluation of security metrics
in AIoT and blockchain-based supply chain by Neutrosophic decision-making method, Supply
Chain Forum: An International Journal, 24:1, 31-42, DOI: 10.1080/16258312.2022.2101898

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2022.2101898

Published online: 17 Jul 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 116

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tscf20
SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
2023, VOL. 24, NO. 1, 31–42
https://doi.org/10.1080/16258312.2022.2101898

Evaluation of security metrics in AIoT and blockchain-based supply chain by

Neutrosophic decision-making method
a b
Alireza Aliahmadi and Hamed Nozari
a
Professor of Management & Industrial Engineering, Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science & Technology,
Tehran, Iran; bFaculty of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Today, smart supply chains are one of the main and growing applications of evolving Security criteria; internet of
technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), and blockchain, things; blockchain; AIoT-
which bring many benefits. IoT and blockchain security is a subset of cybersecurity that blockchain-based supply
chain; smart supply chain
protects against IoT-related threats. Therefore, the simultaneous combination of these
security metrics
technologies and the creation of a supply chain based on the artificial intelligence of
things (AIoT) and blockchain, in addition to increasing the performance of activities in
supply chain processes, can also bring many security challenges to this smart supply
chain. Because the data collected by IoT devices and stored in the blockchain-based
systems that manage them are much more sensitive than traditional network security
strategies.Due to the importance of this issue, in this study, an attempt has been made to
analyse these security indicators in the AIoT and blockchain-based intelligent supply chain
using a combined decision-making method in a fuzzy neutrosophic environment.
Understanding these security measures will definitely help to implement more secure
and powerful smart supply chains. The results showed that customer privacy criteria have
the highest priority. The following priorities are authentication, Security challenges based
on infrastructure, and network integrity.

Introduction using the IoT platform, blockchain capability, and

artificial intelligence from a simple supply chain to
Supply chain intelligence under the influence of the
complex systems. Therefore, realising the full poten­
Fourth Industrial Revolution and advances in infor­
tial of IoT and blockchain requires investing in new
mation technology at various levels can significantly
technologies, including artificial intelligence.
impact its overall performance and favourable
Convergence or integration of these technologies
response to continuous changes in the business
can redefine the performance of industries, jobs,
environment in a wide network of local and global
and the economy. With the integration of the
supply chains. Regardless of the increase in speed,
Internet of Things and artificial intelligence, intelli­
flexibility, customisation, accuracy, efficiency, and . . .
gent devices are being created that can simulate
which are the major achievements of the applica­
intelligent behaviour and support decisions without
tion of digital technologies in any field, including
human intervention (Nozari, Fallah, and Szmelter-
the supply chain, examine the challenges in this
Jarosz 2021a).
field for the entry of each of the actors in the field
There are obvious advantages to many of these
of big data, the services and products they provide
networks. Combining these valuable technology
are doubly important (Nozari and Sadeghi., 2021).
streams will definitely be beneficial for ordinary people
The Internet of Things (IoT) is an emerging techni­
and professionals. While the Internet of Things deals
que for connecting devices that come in the form
with devices that interact with the Internet and block­
of sensors, actuators, cell phones, computers,
chain technology provides many capabilities to main­
metres, or even vehicles so that they can be
tain records in a decentralised space, artificial
addressed and identified. Blockchain technology is
intelligence will also enable devices to make the
also a record-keeping technology with decentralised
most of existing data to serve humans. But these sys­
storage capability. The Internet of Things and block­
tems can be life-threatening if they are compromised.
chain has unlimited benefits for our environment
Today, in intelligent processes, technologies such as
and has become a research trend for both academia
IoT, sensor technologies, etc. have been integrated,
and business organisations (Ghahremani-Nahr,
and the amount and variety of data, along with their
Nozari, and Sadeghi 2021). Many architectures and
unique features, have led to the implementation of AI
applications have been proposed and implemented

CONTACT Hamed Nozari ham.nozari.eng@iauctb.ac.ir Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
© 2022 Kedge Business School
32 A. ALIAHMADI AND H. NOZARI
and IoT on a large scale. In the field of cybersecurity, AI,
IoT, and blockchain may be considered emerging
approaches, but AI techniques and their combination
with IoT technology have been used to support and
automate related operations such as traffic filtering,
automated criminology analysis, and more. While
these technologies are undoubtedly useful, it should
not be overlooked that AI and the Internet of Things,
and its use for automated decision making, for exam­
ple, can expose individuals and organisations to new
and sometimes unpredictable risks, especially in block­
chain-based environments where data storage and
security issues are of paramount importance. (Nozari
and Sadeghi 2021b). IoT and blockchain and their
combination with artificial intelligence may also open
new avenues in attack methods and techniques and
create new challenges for data protection. AI and the
Internet of Things are influencing people’s daily lives
more and more every day, and with their automated
decision-making capabilities, they are playing a key
role in digital transformation. The benefits of these
emerging technologies are significant, but there are
concerns. As a result, the role of cybersecurity in creat­
ing a reliable and trustworthy implementation of AI
and combining it with the Internet of Things and
blockchain is essential (Fallah, Sadeghi, and Nozari
2021).
Given the above, it can be seen that given the
importance of the supply chain as one of the most
important parts of business activities from purchase
to sale and distribution, creating an effective and reli­
able security technique is one of the highest priorities
that should be considered. Therefore, a framework
must be designed for new intelligent supply chain
architectures that provide a secure and reliable system
environment. Understanding security metrics and their
impact on each other in an AI-based intelligent supply
chain, IoT and blockchain technologies can determine
the type of focus on indicators in addition to addres­
sing security challenges. Therefore, this study evalu­
ates these challenges that are created by the
simultaneous use of transformational technologies.
To this end, the most important key security indicators
in an AIoT and blockchain-based supply chain were
extracted using a review of the literature and opinions
of industry experts familiar with these concepts, as well
as academic experts. Finally, the most important indi­
cators have been evaluated using a combined method
of hierarchical analysis and TOPSIS in the neutrosophic
environment. According to the literature, since if we
want to solve this problem only by single method such
as hierarchical analysis, we will need a vast number of
pair comparisons, and this causes the problem to be
crowded, many calculations and reluctance of experts
to answer the questionnaire. By including the TOPSIS
method, the weight of the criteria is calculated using
the AHP method, and the options are ranked using the
TOPSIS method. This mode reduces the number of
pairwise comparisons and therefore, it seems very rea­
sonable to use the combined AHP-TOPSIS method in
a neutrosophic environment, given the uncertainty. In
general, using the framework presented in this study,
the following questions can be answered:
(1) What are the most important security indicators
affecting supply chains based on IoT and block­
chain technologies?
(2) What parts of the supply chain organisations in
the age of digital technologies should empha­
sise for higher security?
(3) What are the dimensions of a digital supply chain
powered by IoT and blockchain technologies?
(4) What are the security challenges of a supply
chain organisation based on a combination of
IoT and AI technologies called AIoT?
The structure of the present article is as follows. In
the second part, the literature review is compiled in
three sections. The first section deals with IoT security.
The second section is about security in artificial intelli­
gence and its integration with the Internet of Things
and blockchain, and the third section is about security
in the smart supply chain. In the third part, security
indicators in the field of intelligent supply chain based
on AIoT and blockchain are presented. In the fourth
section, the research method is presented. In the fifth
section, the results of the research are analysed and
finally in the sixth section, the conclusions are
presented.
Literature review
The Internet of Things (IoT) refers to the billions of
physical devices around the world that are con­
nected to the Internet to collect data and transmit
and share data quickly without human intervention.
The integration of the digital and physical worlds
makes the fabric of the world around us smarter, so
much so that almost any physical object can be
turned into an Internet of Things device by con­
necting to the Internet (Nozari et al. 2021c). On
the other hand, Blockchain is a database distributed
among members that records all transactions and
digital events that have taken place and shares
them between participating parties.
Security is one of the biggest issues in the IoT and
blockchain; maintaining security is vital to consumer
confidence. The Internet of Things physicalizes compu­
tations, that is, it has a physical layer that has sensors for
sensing and gathering information about the environ­
ment, and they use the information given by these
sensors for similar environments. So if things go wrong
with IoT devices, it can have major real-world conse­
quences. Connecting to the Internet also means

connecting to potential cyber threats. Cybersecurity is an
area that every business should consider. With the
increasing use of blockchain, malicious code and mal­
ware that target information and records also increase.
Malware can infect stored records by attacking compu­
ters. To solve such a problem, a security solution must be
adopted to detect the malicious code (Nozari et al. 2022).
Stakeholders play an important role in ensuring the
security of the Internet of Things. Device manufac­
turers must design the device hardware so that it is
resistant to attack. Software programmers must write
highly secure code to run on devices. Engineers
responsible for deploying and managing IoT devices
must take steps to reduce security risks. End users who
have access to data or systems via the Internet of
Things; must keep the devices safe and prevent
unauthorised access to users. Despite the differences
in the role of each of these industries in IoT security, all
of them can use a set of standard guidelines to assess
and address potential IoT challenges. Prasad,
Andersen, and Rubin-Grøn (2022), examined security
challenges in the IoT infrastructure in the automotive
industry. Ho (2022) examines security challenges in
deep neural networks for IoT-based treatment systems.
The most important factors that lead to security issues
were examined in that study. Bansal et al. (2022) also
introduced architecture to solve security problems and
threats in the Internet of Things and blockchain.
Touqeer et al. (2021) challenges, problems, and solu­
tions at different layers of the IoT in smart homes were
explored. They also offer solutions that help overcome
these security challenges. In recent years, due to the
corona pandemic, much research has been done on
security and privacy issues affected by Covid 19. In this
regard, Bentotahewa et al. (2022) in a study examined
the security and privacy challenges of the Internet of
Things during the Corona epidemic. This research ana­
lyzes IoT-inspired big data issues, data protection, and
IoT security concerns.
AI is affecting people’s daily lives more and more
every day, and with its automated decision-making
capabilities, it plays a key role in digital transforma­
tion. The benefits of this emerging technology have
been significant, especially when paired with valuable
IoT technology, but it also raises concerns. As a result,
it is essential that the role of cybersecurity in creating
a reliable and trustworthy implementation of AI,
along with the use of IoT-specific data, is prominent
(Tan etal., 2021).
When it comes to security in the field of AI, one
should be aware that AI techniques and systems that
use AI may lead to unexpected results and can be
manipulated to achieve the desired results. As
a result, it is essential that AI itself be secure. In parti­
cular, it is important to understand what (assets that
are exposed to AI risks and risky models) should be
secured.
SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 33
The artificial intelligence of things and cybersecurity
have multidimensional relationships and a set of inter­
dependencies. Weaknesses and vulnerabilities of AI
models and algorithms, such as malicious manipula­
tion and inference of models, attacks on AIoT-based
physical cyber systems, disruption of data used in AIoT
systems, misuse of AI infrastructure used to power AI
systems and performance, Data poisoning, environ­
mental variability leading to variability in the nature
of the data, valid and reliable training datasets, algo­
rithmic review and validation, including software sup­
ply chain integration, validation of performance
appraisal and training processes, identification of fea­
tures in a valid and reliable manner data protection
and privacy in AIoT systems are all fundamental chal­
lenges that call into question the security of intelligent
systems based on these evolving technologies (Wazid,
Das, and Park 2021). Therefore, a basic understanding
of security concepts and criteria in artificial intelligence
of things seems necessary. In many researches, the
security criteria of artificial intelligence and IoT have
been examined separately. For example, Sakhnini and
Karimipour (2020) thoroughly explored the opportu­
nities and challenges of artificial intelligence and
cyber-physical systems. Tan (2021) in a study explores
security-related security challenges in the field of
e-commerce based on artificial intelligence.
As much as technology helps improve efficiency, the
issue of supply chain cybersecurity has become a major
concern. Due to the abundance of mobile and IoT-based
devices, companies are now constantly involved in the
issue of securing expanding networks, and we know that
with the expansion of the network, the number of end­
points increases, and this issue, maintaining security It
makes it more difficult (Williams, Lueg, and LeMay 2008).
Many supply chains are compromised due to the
negligence of third parties, which can have serious and
unpleasant consequences for them. The financial losses
caused by compromised supply chain cybersecurity are
the most prominent and immediate consequences of
this unfortunate event. An important part of supply
chain cybersecurity is that vendors, suppliers, corporate
executives, and in general, everyone who acts as a link in
the chain can be the source of a threat, and their vulner­
ability to the threat is usually the entire supply chain
(Fallah and Nozari 2021). That’s why companies need to
look for ways to improve security as the digital world
grows. As companies grow, a wider network of people
and data is formed, and this expansion potentially
increases the areas of vulnerability. Life cycle assess­
ment to address threats and enhance supply chain
cybersecurity requires four phases of prevention, identi­
fication, containment, and recovery, all of which are
equally important. Of course, prevention always takes
precedence over other measures, but preventive mea­
sures should not preclude foresight (Tong et al. 2022).
34 A. ALIAHMADI AND H. NOZARI
Supply chain cybersecurity is becoming more and
more important as its links increase and technology
advances, and if organisations do not want to be victims
of security threats, it is necessary to adopt preventive
mechanisms while raising awareness in this area and
paying attention to all phases of the threat life cycle.
AIoT and blockchain-based supply chain
security approaches
Managing the security of tools based on artificial intel­
ligence and the Internet of Things is not easy in busi­
nesses and organisations. These organisations should
use monitoring and scanning tools for all intelligent
devices (AIoT- blockchain powered) that can detect
any type of security threat and try to reduce the risk
of breach. Observers and analysts should help identify
and investigate various security threats. Since the
smart supply chain system uses IoT, blockchain, traffic
monitoring system, analytics and optimisation systems
based on specific data, independent and non-
automated environments and mechanisms, it some­
times deals with integration and therefore sometimes
provides security., But violates users’ privacy. Thus,
security and privacy are in conflict in certain scenarios
(Hasan et al. 2022).
Different security approaches should be adopted
considering a smart supply chain. The following sec­
tion lists the various security approaches listed for
AIoT and blockchain based security chains to miti­
gate the effects of various deficiencies. In order to
extract security approaches, first by reviewing the
literature and searching for papers in Google
Scholar and Scopus databases, a set of the most
important security approaches related to systems
intelligence were extracted, and among them, the
most important approaches related to intelligent
supply chain processes were identified. These secur­
ity approaches were then provided to experts to
select the most important criteria. It should be
noted that for this analysis, the opinions of 35 experts
were used, 20 of whom were experts in the field of
supply chain and familiar with the concepts related
to information technology and with more than
Table 1. AIoT and blockchain-based supply chain security metrics.
AIoTand blockchain-based smart supply chain supply and
security metrics purchase
production
sales and
distribution
5 years of experience and 15 experts were also aca­
demic experts with a relevant research background.
Table 1 shows the most important security
approaches for the smart supply chain powered by
the Internet of Things, blockchain and artificial intel­
ligence in the three main branches of the supply
chain, namely supply and purchase, production,
sales and distribution.
Security and privacy are essential constraints on
the popularity and adoption of technologies such as
the Internet of Things and artificial intelligence. IoT
vulnerabilities indicate the need for security and
privacy in IoT design. The powerful and accurate
central analysis is also a requirement of intelligent
systems. For this reason, the lack of computational
and analytical infrastructure can be one of the risks
that endanger the security of data analysis. In the
following, we will describe each of the approaches
presented in Table 1.
● Secrecy Confidentiality: The secrecy of the infor­
mation (data) sent must be ensured through the
use of confidential mechanisms such as encryp­
tion and so on. It is essential to maintain the
confidentiality of data collected through various
sensors and IoT devices located in different areas
of interest. Strong encryption mechanisms can be
used to provide a complex security model of such
sensitive information (Bhargava et al. 2022; Malik
et al. 2021).
● Suppliers Privacy: Companies are required to
limit the data they share with their external part­
ners and then ensure that vendors and suppliers
protect that data and use it only for its intended
purpose. By specifying these requirements in
their contracts, an organisation can ensure that
its external partners are responsible in the event
of data breaches or cyberattacks and compromis­
ing the organisation’s data (Nozari, Fallah, and
Szmelter-Jarosz 2021a).
● Trust management: Due to the heterogeneity in
the devices, privacy can not be controlled after the
start of the connection. This is one of the reasons
for building trust between communication
Secrecy Confidentiality (Bhargava et al. 2022 and Malik et al. 2021)
Suppliers Privacy (Nozari, Fallah, and Szmelter-Jarosz 2021a)
Trust management (Paiva et al. 2020 and Nozari, Fallah, and Szmelter-
Jarosz 2021a)
Secure middleware (Paiva et al. 2020)
Access control (Tubaishat et al. 2009 and Varriale et al. 2021)
Availability (Balamurugan et al., 2021)
Confidentiality in (Nozari, Fallah, and Szmelter-Jarosz 2021a)
infrastructure
Authentication (Alsinglawi et al. 2022)
Policy enforcement (Fragkiadakis 2021)
Network Integrity (Nozari et al. 2021d)
Customer privacy (Yadav, Luthra, and Garg 2021 and Nozari et al. 2021d)

institutions before starting a relationship. The trust
management model is used to prevent security
threats/attacks and routing attacks to increase
the reliability of network communications. It also
increases the efficiency of computing resources
and the strength of the network (Paiva et al.
2020; Nozari, Fallah, and Szmelter-Jarosz 2021a).
● Secure middleware: The security of the firmware
used in data collection, data transfer, and data
analysis must be protected from any tampering,
hardware failure, exploitation damage, or even
theft. It is important that any security approach
applied to production computational processes
be sufficiently robust (Paiva et al. 2020).
● Access control: Access control rules and policies
should be defined to ensure authorised access to
devices and data. A hierarchical access control
mechanism should be developed to ensure indi­
vidual access privileges for individuals to ensure
the privacy and security of data and other parti­
cipants (Tubaishat et al. 2009; Varriale et al. 2021).
● Availability: Given the complete communication
of data in IoT technologies and analytical pro­
cesses of artificial intelligence in the network, it
is necessary to take security measures to access in
times of crisis to prevent overwork and loss of
valuable information (Balamurugan et al., 2021).
● Confidentiality in infrastructure: All infrastruc­
tures related to production processes must have
the necessary adequacy to use the large data
generated using IoT technology, and in addition
to the accuracy of the analytical lasers, the secur­
ity of the input data and the privacy of the users
must also be protected in them.
● Authentication: Existence authentication and
channel authentication can be provided using
robust device authentication mechanisms. To
ensure authentication, stealing IoT devices or
tampering with sensors or other devices should
be avoided (Alsinglawi et al. 2022).
● Policy enforcement: Appropriate instructions and
compliance of the supervisory organisation must
be applied in communicating between different
heterogeneous vehicles (Fragkiadakis 2021).
● Network Integrity: Since IoT-based applications
and artificial intelligence can run simultaneously,
robust networks with simultaneous processing
capability are among the most important parts
of AIoT and blockchain-based systems and must
remain anonymous while maintaining maximum
accuracy. Supply chain processes are extensive in
different sectors and require strong networks
(Nozari, Fallah, and Szmelter-Jarosz 2021a).
● Customer privacy: Consumer privacy, also known
as customer privacy, involves managing and pro­
tecting sensitive personal information provided
by customers during day-to-day transactions.
SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 35
The presence of the Internet of Things and analy­
tics networks in the processes of distributing and
delivering products to customers has made con­
sumer data privacy a growing concern (Yadav,
Luthra, and Garg 2021; Nozari et al. 2021d).
Methodology
This section proposes an accurate method for assessing
security metrics for an intelligent supply chain based on
artificial intelligence and IoT technologies through the
integration of neutrosophic AHP and TOPSIS. Three
steps were performed in this study. First, the most impor­
tant effective security criteria in the intelligent supply
chain were extracted using literature review. Then, supply
chain experts familiar with the concepts related to digital
technologies as well as academic experts were contacted
and asked to use a questionnaire and a 5-level Likert scale
among 30 factors, the most important security criteria in
the supply chain. Or specify what their studies are facing.
For this reason, 11 criteria were selected as the most
effective among the extracted criteria. Third, we asked
the experts to use a neutrosophic scale to prioritise AIoT
and blockchain-based intelligent supply chain security
metrics and to rate each option. This study proposes
a research framework shown in Figure 1. According to
the literature review, due to the volume of calculations
and the high number of fuzzy questionnaires, the use of
AHP-TOPSIS combined method has a shorter computa­
tional time and provides acceptable answers.
As the methodology presented in Figure 1 shows. The
analytical process of security criteria is started by review­
ing the literature and the most important criteria are
extracted. In the next step, based on the opinions of
experts, these criteria are refined and the most important
ones are introduced and indicators are added to them. In
order to analyse these data, the combined method of
fuzzy decision-making has been used. Also, in this
method, a combination of neutrosophic fuzzy criteria is
used, which adds to the stability of the study results.
Finally, in order to analyse the stability of the results,
the sensitivity analysis method is used, which confirms
the results. This framework and the results obtained can
be used to create a smart supply chain system powered
by the Internet of Things, artificial intelligence and block­
chain with high Sustainability and security.
Assessment method based on neutrosophic
hierarchical analysis and TOPSIS
N-AHP
We used neutrosophic scales for smart supply
chain security metrics to create the pairwise com­
parison matrix. These scales are shown in Table 2.
Using these neutrosophic scales, a matrix of pair­
wise comparisons is formed. If the first criterion is
equal to the second criterion, then the value (1,1,1)
36 A. ALIAHMADI AND H. NOZARI

Start

Literature
Review
END

Extraction of smart supply chain

security metrics based on
Analysis of results
Internet of Things, blockchain
and artificial intelligence

Evaluation of criteria
using N -AHP and N-
Refinement of TOPSIS
Apply expert opinion with a 5-level
criteria and
Likert scale
selection

Neutrosophic
triangular scale

Figure 1. Research framework.

Table 2. Triangular scale for neutrosophic AHP and TOPSIS inaccuracy. If there is more than one expert in the
(Junaid et al. 2019).
process, all experts’ sum (average) should be consid­
AHP Preferences Triangular neutrosophic scale
1 Equally Preferable ~1 ¼ ð1; 1; 1Þ ered to construct the final matrix.
3 Slightly Preferable ~3 ¼ ð2; 3; 4Þ
5 Strongly preferable ~5 ¼ ð4; 5; 6Þ Calculate weight for criteria. In the second step, we
7 Very Strongly preferable ~7 ¼ ð6; 7; 8Þ
9 Absolutely preferable ~9 ¼ ð9; 9; 9Þ
calculate the weight of each criterion by dividing each
2 ~2 ¼ ð1; 2; 3Þ number by the sum (sum) of its columns.
4 Sporadic values ~4 ¼ ð3; 4; 5Þ
6 ~6 ¼ ð5; 6; 7Þ
8 ~8 ¼ ð7; 8; 9Þ
Check the compatibility of the weight matrix.
Matrix compatibility should be evaluated based
on expert judgement. Compatibility can be
checked by dividing the compatibility index (CI)
will be placed in the matrix of pairwise compari­
by the random index (RI). The value obtained
sons. If the first criterion is strongly preferred to
must be less than 0.1.
the second criterion, then the value (4,5,6) will be
placed in the matrix of pairwise comparisons. Also,
N-TOPSIS Technique
if the second criterion is strongly preferred to the
Create a decision matrix. Use Neutrosophic trian­
first criterion, then this neutrosophic scale is writ­
gles to construct a decision matrix by comparing
ten in reverse, ie (1/4,1/5,1/6), in the pairwise com­
each option in each section. If there is more than
parison matrix. In addition to neutrosophic scales,
one expert in the process, the sum (average) of all
we receive degrees of truthiness, indeterminacy,
experts should be considered to construct the final
and falsity from experts (Junaid et al. 2019).
matrix. Next, convert this matrix to a crisp matrix.
The neutrosophic matrix can be converted to a crisp
Equations (1) and (2) are used to convert the
matrix by the following score function:
matrix.
Lxij þ Mxij þ Uxij
Sðxij Þ ¼ þ ðTRxij þ INxij þ FAxij Þ (1) Normalisation of the decision matrix. Normalise the
3
decision matrix. The matrix consists of m the number
of security indicators and n essential sections. With the
1 1 help of the following equation, the normalised deci­
Sðxji Þ ¼ ¼ (2)
Sðxij Þ Lxij þMxij þUxij þ ðTR þ IN þ FA Þ sion matrix can be obtained:
3 xij xij xij
xij
rij ¼ sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi i ¼ 1; j ¼ 1; 2; :::; n (3)
Where L, M, and U represent the low, medium, and P 2 m
high values of neutrosophic triangles. TR, IN, and FA x ij
i¼2
indicate the degree of honesty, uncertainty, and
 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 37

Calculate the weight matrix. Calculate the weight Research findings

matrix by multiplying the weight of the criteria, wj ,
In this study, the opinions of a group of experts were
obtained from the normalised AHP matrix in
used to examine the most important security criteria in
4Vitreoretinal Services; Aravind Eye Hospitals and
the intelligent supply chain based on artificial intelli­
Postgraduate Institute of Ophthalmology; Chennai;
gence and the Internet of Things. A total of 35 specia­
India.
lists were selected for this study. Twenty experts with
vij ¼ wij � rij (4) more than 5 years of experience in supply chain man­
agement were familiar with digital technologies and
information technology. These specialists were
Calculate positive ideal solutions and negative ideal selected from FMCG companies in Iran (5 pharmaceu­
solutions. Positive Aþ positive solutions and A nega­ tical companies and 8 food companies). Because the
tive ideal solutions are calculated using the following authors had access to the specialists of these compa­
formulas: nies. 15 specialists were selected from university pro­
fessors who had valuable research activities in related
Aþ ¼ fA1 � ; A2 � ; . . . ; An � g fields. Questionnaires were sent to these experts to
¼ fðmax vij njεjþ Þ; ðmin vij njεj Þ; ði ¼ 1; 2; ::; mÞg form pairwise comparison matrix, and finally, 27 com­
(5) pleted questionnaires were received by researchers.
In the first stage, the matrix of pairwise comparisons
A ¼ fA1 � ; A2 � ; . . . ; An � g is formed using the opinions of experts and based on
¼ fðmin vij njεjþ Þ; ðmax vij njεj Þ; ði ¼ 1; 2; ::; mÞg the neutrosophic language scales presented in Table 2.
(6) . In addition to neutrosophic scales, we receive degrees
of truthiness, indeterminacy, and falsity from experts.
The aggregated matrix for the three main parts of the
Calculate the Euclidean distance. The Euclidean dis­ intelligent supply chain in the face of security criteria is
tance between the positive and negative ideal solu­ shown in Table 3.
tions is calculated as follows: Once the final comparison matrix is created, we
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi convert it to a score matrix using the formula provided
uX in Equation (1). The obtained score matrix shows that
u n
di ¼ t
þ
ðvij vj þ Þ2 i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; m (7) the distribution sector in the smart supply chain is
j¼1
more affected by security risks. The score matrix
obtained is presented in Table 4.
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi After obtaining the score matrix using Equation (1),
uX
u n
di ¼t ðvij vj Þ2 i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; m (8) we normalise the matrix by dividing each cell by the
j¼1 sum (sum) of its columns to obtain the final weights of
each section. The results show that the weight distri­
bution has a higher weight among the three basic
Ranking of alternatives. Once the Euclidean distance parts of the intelligent supply chain. Also, the total
is calculated, the alternatives can be ranked by calcu­ weight is equal to 1, which indicates that the results
lating the degree of proximity with the following for­ are satisfactory. The paired matrix is normalised and
mula. The largest number represents the highest rank. the weight of the criteria is given in Table 5.
To check the consistency of the results obtained by
di þ the N-AHP method, we examined the compatibility
ci ¼ þ ; i ¼ 1; 2; . . . ; m (9)
di þ di ratio for the expert decision matrix and the value
obtained is 0.076, which is less than the threshold
value of 0.10. Therefore, it is said that there is no
Model validation. Validate model results based on problem of inconsistency in this research and further
goals/objectives. The model can be confirmed by per­ analysis can be done.
forming a sensitivity analysis, which shows that if the We can now use the N-TOPSIS method to evalu­
criteria increase or decrease in weight, ‫ﺍ‬ow stable the ate security metrics in the AIoT-blockchain based
model results are. intelligent supply chain. In this study, the N-TOPSIS

Table 3. Final comparison matrix for the main sections.

The main parts facing security risks supply and purchase Production Sales and distribution
supply and purchase ½ð1; 1; 1Þ; 0:5; 0:5; 0:5� ½ð1=5; 1=4; 1=3Þ; 0:7; 0:25; 0:3� ½ð1=6; 1=5; 1=4Þ; 0:6; 0:35; 0:4�
Production ½ð3; 4; 5Þ; 0:7; 0:25; 0:3� ½ð1; 1; 1Þ; 0:5; 0:5; 0:5� ½ð1=5; 1=4; 1=3Þ; 0:6; 0:25; 0:4�
Sales and distribution ½ð4; 5; 6Þ; 0:6; 0:35; 0:4� ½ð3; 4; 5Þ; 0:6; 0:25; 0:4� ½ð1; 1; 1Þ; 0:5; 0:5; 0:5�
38 A. ALIAHMADI AND H. NOZARI

Table 4. Score matrix. and priority of security criteria in the supply chain
The main parts facing Supply and Sales and based on the Artificial intelligence of Things and block­
security risks purchase Production distribution
chain at the same time. By comparing this research
supply and purchase 1 0.24 0.2
Production 4.15 1 0.25 with some researches (for example (Nozari, Fallah,
Sales and distribution 4.85 3.95 1 and Szmelter-Jarosz 2021a), (Grida, Mohamed, and
Zaied 2020), (Hussain et al. 2021), (Tsang et al., 2018))
it can be seen that the similarity And there are differ­
Table 5. Normalised comparison matrix.
ences between these results. For example, smooth
The main parts Supply and Sales and
facing security risks purchase Production distribution Weights privacy seems to be the highest priority in all assess­
supply and 0.1 0.04 0.14 0.1 ments. However, the present study shows that due to
purchase the simultaneous presence of the Internet of Things
Production 0.415 0.19 0.17 0.26
Sales and 0.485 0.76 0.69 0.645 and blockchain, data privacy has a high priority in
distribution supply chains that use these technologies simulta­
neously. Therefore, it seems that more attention
should be paid to this issue in production processes
approach was used to evaluate the security criteria
based on intelligent technology.
in the concrete smart supply chain based on AIoT.
Since the experts may have used different weights
First, the decision matrix was calculated based on
in the analysis, in this study, the results were reviewed
the scores received from experts (27 questionnaires
and confirmed using sensitivity analysis. To evaluate
received) for each criterion relative to the main
the sensitivity of the results, three steps were per­
sections. The experts provided scores using the
formed. In the first step, we increased the weight by
neutrosophic scale presented in Table 1, then the
10% for one factor and decreased the weight of the
total scores of all experts were calculated and the
other factors, respectively. In the second step, we
aggregated decision matrix was constructed, which
reduced the weight of one factor by 10% and
is presented in Table 6.
increased the weight of the other factors, respectively.
Using Equations 1 and 2, convert the neutrosophic
In the third step, we did not change the weight and
matrix to a crisp matrix, and then use Equation 3 to
kept the amount constant.These changes are shown in
create the normal matrix shown in Table 7.
Table 10. After changing the weights, no significant
The weighted matrix will be calculated using
changes were observed in the results, so it shows
Equation 4.
a stable solution.
Then, using equations 5 and 6, we calculate the
However, according to studies, the use of neutro­
amount of positive and negative ideal solutions.
sophic fuzzy method is a factor of stability, which has
In this step, the Euclidean distance between the
been proven by sensitivity analysis.
ideal solutions is calculated using Equations 7 and 8,
The results are shown in Figure 3, which shows
and then the degree of closeness is computed using
stability when gaining or losing weight.
Equation 9. The obtained weighted matrix is shown in
Table 8. Finally, the final ranking is shown in Table 9.
Based on the data in Table 9, important security
Discussion and Conclusion
criteria can be identified. These criteria are shown in
Figure 2. Despite the undeniable value of security, in many
In many previous studies, security indicators of the cases the conceptual design of systems does not
use of digital technologies such as IoT and blockchain take this issue into account and security is usually
technology have been examined separately in cities taken into account when weaknesses arise; While
and smart homes. However, since the combination of this is very costly. The worst case scenario is when
these technologies can bring different security priori­ some managers think that in order to stay compe­
ties, so the results of this study show the importance titive they need to produce a product as quickly as

Table 6. Integrated neutrosophic decision matrix.

smart supply chain security metrics Supply and Purchase Production Sales and distribution
W1 Secrecy Confidentiality 5,6,7 (0.6,0.35,0.4) 3,4,5 (0.45,.35,.55) 4,5,6 (0.55,0.25,0.45)
W2 Suppliers Privacy 6,7,8 (0.5,0.25,0.5) 5,6,7 (0.55,0.35,0.45) 6,7,8 (0.45,0.35,0.55)
W3 Trust management 2,3,4 (0.6,0.45,0.4) 1,2,3 (0.8,0.6,0.2) 2,3,4 (0.6,0.4,0.4)
W4 Secure middleware 6,7,8 (0.6,0.25,0.4) 7,8,9 (0.7,0.2,0.3) 4,5,6 (0.65,0.25,0.35)
W5 Access control 4,5,6 (0.7,0.25,0.3) 3,4,5 (0.7,0.5,0.3) 2,3,4 (0.85,.25,0.15)
W6 Availability 3,4,5 (0.65,0.2,0.35) 4,5,6 (0.65,0.5,0.35) 4,5,6 (0.6,0.55,0.4)
W7 Confidentiality in infrastructure 7,8,9 (0.55,0.2,0.45) 7,8,9 (0.8,0.25,0.2) 5, 6, 7 (0.5,0.0.45,0.5)
W8 Authentication 2,3,4 (0.5,0.35,0.5) 1,2,3 (0.8,0.45,0.2) 2,3,4 (0.45,0.55,0.55)
W9 Policy enforcement 2,3,4 (0.55,0.45,0.45) 1,2,3 (0.55,0.35,0.45) 4,5,6 (0.45,0.3,0.55)
W10 Network Integrity 6,7,8 (0.7,0.25,0.3) 5,6,7 (0.6,0.2,0.4) 5,6,7 (0.75,0.35,0.25)
W11 Customer privacy 7,8,9 (0.7,0.2,0.3) 6,7,8 (0.8,0.35,0.2) 7,8,9 (0.7,0.3,0.3)
 SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 39

Table 7. Normalised decision matrix. future are very high. Because delivering a product
smart supply chain Supply and Sales and to the market in this way may be market acceptable
security metrics Purchase Production distribution
in terms of distribution timing, it will have
W1 Secrecy 0.30 0.20 0.28
Confidentiality a detrimental effect on the supply chain as custo­
W2 Suppliers Privacy 0.35 0.32 0.38 mers have difficulty managing their supply chain
W3 Trust management 0.14 0.11 0.16
W4 Secure middleware 0.36 0.46 0.29 weaknesses. Therefore, delaying cybersecurity is
W5 Access control 0.27 0.22 0.20 unreasonable and low cost and imposes high costs
W6 Availability 0.21 0.27 0.27
W7 Confidentiality in 0.42 0.47 0.32
on the company and may even lead to product
infrastructure redesign and elimination of its shortcomings,
W8 Authentication 0.14 0.12 0.14 which in addition to imposing financial costs on
W9 Policy enforcement 0.14 0.10 0.27
W10 Network Integrity 0.37 0.33 0.36 the company, delays It will also lead to customer
W11 Customer privacy 0.42 0.40 0.47 dissatisfaction in product presentation. Due to the
growth of transformative technologies such as the
Internet of Things, Blockchain, and artificial intelli­
Table 8. Weighted decision matrix.
gence and the significant effects of these technolo­
smart supply chain Supply and Sales and
security metrics Purchase Production distribution gies on business processes, in this study, an attempt
W1 Secrecy 0.03 0.05 0.18 was made to examine the security aspects of an
Confidentiality
W2 Suppliers Privacy 0.03 0.08 0.25
AIoT and blockchain-based digital smart supply
W3 Trust management 0.01 0.03 0.11 chain. These technologies can always face many
W4 Secure middleware 0.04 0.12 0.19 security challenges due to their simultaneous pre­
W5 Access control 0.03 0.06 0.13
W6 Availability 0.02 0.07 0.17 sence in the network. Artificial intelligence can
W7 Confidentiality in 0.04 0.12 0.21 negatively affect privacy and security, and the
infrastructure
W8 Authentication 0.01 0.03 0.09 Internet of Things can always provide many benefits
W9 Policy enforcement 0.01 0.03 0.17 to the supply chain due to the presence of the
W10 Network Integrity 0.04 0.09 0.23
W11 Customer privacy 0.04 0.11 0.30 Internet. Also, since the blockchain is not affiliated
with trusted third-party entities, it will be challen­
ging to track down the offenders’ behaviour and
Table 9. Rank of security criteria in AIoT and blockchain-based retrieve the modified blockchain information if its
smart supply chain. private key has been stolen.
di þ di di þ þ di ci The rank of security criteria Organizational leaders need to be aware that pro­
W1 0.08 0.01 0.09 0.891 7 blems in one part of the supply chain can lead to threats
W2 0.08 0.01 0.09 0.893 6 and costs to the entire chain. As a result, in order to
W3 0.03 0.025 0.06 0.573 10
W4 0.11 0.007 0.12 0.94 5 increase supply chain security, organisational leaders
W5 0.04 0.02 0.06 0.67 8 have a responsibility to identify security issues and
W6 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.575 9
W7 0.17 0.0051 0.17 0.975 3 address weaknesses. In this way, security becomes an
W8 0.17 0.0055 0.17 0.975 2 integral part of the supply chain, even if customers do
W9 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.52 11
W10 0.16 0.005 0.16 0.973 4 not request it. For this reason, in this study, first, by
W11 0.12 0.003 0.12 0.98 1 reviewing the literature, the most important security
criteria in the three main parts of the supply chain
were extracted and refined with the opinions of experts,
Table 10. Sensitivity analysis. and eleven criteria were selected as the most important
The weight 10% criteria. 35 experts active in industry and academia were
smart supply chain remained weight 10% weight used to evaluate the criteria. A combined decision-
security metrics unchanged gain reduction
W1 Secrecy 0.901 0.97 0.80
making method based on neutrosophic scales was
Confidentiality used to analyse the opinions of experts. The results of
W2 Suppliers Privacy 0.893 0.98 0.8037 the analysis showed that customer privacy was one of
W3 Trust management 0.585 0.63 0.5157
W4 Secure middleware 0.94 1.03 0.846 the most important areas to consider in the discussion
W5 Access control 0.67 0.74 0.603
W6 Availability 0.575 0.63 0.5175
of smart supply chain security. A review of the literature
W7 Confidentiality in 0.975 1.07 0.8775 indicates that this criterion is one of the most important
infrastructure
W8 Authentication 0.960 1.1 0.8775
security criteria in the presence of digital technologies in
W9 Policy enforcement 0.52 0.57 0.468 the new era and in all societies. Capturing and main­
W10 Network Integrity 0.973 1.07 0.8757 taining customer information and not misusing informa­
W11 Customer privacy 0.98 1.08 0.882
tions are of paramount importance, and authentication
possible; Even if that product has many weaknesses. and security of operational infrastructure in network-
Although the risk of identifying product weaknesses based sectors is the next priority. Therefore, it seems
in this case is low, the costs of fixing them in the that managers of organisations should pay close
40 A. ALIAHMADI AND H. NOZARI
Figure 2. The position of security indicators in the AIoT and blockchain-based supply chain.
Figure 3. Sensitivity analysis results.
attention to the existing infrastructure and middleware
to increase computational accuracy and reduce security
concerns. Because paying attention to security as
a priority of organisations in business, indicates their
commitment to customers and the entire supply chain.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author(s).
Notes on contributors
Alireza Aliahmadi is a full Professor of Management &
Industrial Engineering at the Iran University of Science and
Technology. He received Ph.D. in Production Management/
Operations Research from Tarbiat Modares University in
Tehran in 1994 and master’s degree in industrial engineering
from Tarbiat Modares University in Tehran in 1989. His main
research areas are strategic management and strategic think­
ing, innovation and technology management, information
technology management, and value engineering. He has
been the supervisor of more than one hundred students in
graduate courses. He is the author of more than 30 books in
Persian and many of his articles have been published in
prestigious international journals.
Hamed Nozari is a research assistant in Industrial engineer­
ing at the Iran university of science and technology. He holds
a Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering with a focus on Production
Management and Planning and PostDoc in Industrial
Engineering from the Iran University of Science and
Technology. He has taught various courses in the field of
Industrial Engineering and has published many books and
papers as well. Now he is a researcher in the field of digital
developments and smart systems and optimization.
ORCID
Alireza Aliahmadi http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5640-9644
Hamed Nozari http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6500-6708
References
Alsinglawi, B., L. Zheng, M. A. Kabir, M. Z. Islam, D. Swain, and
W. Swain (2022). “Internet of Things and Microservices in
Supply Chain: Cybersecurity Challenges, and Research

Opportunities”. In International Conference on Advanced
Information Networking and Applications (pp. 556–566).
Springer, Cham.
Balamurugan, S., A. Ayyasamy, and K. S. Joseph. 2021. “IoT-
Blockchain Driven Traceability Techniques for Improved
Safety Measures in Food Supply Chain.” International
Journal of Information Technology 13 (1): 1–12. doi:10.
1007/s41870-021-00612-2.
Bansal, S., and V. K. Tomar (2022, January). “Challenges &
Security Threats in IoT with Solution Architectures”. In
2022 2nd International Conference on Power Electronics &
IoT Applications in Renewable Energy and its Control (PARC),
India (pp. 1–5). IEEE.
Bentotahewa, V., M. Yousef, C. Hewage, L. Nawaf, and J. Williams.
2022. “Privacy and Security Challenges and Opportunities for
IoT Technologies during and beyond COVID-19.” In:
Montasari, R., Carroll, F., Mitchell, I., Hara, S., Bolton-King, R.
(eds)Privacy, Security and Forensics in the Internet of Things (Iot)
51–76. Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-91218-5_3
Bhargava, A., D. Bhargava, P. N. Kumar, G. S. Sajja, and
S. Ray. 2022. “Industrial IoT and AI Implementation in
Vehicular Logistics and Supply Chain Management for
Vehicle Mediated Transportation Systems.” International
Journal of System Assurance Engineering and
Management 13(1), 673–680.
Fallah, M., and H. Nozari. 2021. “Neutrosophic Mathematical
Programming for Optimization of Multi-Objective
Sustainable Biomass Supply Chain Network Design.” CMES-
COMPUTER MODELING IN ENGINEERING & SCIENCES 129 (2):
927–951. doi:10.32604/cmes.2021.017511.
Fallah, M., M. E. Sadeghi, and H. Nozari. 2021. “Quantitative
Analysis of the Applied Parts of Internet of Things
Technology in Iran: An Opportunity for Economic
Leapfrogging through Technological Development.”
Science and Technology Policy Letters 11: 4.
Fragkiadakis, A. (2021, January). “An IoT-based Platform for
Supply Chain Monitoring”. In 2021 IEEE 18th Annual
Consumer Communications & Networking Conference
(CCNC) Las Vegas, USA (pp. 1–4). IEEE.
Grida, M., R. Mohamed, and A. N. H. Zaied. 2020. “A Novel
Plithogenic MCDM Framework for Evaluating the
Performance of IoT Based Supply Chain.” Neutrosophic
Sets and Systems 33 (1): 323–341.
Hasan, A. S. M., S. Sabah, R. U. Haque, A. Daria, A. Rasool, and
Q. Jiang. 2022. “Towards Convergence of IoT and
Blockchain for Secure Supply Chain Transaction.”
Symmetry 14 (1): 64. doi:10.3390/sym14010064.
Ho, E. S. 2022. “Data Security Challenges in Deep Neural Network
for Healthcare IoT Systems.” In: Abd El-Latif, A.A., Abd-El-Atty,
B., Venegas-Andraca, S.E., Mazurczyk, W., Gupta, B.B. (eds)
Security and Privacy Preserving for IoT and 5G Networks, 19–
37 . Cham: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-85428-7_2
Hussain, M., W. Javed, O. Hakeem, A. Yousafzai, A. Younas,
M. J. Awan, . . . A. M. Zain. 2021. “Blockchain-Based IoT
Devices in Supply Chain Management: A Systematic
Literature Review.” Sustainability 13 (24): 13646. doi:10.
3390/su132413646.
Junaid, M., Y. Xue, M. W. Syed, J. Z. Li, and M. Ziaullah. 2019.
“A Neutrosophic Ahp and Topsis Framework for Supply
Chain Risk Assessment in Automotive Industry of
Pakistan.” Sustainability 12 (1): 154. doi:10.3390/
su12010154.
Malik, N., K. Alkhatib, Y. Sun, E. Knight, and Y. Jararweh. 2021.
“A Comprehensive Review of Blockchain Applications in
Industrial Internet of Things and Supply Chain Systems.”
Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry 37 (3):
391–412. doi:10.1002/asmb.2621.
SUPPLY CHAIN FORUM: AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 41
Nahr, J. G., H. Nozari, and M. E. Sadeghi. 2021. “Green Supply
Chain Based on Artificial Intelligence of Things (Aiot).”
International Journal of Innovation in Management,
Economics and Social Sciences 1 (2): 56–63.
Nozari, H., M. Fallah, and A. Szmelter-Jarosz. 2021a.
“A Conceptual Framework of Green Smart IoT-based
Supply Chain Management.” International Journal of
Research in Industrial Engineering 10 (1): 22–34.
Nozari, H., and M. E. Sadeghi. 2021b. “Artificial Intelligence
and Machine Learning for Real-world Problems (A
Survey).” International Journal of Innovation in
Engineering 1 (3): 38–47.
Nozari, H., M. Fallah, H. Kazemipoor, and S. E. Najafi. 2021c.
“Big Data Analysis of IoT-based Supply Chain Management
considering FMCG Industries.” Бизнес-информатика
15 (1 (eng)), 78–96.
Nozari, H., M. Fallah, A. Szmelter-Jarosz, and
M. Krzemiński. 2021d. “Analysis of Security Criteria for
IoT-based Supply Chain: A Case Study of FMCG
Industries.” Central European Management Journal
29 (4). doi:10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.63.
Nozari, H., J. Ghahremani-Nahr, M. Fallah, and A. Szmelter-
Jarosz. 2022. “Assessment of Cyber Risks in an IoT-based
Supply Chain Using a Fuzzy decision-making Method.”
International Journal of Innovation in Management,
Economics and Social Sciences 2 (1), 52–64.
Paiva, S., M. A. Ahad, S. Zafar, G. Tripathi, A. Khalique, and
I. Hussain. 2020. “Privacy and Security Challenges in Smart
and Sustainable Mobility.” SN Applied Sciences 2 (7): 1–10.
doi:10.1007/s42452-020-2984-9.
Prasad, N. R., B. Andersen, and D. K. Rubin-Grøn. 2022.
“Overview of Security Challenges in Wireless IoT
Infrastructures for Autonomous Vehicles.” Journal of
Cyber Security and Mobility.
Sakhnini, J., and H. Karimipour. 2020. “AI and Security of
Cyber Physical Systems: Opportunities and Challenges.”
In: Karimipour, H., Srikantha, P., Farag, H., Wei-Kocsis, J.
(eds)Security of Cyber-Physical Systems 1–4. Cham:
Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-45541-5_1
Tan, L., K. Yu, F. Ming, X. Chen, and G. Srivastava. 2021.
“Secure and Resilient Artificial Intelligence of Things:
A HoneyNet Approach for Threat Detection and
Situational Awareness.” IEEE Consumer Electronics
Magazine, 11(3), 69-78.
Tan, Y. C. L. 2021. “Recent Technological Trends and
Security Challenges in Trust-Building in E-Commerce.”
International Journal of Business and Management
14 (12): 226.
Tong, X., K. H. Lai, C. K. Lo, and T. C. E. Cheng. 2022. “Supply
Chain Security Certification and Operational Performance:
The Role of Upstream Complexity.” International Journal of
Production Economics 247: 108433. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2022.
108433.
Touqeer, H., S. Zaman, R. Amin, M. Hussain, F. Al-Turjman, and
M. Bilal. 2021. “Smart Home Security: Challenges, Issues
and Solutions at Different IoT Layers.” The Journal of
Supercomputing 77 (12): 14053–14089. doi:10.1007/
s11227-021-03825-1.
Tsang, Y. P., K. L. Choy, C. H. Wu, G. T. Ho, C. H. Lam, and
P. S. Koo. 2018. “An Internet of Things (Iot)-based Risk
Monitoring System for Managing Cold Supply Chain
Risks.” Industrial Management & Data Systems 118 (7):
1432–1462. doi:10.1108/IMDS-09-2017-0384.
Tubaishat, M., P. Zhuang, Q. Qi, and Y. Shang. 2009. “Wireless
Sensor Networks in Intelligent Transportation Systems.”
Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing 9 (3):
287–302. doi:10.1002/wcm.616.
42 A. ALIAHMADI AND H. NOZARI
Varriale, V., A. Cammarano, F. Michelino, and M. Caputo.
2021. “Sustainable Supply Chains with Blockchain, IoT
and RFID: A Simulation on Order Management.”
Sustainability 13 (11): 6372. doi:10.3390/su13116372.
Wazid, M., A. K. Das, and Y. Park. 2021. “Blockchain-
Envisioned Secure Authentication Approach in AIoT:
Applications, Challenges, and Future Research.”
Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing 2021.
28(13).
Williams, Z., J. E. Lueg, and S. A. LeMay. 2008. “Supply Chain
Security: An Overview and Research Agenda.” The
International Journal of Logistics Management 19 (2): 254–
281. doi:10.1108/09574090810895988.
Yadav, S., S. Luthra, and D. Garg. 2021. “Modelling Internet of
Things (Iot)-driven Global Sustainability in multi-tier
agri-food Supply Chain under Natural Epidemic
Outbreaks.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research
28 (13): 16633–16654. doi:10.1007/s11356-020-11676-1.