EXPLORING THE ROADBLOCKS TO INDUSTRY 4.

0 IN THE AFSC: AN ISM

AND DEMATEL-K-MEANS FRAMEWORK FOR BARRIER IDENTIFICATION

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

the award of the degree of

B.Tech
in
Mechanical Engineering

By

MOHITH CHIRAMANA (111119068)

NITHYA SOUNDARYA N (111119076)
RAFATH BANU (111119096)

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
TIRUCHIRAPPALLI – 620015
MAY 2023
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project titled “EXPLORING THE ROADBLOCKS TO

INDUSTRY 4.0 IN THE AFSC: AN ISM AND DEMATEL-K-MEANS
FRAMEWORK FOR BARRIER IDENTIFICATION” is a bonafide record of the
work done by

Mohith Chiramana (111119068)

Nithya Soundarya N (111119076)
Rafath Banu (111119096)

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of BACHELOR OF
TECHNOLOGY in MECHANICAL ENGINEERING at the NATIONAL
INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI, during the year 2022-2023.

Dr. Bishweshwar Babu Dr. K.Pannirselvam

Project Guide Head of the Department

Project viva-voce held on:__________________________

Internal Examiner External Examiner

ii
 ABSTRACT

The Agri-Food Supply Chain (AFSC) has the potential to significantly enhance operational
efficiencies and competitiveness through the adoption of Industry 4.0 practices. However, the
implementation of Industry 4.0 in this complex and dynamic domain is confronted with various
obstacles. This thesis seeks to investigate and analyze the barriers that impede the successful
adoption of Industry 4.0 in the AFSC. To accomplish this objective, a combination of two
Multi-criteria decision-making methods, namely Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) and
Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL), is proposed for barrier
identification. The ISM framework facilitates the identification of interrelationships and
dependencies among the barriers, while the DEMATEL methodology enables a quantitative
analysis of the cause-effect relationships between these barriers. Moreover, the DEMATEL
method is integrated with the K-means clustering algorithm to illustrate the relationships
between the barriers within clusters. By employing this integrated framework, a comprehensive
understanding of the intricate network of barriers hindering the adoption of Industry 4.0 within
the AFSC can be attained. The findings of this study offer valuable insights and practical
recommendations for policymakers, industry stakeholders, and supply chain participants,
enabling them to devise targeted strategies to overcome these barriers and promote the
successful implementation of Industry 4.0 in the AFSC. The proposed integrated framework
serves as a powerful tool for barrier analysis and decision-making, thereby contributing to the
advancement of the Agri-Food Supply Chain and facilitating a sustainable and technologically-
enabled future.

Keywords: Industry 4.0, Agri-Food Supply Chain, Agri 4.0, Interpretive Structural Modeling,
Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory, K-means clustering, Decision-makers,
Causal Digraph, Prominence and Relation degrees

iii
.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to extend our sincere gratitude to Dr. G. Aghila, Director of National Institute
of Technology, Tiruchirappalli, for the invaluable cooperation extended to us, which enabled
the successful completion of our project.

We are deeply obliged to Dr. K. Pannirselvam, the Head of the Department of Mechanical
Engineering, for his unwavering support and encouragement. We are also grateful to the
esteemed members of the evaluation committee, Dr. K. Pannirselvam, Dr. R. B. Anand, Dr.
Ashok Kumar Nallathambi, and Dr. R Prakash, for their valuable advice, which significantly
contributed to the refinement of our project.

We owe a profound debt of gratitude to our guide, Dr. Bishweshwar Babu, for his exceptional
guidance and constant encouragement throughout the duration of our research work. His
expertise and inspiration played a vital role in our research journey, and we are truly
privileged to have had the opportunity to work under his supervision.

We would also like to express our sincere appreciation to Dr. P. Parthiban (Co-guide) for his
continuous assistance and valuable time, without which the successful completion of this
research would not have been possible.

Finally, we would like to acknowledge and thank our parents, relatives, and friends for their
unwavering love, emotional support, and unwavering belief in our abilities, which provided
us with the strength to overcome challenges and achieve our goals.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page No.

ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii

ABBREVIATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

NOMENCLATURE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

1.1.Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2. Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3. Present Work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.4. Thesis Organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.1. Case Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3.2. Hierarchical modeling using ISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
3.3. Causal-Effect Analysis using DEMATEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.4. K-means Clustering algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.5. Proposed algorithm. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS & DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

4.1. Hierarchical modeling using ISM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4.2. Causal-Effect Analysis using DEMATEL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33

4.3. Hybrid DEMATEL-K-Means clustering framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

v
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

5.1. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41

5.2. Future Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

APPENDIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

vi
 LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page No.

2.1 Final list of Barriers 14

3.1 Industry Experts 16

4.1 SSIM 28

4.2 Reachability Matrix 29

4.3 Final Reachability Matrix 29

4.4 Iteration – I 30

4.5 Iteration – II 30

4.6 Iteration – III 31

4.7 Final Level Partitioning 31

4.8 Average Direct Relation Matrix 34

4.9 Normalized Direct Relation Matrix 35

4.10 Total Relation Matrix 35

4.11 Adjacency Matrix 36

4.12 DEMATEL Results 37

4.13 Clustered DEMATEL Results 39

4.14 Clustered weighted Adjacency Matrix 39

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Title Page No.

1.1 Industry 1.0 2

1.2 Industry 2.0 3

1.3 Industry 3.0 3

1.4 Industry 4.0 4

1.5 Industrial Revolution 4

1.6 Agri-food Supply Chain 6

1.7 Industry 4.0 in AFSC 7

3.1 Flowchart of the proposed algorithm 25

4.1 ISM Digraph 32

4.2 MICMAC Analysis 33

4.3 Causal Diagram 37

4.4 Optimal Clustering generated by the algorithm 38

4.5 Clustered Causal Digraph 40

viii
 ABBREVIATIONS

AFSC Agri-Food Supply Chain

ISM Interpretive Structural Modeling
DEMATEL Decision-Making Trail And Evaluation Laboratory
SSIM Structural Self-Identification Matrix
RM Reachability Matrix
MICMAC Matrice d'impacts croisés multiplication appliquée á un
classment

ix
 NOMENCLATURE

 Threshold Value
D Dispatch
R Receiving
D-R Relation Degree
D+R Prominence Degree

x
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
From the mid-18th to mid-19th century, significant socio-economic and technological
changes occurred which is famously known as Industrial Revolution. It began in Britain and
later spread to other parts of the world, transforming societies from predominantly agrarian to
industrial and urban.
The Industrial Revolution brought about profound changes in society, including
urbanization, the growth of the middle class, increased productivity, improved living standards
for some, but also exploitation of workers and environmental challenges. It laid the foundation
for modern industrialized economies and set the stage for subsequent technological
advancements and societal transformations.
Certainly! The terms Industry 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 are often used to describe different
stages of industrial development. They are closely related to the concept of industrial
revolutions but provide a more specific focus on the technological advancements and changes
within industries. Here's an explanation of each phase:

I. Industry 1.0 (Industrial Revolution):

Industry 1.0 refers to the period of the
first Industrial Revolution. It took
place from the late 18th century to the
early 19th century and was
characterized by the introduction of
mechanization and steam power. Key
innovations included the steam engine,
which replaced human and animal
power, and the development of machinery
Figure 1.1 Industry 1.0
for textile production. The shift from
manual labor to machine-based production in factories marked a significant transition
in industrial processes.

2
 II. Industry 2.0 (Technological
Revolution): Industry 2.0 represents
the second phase of industrial
development, often associated with the
Second Industrial Revolution. It
occurred from the mid-19th century to
the early 20th century and was
characterized by the widespread
adoption of electricity and assembly
line production. Major advancements Figure 1.2 Industry 2.0
included the use of electric power, the
invention of the internal combustion engine, the telegraph, and the telephone. These
innovations led to increased productivity, mass production, and the rise of large-scale
industrial corporations.

III. Industry 3.0 (Digital Revolution):

Industry 3.0 refers to the digital revolution
and the widespread use of computers and
automation in industries. It began in the
mid-20th century and continues to the
present day. Key technologies include the
invention of the microprocessor, the
emergence of personal computers, and the
development of digital communication
Figure 1.3 Industry 3.0
networks. Industry 3.0 brought about
significant advancements in information technology, enabling the automation of
processes, the digitization of data, and the integration of computer systems into various
industries.

3
IV. Industry 4.0 (Fourth Industrial
Revolution): Industry 4.0 represents the
ongoing phase of industrial development
characterized by the integration of digital
technologies, automation, and data
exchange. It builds upon Industry 3.0 but
emphasizes the fusion of physical, digital,
and biological systems. Key technologies
include artificial intelligence, machine
Figure 1.4 Industry 4.0
learning, the Internet of Things, cloud
computing, big data analytics, and advanced robotics. Industry 4.0 aims to create "smart
factories" that are highly automated, interconnected, and capable of making
autonomous decisions based on real-time data. It envisions a more flexible, efficient,
and interconnected industrial ecosystem.

Each of these industrial phases represents a significant shift in technology, production

processes, and societal impact. They have reshaped industries, economies, and employment
landscapes, leading to both opportunities and challenges for businesses and societies.

Figure 1.5 Industrial Revolution

4
1.2. Theory

Agri Food Supply Chain:

The agri-food supply chain refers to the interconnected network of activities and processes
involved in producing, processing, distributing, and delivering agricultural products from farm
to fork. It encompasses the entire journey of food products, including raw materials,
ingredients, and finished goods, as they move through various stages and entities within the
supply chain.

The agri-food supply chain typically involves the following key components:

i. Input Suppliers: These are companies that provide agricultural inputs such as seeds,
fertilizers, pesticides, machinery, and equipment to farmers and producers.
ii. Production: This stage involves the cultivation, raising, and harvesting of crops, as well
as the rearing of livestock and other agricultural activities. Farmers and producers play
a central role in this stage.
iii. Processing and Manufacturing: Once harvested or produced, agricultural commodities
undergo various processing and manufacturing activities to transform them into value-
added products. This includes activities such as cleaning, sorting, grading, milling,
packaging, and converting raw materials into intermediate or final products.
iv. Distribution and Logistics: This stage involves the movement of agricultural products
from processing facilities to distribution centers, wholesalers, retailers, and ultimately
to consumers. It encompasses transportation, storage, warehousing, inventory
management, and logistics operations.
v. Retail and Food Service: This stage involves the sale of agricultural products to end
consumers through retail outlets such as supermarkets, grocery stores, farmers' markets,
and online platforms. It also includes food service establishments like restaurants,
cafeterias, and catering companies.
vi. Consumer: The final stage of the agri-food supply chain is the consumption of food
products by individuals or households. Consumers make choices based on factors such
as quality, price, convenience, and sustainability.

5
 Figure 1.6 Agri-food supply chain

The agri-food supply chain is complex and requires coordination, collaboration, and
information exchange among various stakeholders, including farmers, suppliers, processors,
distributors, retailers, and consumers. The goal is to ensure the efficient, safe, and sustainable
flow of agricultural products from producers to consumers while maintaining product quality,
traceability, and food safety standards.

Efforts are being made to enhance the transparency, traceability, and sustainability of
the agri-food supply chain through the use of technologies such as blockchain, IoT sensors,
data analytics, and supply chain management systems. This enables better monitoring, tracking,
and optimization of the supply chain processes, reducing waste, improving food safety, and
enhancing the overall efficiency and resilience of the system.

Industry 4.0 in Agri Food Supply Chain:

Incorporating Industry 4.0 technologies and principles into the agri-food supply chain can bring
several benefits, including increased efficiency, improved traceability, enhanced sustainability,
and better decision-making. Here are some ways in which Industry 4.0 can be integrated into
the agri-food supply chain:

➢ Precision Agriculture: Precision agriculture involves the use of technologies such as

sensors, drones, satellite imagery, and GPS to collect data and monitor field conditions.
This data can be analyzed to optimize the use of resources, including water, fertilizers, and
pesticides. By implementing precision agriculture techniques, farmers can enhance
productivity, reduce costs, and minimize environmental impact.

6
➢ IoT and Smart Farming: The Internet of Things (IoT) enables the connectivity of devices
and sensors on farms, facilitating real-time data collection and analysis. IoT systems can
monitor and control various parameters such as soil moisture, temperature, crop growth,
and livestock health. This allows farmers to make data-driven decisions, automate
processes, and optimize resource utilization.
➢ Data Analytics and Predictive Analytics: By applying data analytics and predictive
analytics algorithms to the vast amounts of data collected throughout the supply chain,
stakeholders can gain valuable insights. For example, analyzing historical data and weather
patterns can help predict crop yields, optimize inventory levels, and optimize
transportation routes, leading to more efficient operations and reduced waste.
➢ Blockchain Technology: Blockchain can enhance transparency and traceability within the
agri-food supply chain. It enables secure and immutable recording of transactions,
allowing stakeholders to track the journey of food products from farm to fork. Blockchain
can help ensure food safety, verify certifications (e.g., organic, fair trade), and provide
consumers with accurate information about the origin and quality of products.
➢ Robotics and Automation: Robotic systems can be employed in various stages of the agri-
food supply chain, such as harvesting, sorting, and packaging. Automated processes can
improve efficiency, reduce labor costs, and enhance quality control. Robots can also be
used for tasks that require precision or are labor-intensive, freeing up human resources for
more complex activities.

Figure 1.7 Industry 4.0 in AFSC

7
➢ Cloud Computing and Big Data: Cloud computing enables the storage, processing, and
analysis of large volumes of data from multiple sources. It allows stakeholders in the
supply chain to access and share information in real-time, facilitating collaboration and
decision-making. Big data analytics can uncover patterns and trends that can optimize
production, logistics, and inventory management.
➢ Mobile Applications and Digital Platforms: Mobile applications and digital platforms can
provide farmers, suppliers, distributors, and consumers with access to real-time
information, marketplaces, and supply chain visibility. They can facilitate direct
communication, enable online transactions, and support the traceability of products.

Integrating Industry 4.0 technologies requires investment in infrastructure, data management

systems, and workforce skills. Collaboration and partnerships among stakeholders in the agri-
food supply chain are crucial for successful implementation. By leveraging the power of
Industry 4.0, the agri-food supply chain can become more efficient, sustainable, transparent,
and responsive to consumer demands.

1.3. Present Work

Objectives of the Research:

i. R01: To determine the various influential barriers to implementing Industry 4.0 in Agro
Food Supply Chain.
ii. R02: To examine how these barriers influence to implementation of the Industry 4.0
concept by MCDM methods.
iii. R03: To create an ISM MICMAC model to determine the interdependency of each
barrier.
iv. R04: Create a cause-and-effect diagram by utilizing the DEMATEL technique

Methodology:

• Literature Review – We get an overview on previously published works on this topic.

• Listing Barriers – List all the Barriers for the Agri Food Supply Chain to get converted
into Industry 4.0.
• Questionnaire Preparation – From the Barriers, make questionnaire on different
methods available.

8
 • Data Collection – The Questionnaire is given to industrial experts and the data is
collected.
• Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Techniques – We use this for an objective approach of
taking a complex decision.
• Advanced data analytics – From the analysis, we find the effect and cause barriers of
Industry 4.0 in AFSC and about the relation between each other.

1.4. Thesis Organization

This thesis is divided into five further chapters as follows.

• Chapter 2 – Literature Review

• Chapter 3 – Research Methodology

• Chapter 4 – Results & Discussion

• Chapter 5 – Conclusions & Future Scope

9
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

Sunil Luthra and Sachin Kumar Mangla [1] analyzes the challenges to adopting Industry 4.0
technologies for promoting supply chain sustainability in emerging economies. Relevant
literature is reviewed and empirical evidence from interviews with industry experts in Brazil,
China, and India is presented. The findings identify various challenges, including inadequate
infrastructure, cultural barriers, and lack of awareness and education. Recommendations,
such as investing in education and training, building strategic partnerships, and adopting a
more holistic approach to supply chain management, are proposed to overcome these
challenges and promote sustainable supply chains in emerging economies.

Jaiprakash Bhamu and Kuldip Singh Sangwan [2] examine barriers to adopting Industry 4.0
technologies in manufacturing organizations. Relevant literature is reviewed, and an
interpretive structural modeling (ISM) approach is used to develop a hierarchical model of
the interrelationships between these barriers. The authors propose recommendations to
overcome these barriers and accelerate Industry 4.0 adoption in manufacturing organizations.

Md. Abdul Moktadir, Syed Mithun Ali and Simonov Kusi-Sarpong [3] explore the challenges
of implementing Industry 4.0 with regards to process safety and environmental protection.
The authors identify several challenges through a review of relevant literature, including data
protection, lack of standards, and human factors. The study concludes by proposing
recommendations to overcome these challenges and ensure safe and sustainable Industry 4.0
implementation.

Ankit Sharma [4] investigate the barriers to adopting Industry 4.0 technologies in the
manufacturing sector across different countries. Relevant literature is reviewed to identify
barriers such as lack of skills and training, high implementation costs, and cybersecurity
concerns. The authors analyze data from a survey conducted across multiple countries to
compare the barriers and challenges faced in different regions. The study concludes with
recommendations to overcome these barriers and accelerate the adoption of Industry 4.0
technologies in the manufacturing sector.

10
Deeraj Nimawat [5] identified various challenges, such as a lack of awareness and expertise,
high implementation costs, and cybersecurity risks. They also suggest recommendations for
overcoming these challenges, including investing in education and training and developing
national policies and strategies to promote Industry 4.0 adoption. Overall, the authors'
research provides valuable insights into the implementation of Industry 4.0 in developing
countries.

In their research paper, Pankaj Goel and Raman Kumar [6] conduct a literature review to
identify the primary barriers hindering the implementation of Industry 4.0 in small and
medium enterprises. The authors suggest strategies, such as collaboration with universities
and government, and fostering a culture of innovation, to overcome these barriers. Their
study offers important insights into the challenges faced by small and medium enterprises in
adopting Industry 4.0.

Dheeraj Nimawat and B.D. Gidwani [7] employ the DEMATEL method to identify the
interdependence of barriers to Industry 4.0 implementation. Through a literature review, they
identify various barriers, such as lack of skilled workforce and data privacy concerns. The
authors propose a hierarchy of these barriers, which can help organizations prioritize their
efforts to overcome these challenges. Overall, their research offers valuable insights into the
cause and effect relationships among Industry 4.0 barriers and can aid organizations in their
efforts to adopt this transformative technology.

Ahmad Reshad Bakhtari [8] use the ISM method to identify challenges that manufacturing
industries encounter while implementing Industry 4.0. They conduct a literature review and
identify several challenges such as cybersecurity concerns and a shortage of skilled
workforce. The authors create a hierarchy of these challenges that helps organizations
prioritize their efforts to overcome them. The study offers valuable insights into Industry 4.0
implementation challenges in manufacturing industries and can assist organizations in
adopting this technology.

Abhijit Majumdar [9] examine the barriers faced by the textile and clothing industry in
implementing Industry 4.0. They use the ISM and triple helix frameworks to identify and
analyze these barriers, including inadequate infrastructure and a lack of skilled workforce.
The authors provide recommendations for overcoming these barriers, such as developing
11
training programs and partnerships with technology providers. Overall, their research offers
valuable insights into managing the barriers of Industry 4.0 adoption and implementation in
the textile and clothing industry.

Dheeraj Nimawat and B.D. Gidwani [10] identify and prioritize barriers to Industry 4.0
adoption in Indian manufacturing industries through a literature review and AHP/ANP
analysis. Their research provides guidance on which barriers should be addressed first, aiding
in the adoption of Industry 4.0.

In their systematic literature review, Yadav et al. [11] explore the application of Industry 4.0
technologies in the agricultural food supply chain. The study identifies key studies and
highlights the potential benefits of integrating technologies such as IoT, big data analytics,
AI, and robotics in the agricultural sector.

Yadav and Singh [12] conduct a systematic literature review investigating the uses of
blockchain technology in agriculture. The review emphasizes the potential advantages of
blockchain in addressing supply chain inefficiencies, increasing transparency, and building
trust among stakeholders. The authors also acknowledge the challenges linked to its
implementation, including scalability and regulatory considerations.

In their review, Singh et al. [13] explore the applications of digital twin technology across
industries. They highlight its potential to revolutionize industrial processes and provide a
concise overview of its use cases and benefits.

Arora et al. [14] review the integration of agriculture and Industry 4.0 through "Agri-Food
4.0" to identify suitable technologies for overcoming agronomical barriers. The authors aim
to provide a concise analysis of relevant literature in this area. The review highlights the
importance of leveraging Industry 4.0 technologies in agriculture to address agronomical
challenges. The authors identify key technologies and their potential applications to enhance
productivity and sustainability in the agri-food sector.

García et al. [15] conduct a systematic literature review on the use of machine learning in
precision livestock farming. The review highlights the potential of machine learning to
transform livestock management practices. The authors provide a concise overview of
12
existing research, focusing on the diverse applications and benefits of machine learning in
this domain. The study aims to contribute to the understanding of the role of machine
learning in improving precision livestock farming techniques.

Zambon et al. [16] conduct a literature review exploring the impact of Revolution 4.0 on
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the industry and agriculture sectors. The
review highlights the potential for future development and transformation in both industries.
The authors provide a concise overview of existing research, focusing on the implications of
Revolution 4.0 for SMEs. The study aims to contribute to understanding the opportunities
and challenges faced by SMEs in adopting advanced technologies in the context of
Revolution 4.0.

Zhaoa et al. [17] provide a literature review on the applications of blockchain technology in
agri-food value chain management. The review highlights the benefits of blockchain in
improving transparency, traceability, and efficiency within the agri-food sector. The authors
also discuss the challenges associated with blockchain implementation and propose future
research directions. The study aims to contribute to the understanding of blockchain's
potential in revolutionizing agri-food value chain management.

Kumar et al. [18] review the adoption barriers of Industry 4.0 and circular economy practices
in the agriculture supply chain. The review focuses on using the ISM-ANP approach for
identification and analysis. The authors aim to contribute to understanding the challenges
faced in implementing Industry 4.0 and circular economy principles in the agricultural sector.

Belauda et al. [19] conduct a literature review on the application of big data in Agri-Food 4.0
for sustainability management in the by-products supply chain. The review highlights the
potential of big data analytics in optimizing resource utilization and improving sustainability
practices. The authors aim to contribute to the understanding of leveraging big data for
sustainable management in the agri-food sector.

From the literature review, we identified 15 barriers which are summarised in the table
below:

13
 Table 2.1 Final list of Barriers

S No. Barriers (B) Citation(as per references)

1. High expenditure in the adoption of Industry 4.0
[ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 ]
2. disruption of current employment
[ 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9 ]
3. No definite government plans
[ 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 ]
4. Untrained and unskilled personnel
[ 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]
5. Issues related to law
[ 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 ]
6. Lack of Industry 4.0 global standards
[ 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 ]
7. Issues with security and data protection
[ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]
8. Lack of a clear understanding of the
benefits [ 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 10 ]
9. System of adequate [ 1, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]
maintenance assistance
10. Implementation related limitations
[ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 ]
11. Unwillingness to adapt
[ 1, 2, 4, 6, 8 ]
12. Low commitment and help [ 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]
from management
13. Challenging Process and organization adjustments
[ 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]
14. Lack of a methodical execution strategy [ 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 ]
15. Anxiety of failing [ 4, 6, 8, 9 ]

14
 CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Case background

Agri 4.0 is crucial for India's economy, revolutionizing agriculture with increased
productivity, sustainability, and market access. Through advanced technologies, it empowers
farmers, attracts investments, and fosters innovation. It enhances rural development, reduces
poverty, and contributes to overall economic growth and food security.
Moreover, they have also found that:
➢ Agri-tech Startups: India has over 500 agri-tech startups, indicating a thriving
ecosystem for Agri 4.0 innovations.
➢ Agricultural IoT Market: The agricultural IoT market in India is expected to reach
USD 3.7 billion by 2024, growing at a CAGR of 25.2%.
➢ Smart Irrigation Systems: The smart irrigation systems market in India is projected to
reach a value of USD 438 million by 2025.
➢ Farm Management Software: The market for farm management software in India is
anticipated to exceed USD 450 million by 2026.
➢ Government Digital Initiatives: The Indian government has launched the e-National
Agriculture Market (eNAM) platform, covering over 1,000 wholesale markets across
the country.
➢ Blockchain in Agriculture: The blockchain in agriculture market in India is estimated
to grow at a CAGR of 46.8% during 2021-2026.

A study was conducted in the Agri-Food sector, involving 55 experts from various
companies. These experts were contacted to complete a questionnaire, resulting in 23
decision-makers (DMs) providing responses. The collected data served as inputs for
developing a framework to facilitate the adoption of Industry 4.0 in the Agri-Food sector. The
identified barriers hindering adoption are presented in Table 2.1. The credentials of each DM,
demonstrating their expertise, are detailed in Table 2.1.
The responses provided by the DMs were analyzed to understand the barriers and
challenges related to adopting Industry 4.0 in the Agri-Food sector. Table 2.1 outlines the
significant obstacles faced by organizations in embracing advanced technologies and

15
processes. These barriers offer valuable insights into the key areas that need to be addressed
to promote successful integration.

Table 3.1 Industry Experts

Code Name of the company
Decision maker (DM) 1 ITC (Cheerala)
Decision maker (DM) 2 Deeselva Company (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 3 Vivasayi Agro Agency (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 4 Excel Agro Tech (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 5 Cauveri Agro services (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 6 Sri Vari Agencies Argri-tech Solutions (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 7 Saravana Farm Services (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 8 Meejan Agro Services (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 9 Sree Meenashi Agro Service (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 10 Sree Dharshini Agro Services (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 11 Raja Agro Agencies (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 12 VAF Green (Trichy)
Decision maker (DM) 13 IIM (Shillong)
Decision maker (DM) 14 IIM (Shillong)
Decision maker (DM) 15 Uma Venkata Agro Agencies (Vizag)
Decision maker (DM) 16 Farmkrate Pvt Ltd (Vizag)
Decision maker (DM) 17 Lakshmi Kubera Enterprises (Vizag)
Decision maker (DM) 18 Anthelia Living Solutions and Services (Vizag)
Decision maker (DM) 19 Indira Agrotech (Chennai)
Decision maker (DM) 20 Jfarm Services (Chennai)
zDecision maker (DM) 21 Paalar Urban (Chennai)
Decision maker (DM) 22 Agrit Solutions Pvt Ltd (Chennai)
Decision maker (DM) 23 Ayyan Agro Services (Chennai)

Table 2.1 provides the credentials of the DMs, showcasing their backgrounds and
expertise. This information validates the study's findings and recognizes the contribution of
industry professionals. Understanding the credentials of the DMs enhances the study's
credibility and acknowledges the knowledge and experience brought by the participants.
Overall, this study aimed to gather insights from decision-makers in Agri-Food sector
companies to develop a framework for Industry 4.0 adoption. The identified barriers and the

16
expertise of the DMs contribute to advancing the implementation of Industry 4.0, fostering
operational efficiency, growth, and innovation in the Agri-Food sector.

3.2. Hierarchical modeling using ISM

The Interactive Structural Modeling (ISM) approach was first introduced by Warfield
in 1974. It provides a systematic and interactive process for organizing a set of elements that
are directly or indirectly related to each other. The main objective of ISM is to develop a
comprehensive model that captures the relationships among these elements, enabling a better
understanding and resolution of complex problems.
ISM recognizes that many problems are not isolated but rather interconnected, with
various elements influencing each other. By structuring these elements into a model, ISM
helps uncover the underlying relationships and dependencies among them. This allows for a
more holistic and comprehensive analysis of the problem at hand.
The ISM approach has found applications in various fields, such as systems
engineering, organizational management, and policy analysis. By providing a structured
framework to model and analyze complex systems, ISM helps decision-makers gain valuable
insights into the interrelationships among elements, supporting effective problem-solving,
strategic planning, and decision-making processes.
Various steps for the development of ISM model for Industry 4.0 are:
STEP-1: Identification Of Barriers For Implementation Of Industry 4.0 In Afsc
A comprehensive examination of literature and consultations with domain experts
have resulted in the identification of fifteen barriers associated with the implementation of
Industry 4.0 in the Agri-Food Sector Companies (AFSC). These barriers encompass a range
of challenges and considerations that need to be addressed for successful adoption and
integration. They are: “High expenditure in the adoption of Industry 4.0(B1), Lack of
Industry 4.0 global standards(B2), Implementation related limitations(B3), Low commitment
and help from management(B4), Challenging Process and organization adjustments (B5),
Untrained and unskilled personnel(B6), Issues with security and data protection(B7), System
of adequate maintenance assistance(B8), Lack of a methodical execution strategy(B9),
Disruption of current employment(B10), No definite government plans(B11), Issues related
to Law(B12), Lack of a clear understanding of the benefits(B13), Unwillingness to
adapt(B14), Anxiety of failing(B15)”
Table 2.1 provides a detailed exploration and description of these identified barriers,
offering comprehensive insights into their nature and implications.

17
STEP-2: Structural Self-Interaction Matrix
In order to analyze the barriers and establish the Structural Self-Interaction Matrix
(SSIM), a contextual relationship matrix is constructed. This matrix serves as a tool to
explore and understand the relationships between each pair of barriers in the system. Four
notations are utilized within the matrix to represent these relationships:
▪ V (Variable i influences variable j): This notation indicates that Barrier i has a direct
influence on Barrier j. It suggests that the presence or actions of Barrier i impact
Barrier j in a significant way.
▪ A (Variable j influences variable i): This notation signifies that Barrier j has a direct
influence on Barrier i. It implies that the presence or actions of Barrier j have a
notable impact on Barrier i.
▪ X (Variable i and j mutually influence each other): This notation represents a mutual
or bidirectional influence between Barrier i and Barrier j. It suggests that these
barriers have a reciprocal relationship, where they both exert influence on each other.
▪ O (Variable i and j are not related to each other): This notation indicates that Barrier i
and Barrier j are unrelated or do not have a significant influence on each other. It
implies that the presence or actions of one barrier do not directly affect the other.
STEP-3: Reachability Matrix From The SSIM
The initial reachability matrix, which is a binary matrix, is obtained from the
Structural Self-Interaction Matrix (SSIM) by replacing the notations V, A, X, and O with 0s
and 1s based on the following rules:
▪ If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is denoted as V, the corresponding entry in the
reachability matrix becomes 1, indicating that Barrier i can reach Barrier j.
Simultaneously, the entry in the reverse direction, (j, i), becomes 0, indicating that
Barrier j cannot reach Barrier i.
▪ If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is denoted as A, the corresponding entry in the
reachability matrix becomes 0, indicating that Barrier i cannot reach Barrier j.
Conversely, the entry in the reverse direction, (j, i), becomes 1, indicating that Barrier
j can reach Barrier i.
▪ If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is denoted as X, both the (i, j) and (j, i) entries in the
reachability matrix become 1, indicating a mutual influence between Barrier i and
Barrier j.

18
 ▪ If the (i, j) entry in the SSIM is denoted as O, the corresponding entry in the
reachability matrix becomes 0, indicating that Barrier i is not related to Barrier j.
Similarly, the entry in the reverse direction, (j, i), also becomes 0.
Applying these rules to the SSIM matrix, an initial reachability matrix is constructed,
capturing the direct relationships between barriers. From this initial reachability matrix, a
final reachability matrix is derived by considering the transitivity rule. This rule states that
if Barrier A is related to Barrier B and Barrier B is related to Barrier C, then it follows that
Barrier A is also related to Barrier C.
STEP-4: Partitions On The Reachability Matrix
After constructing the final reachability matrix, it undergoes partitioning into different
levels through subsequent iterations. This process involves preparing the reachability set and
antecedent set for each barrier. The reachability set of a barrier consists of the barrier itself
and all other barriers that it influences. On the other hand, the antecedent set of a barrier
comprises the barrier itself and all the barriers that influence it.
By intersecting these sets for all the barriers, the highest level in the ISM hierarchy
can be determined. Barriers that have identical reachability and intersection sets occupy this
highest level. Once identified, the highest-level barrier is excluded from influencing any other
barrier above its own level, and it is not considered in subsequent iterations. This procedure is
repeated to assign other barriers to different levels in the hierarchy. In this particular case,
three iterations were performed for all the barriers.
The levels obtained through this process play a crucial role in constructing the ISM model,
providing insights into the hierarchical relationships and influences among the barriers.
Step-5: Developing ISM Model
The ISM model is constructed using final reachability matrix, which captures the
direct relationships between barriers in the problem domain and the hierarchical level of
barriers which are assigned based on the analysis of their reachability and intersection sets.
This hierarchical framework of the ISM model offers valuable insights into the
interdependencies and impacts among the barriers, facilitating effective decision-making and
comprehensive comprehension of the intricacies within the system dynamics.
Step-6: MICMAC Analysis
This MICMAC analysis, also known as "Matrice d'Impacts Croisés-Multiplication
Appliquée et Classment" (cross-matrix multiplication applied to classification), the primary
objective of this analysis is to classify barriers according to their capacity to drive other

19
barriers and depend on them. It categorizes the barriers into four distinct groups: autonomous,
dependent, linkage, and independent.
▪ Variables classified as "Autonomous" exhibit limited driving power and dependence.
▪ "Dependent" variables have weak driving power but demonstrate a significant level of
dependence.
▪ "Linkage" variables possess both strong driving power and substantial dependence.
▪ "Independent" variables are characterized by their robust driving power and
independence.

3.3. Causal-effect analysis using DEMATEL

The DEMATEL methodology, originally proposed by the Science and Human Affairs
Program at the Battelle Memorial Institute in Geneva, is specifically designed to address
intricate and interconnected problems. This approach offers a systematic framework for
understanding the relationships and interactions between various factors or criteria within a
problem domain. By establishing an interrelationship network map, DEMATEL enables the
visualization and analysis of the connections and influences among these factors. It goes
beyond simple correlation analysis and provides a comprehensive method for constructing a
structural model that captures the causal-effect relationships between the identified factors.
This allows decision-makers and researchers to gain valuable insights into the underlying
dynamics of the problem at hand, supporting more informed decision-making processes and
facilitating effective problem-solving strategies.
DEMATEL methodology finds applications in diverse fields such as business
management, environmental management, healthcare, urban planning, and engineering.
Whether it is assessing the impact of factors in business strategies, evaluating environmental
factors, optimizing healthcare systems, planning urban development, or solving complex
engineering problems, DEMATEL provides a valuable tool for understanding and managing
complex interrelationships.

STEP 1. Obtain The Aggregate Direct-Relation Matrix Of The Expert Group

The experts were requested to assess the direct influence of barrier i on barrier j using
a 0-4 integer scale. The scale was associated with linguistic values, ranging from "no effect"
(0) to "very high effect" (4). To consolidate the responses from the decision-makers (DMs),
three aggregation approaches were employed in DEMATEL: average, pessimistic
(minimum), and optimistic (maximum) aggregation methods. These approaches help in

20
summarizing and combining the DMs' evaluations to obtain a comprehensive understanding
of the barrier relationships.
▪ Causal–effect analysis using DEMATEL (Average): In this approach, the experts'
opinions are combined using the arithmetic mean. The calculation process involves
the following steps: gathering the experts' opinions and creating a pair-wise
contextual relationship matrix between the identified variables on a scale of 0-4. Here,
0 indicates 'no influence' and 4 indicates 'very high influence'. The average matrix A
is then calculated based on the experts' opinions and their ratings for each pair-wise
relationship. This approach allows for the aggregation of expert perspectives to
analyze and understand the influence between variables. An n×n non-negative
𝑘
matrix, 𝑋 𝑘 =[𝑥𝑖𝑗 ] is formed for each expert. If there are k experts participating in the
evaluation process, with1 1⩽k ⩽ K, and n is the number of variables, then the average
matrix A can be constructed as:
𝐾
1 𝑘
𝐴 = [𝑎𝑖𝑗 ] = ∑ 𝑥𝑖𝑗 (3.1)
𝐾
𝑘=1

▪ Causal–effect analysis using DEMATEL (pessimistic). In this approach, experts’

opinions are aggregated using minimum value.
▪ Causal–effect analysis using DEMATEL (optimistic). In this approach, experts’
opinions are aggregated using maximum value.
In our study, the responses from the decision-makers (DMs) were aggregated using
the mean or average, a commonly used statistical measure of central tendency. The diagonal
elements of the matrix were set to zero, indicating that a factor cannot have an influence on
itself. This approach allowed for the consolidation of DMs' responses and the exclusion of
self-influence in the analysis.

Step 2 Obtain The Normalized Direct-Relation Matrix

The normalized direct-relation matrix D can be derived from A by utilizing equations
(3.2) and (3.3)
𝐷 = 𝑠. 𝐴, 0 < 𝑠 < 𝑠𝑢𝑝 (3.2)

1 1
𝑠𝑢𝑝 = (𝑚𝑎𝑥 ∑𝑛 |𝑎 | , 𝑚𝑎𝑥 𝑛 ) (3.3)
1≤𝑖≤𝑛 𝑗=1 𝑖𝑗 1≤𝑗≤𝑛 ∑𝑖=1|𝑎𝑖𝑗 |

21
Step 3. Derive The Total Relation Matrix
The total relation matrix T can be obtained using equation (3.4), where I is the
identity matrix of size n for n factors

𝑇 = ∑∞ 𝑘
𝑘=1 𝐷 = 𝐷(𝐼 − 𝐷)
−1
(3.4)

Step 4. Establish Adjacency Matrix

It is crucial to establish a threshold value to filter out insignificant causal
relationships. If the value of 𝑡𝑖𝑗 ≥ 𝛼, it indicates that element i has a significant causal
relationship with element j. The determination of the threshold value is commonly done
through interviews with respondents or based on the researcher's judgment. In this study, the
threshold value is assumed to be the arithmetic mean of the elements of the defuzzified total
relation matrix. This threshold value is utilized in constructing the adjacency matrix, where a
value of 1 is assigned to links that represent significant relationships.

Step 5. Construct The Causal Digraph

To establish the levels of causality and relationship, the degrees of relation (D - R)
and prominence (D + R) are required. The value of D represents the sum of the column
elements for each row in the defuzzified total relationship matrix, while the value of R
represents the sum of the row elements for each column in the same matrix. Equations 3.5,3.6
and 3.7 provide further description and calculation of the D and R values. A negative relation
degree indicates that a factor is significantly influenced by other factors, representing a "net
effect," while a positive relation degree indicates that a factor significantly influences other
factors, representing a "net cause." The prominence degree determines the importance of a
factor, with a high prominence degree indicating a strong relationship with other factors and a
low prominence degree indicating a weak relationship.
Finally, the prominence degrees, relation degrees, and adjacency matrix can be
utilized to construct a digraph that visually represents the causal relationships among the
factors.
𝑇 = (𝑡𝑖𝑗 )𝑛𝑥𝑛 (3.5)
𝐷 = (∑𝑛𝑗=1 𝑡𝑖𝑗 ) = (𝑡𝑖 )𝑛𝑥1 (3.6)
𝑛𝑥1
𝑇
𝑅 = (∑𝑛𝑖=1 𝑡𝑖𝑗 )1𝑥𝑛 = (𝑡𝑗 )𝑛𝑥1 (3.7)

22
3.4. K-means clustering algorithm
Cluster analysis is a powerful technique used to categorize data into meaningful
groups based on their similarities. It has found applications in diverse domains such as
market segmentation, genetic analysis, healthcare analysis, sports analysis, and anomaly
detection. In market segmentation, cluster analysis helps identify distinct groups of customers
with similar preferences and characteristics, enabling targeted marketing strategies. In genetic
analysis, it aids in detecting genetic patterns and similarities among individuals or organisms.
Healthcare analysis benefits from cluster analysis by identifying patient groups with similar
symptoms or medical conditions for personalized treatment approaches. Sports analysis
utilizes cluster analysis to categorize teams or athletes based on performance metrics for
strategic planning. It also plays a role in anomaly detection, where it identifies abnormal
patterns within datasets.
Cluster analysis also contributes to data reduction by replacing individual data objects
with representative cluster summaries, reducing the complexity of large datasets without
losing essential information. Different clustering algorithms are available:
✓ Partitioning methods
✓ hierarchical methods
✓ Density-based methods
✓ Grid based methods each suitable for specific data characteristics and objectives.

By leveraging cluster analysis, researchers and practitioners can uncover meaningful

patterns, simplify complex datasets, and gain valuable insights for decision-making in various
fields. It offers a powerful tool for understanding data relationships, discovering hidden
patterns, and facilitating targeted actions in domains ranging from marketing to healthcare
and beyond.
To keep things concise, we will concentrate on type (i), specifically K-means
clustering. Out of all clustering algorithms, K-means is extensively employed because of its
straightforward algorithm, reasonable resilience, and ability to yield satisfactory outcomes
across diverse datasets.
K-means clustering is a popular unsupervised machine learning algorithm that is
widely used for clustering analysis. It aims to group similar data points together and separate
dissimilar data points into distinct clusters. The algorithm's simplicity and effectiveness have
contributed to its widespread adoption in various fields.

23
 The primary goal of the K-means clustering algorithm is to partition a set of m objects
in n dimensions into k clusters, for k≤n, with the goal of minimizing the within-cluster sum.
The similarity between two objects is determined by their distance, and one commonly used
distance measure is the Euclidean distance, as shown in equation (3.8).
𝑘

𝑛𝑠𝑎𝐽 = ∑ ∑ ||𝑥𝑖 − 𝑐𝑗 ||2 (3.8)

𝑗=1 𝑖∈𝐶𝑗

Equation (3.8) represents the objective function, where J denotes the objective function, 𝑥𝑖
represents the ith observation, 𝑐𝑗 denotes the jth cluster center, 𝐶𝑗 denotes the set of objects in
the jth cluster, and k represents the number of clusters. In the K-means clustering approach,
the objective function is minimized. Generally, the K-means clustering algorithm can be
described by the following steps:
1. Step 1: Select a value for k, representing the desired number of clusters.
2. Step 2: Assign each object to the cluster with the nearest centroid based on distance.
3. Step 3: Calculate the new centroids for each cluster by computing the mean of the
cluster members.
4. Step 4: Repeat the above 2 and 3 steps until the objective value converges, indicating
a stable clustering solution.

3.5. Proposed Algorithm

The combination of DEMATEL and K-means clustering in the proposed framework
offers a more comprehensive approach to causal modeling in decision-making. DEMATEL is
renowned for its ability to uncover the causal structure of a problem by evaluating the
prominence and relationships among different elements in a system. It provides valuable
insights into the cause-and-effect relationships and the relative importance of various factors.
On the other hand, K-means clustering is known for its capability to simplify complex
datasets by grouping together similar concepts or objects. By identifying clusters of similar
elements, K-means clustering helps to reduce the complexity of large sets of factors and
enables a more organized representation of the data.
By combining these two techniques, the hybrid model benefits from the strengths of
both approaches. DEMATEL's causal modeling helps to uncover the underlying structure and
relationships among factors, providing a deeper understanding of the problem at hand.
Meanwhile, K-means clustering enhances the model by grouping together factors that exhibit
similar characteristics, simplifying the representation of the system.

24
Consequently, the resulting hybrid model achieves the following objectives:
✓ Extract the underlying causal structure of the factors involved in the system.
✓ Group together factors that share similar structural characteristics.
This hybrid approach addresses the need for reducing complexity and identifying
meaningful patterns in management applications where a large number of factors are
typically present. All the steps are summarized in the flowchart.

Establish the final list of

Agri 4.0 barriers

Determine the causal

relationshiop of each barrier
using DEMATEL

Find the prominence and relation

degrees of each barrier

Perform a K-means clustering on the prominence

and relation degrees of the barriers

Construct the clustered digraph

using the obtained clusters

Figure 3.1 Flowchart of the proposed algorithm

The steps involved in the proposed algorithm are as follows:

Step-1: Perform The Original Dematel Approach
This step encompasses the entire DEMATEL process, with the optional construction
of a digraph. The DEMATEL analysis summarizes the interaction among the factors in the
system using the prominence (D + R) and relation (D - R) degrees. These values provide
insights into the structural characteristics of each element.
For example, an element with a high prominence value indicates a higher priority
compared to elements with lower values. Additionally, a positive relation degree suggests a

25
net causal effect, while a negative relation degree implies a net effect. In the original
DEMATEL approach, these characteristics, along with the adjacency matrix, form the basis
for constructing a causal digraph that represents the system.
However, as the number of factors increases, the complexity of the digraph grows,
making it challenging to interpret, particularly in practical scenarios. This complexity
undermines the usefulness of the digraph. To address this issue, we propose a hybridization
with the K-means clustering approach in the next step. This hybridization aims to manage the
complexity by leveraging the clustering capabilities of K-means, enabling a more manageable
and interpretable representation of the factors.

Step-2: Perform The K-Means Clustering Approach

The prominence and relation degrees, which encapsulate the structural characteristics
of the system's elements, serve as criteria for generating meaningful clusters. These degrees
can be employed in the K-means clustering approach to perform the clustering process. The
resulting clusters can be viewed as latent or hidden variables, similar to those in factor
analysis. Although they are not directly measured, these clusters are revealed through the
causal structure of the elements.
By using the generated clusters, it becomes possible to represent the causal digraph of
the system. This representation offers a more manageable and meaningful analysis by
reducing the number of factors involved. Consequently, the hybridization of DEMATEL with
K-means clustering enhances the practical utility of the analysis and facilitates a deeper
understanding of the system's causal relationships.

Step-3: Constructing The Weighted Adjacency Matrix Of The Clusters

In the original DEMATEL approach, the adjacency matrix 𝐴 = [𝑎𝑖𝑗 ]𝑚𝑥𝑚 for i,j∈
{1,2, 𝑚}is used to represent the relationships between m factors. The matrix A has elements
𝑎𝑖𝑗 , where 𝑎𝑖𝑗 , equals 0 if factors 𝑏𝑖 and 𝑏𝑗 have no significant relationship, and 1 if they do.
However, in the proposed algorithm, a binary adjacency matrix alone is insufficient to
capture the interrelationships among the original set of factors.
The objective of the proposed algorithm is to reduce complexity while preserving as
much information as possible. To achieve this, a weighted adjacency matrix Z is introduced.
Z is used to avoid information loss from matrix A. Each element of Z represents the sum of

26
interactions between elements of clusters 𝐶𝑢 and 𝐶𝑣 . Therefore, the matrix Z is denoted
as 𝑍 = [𝑧𝑢𝑣 ]𝑘𝑥𝑘 , where u,v∈ {1,2, [… ], 𝑘} and k is the total number of clusters.
By utilizing the weighted adjacency matrix Z, the proposed algorithm takes into
account the interrelationships between clusters, enabling a more comprehensive
representation of the original set of factors. This weighted approach contributes to reducing
complexity while maintaining the integrity of the information captured by the adjacency
matrix.
𝑧𝑢𝑣 = ∑𝑏𝑖 ∈𝐶𝑢 ∑𝑏𝑗∈𝐶𝑣 𝑎𝑖𝑗 (3.9)

Step-4: Computing The Cluster Prominence And Relation Degrees.

K-means clustering algorithm calculates the centroid of elements within a cluster,
which serves as a representation of the cluster's prominence and relation degrees. Similar to
the k-means algorithm, the centroid can be determined by computing the mean (arithmetic) of
the cluster members based on their prominence and relation degrees.

Step-5: Constructing The Clustered Causal Digraph

After Step 3, the clustered causal digraph is constructed using the information derived
from the matrix Z, along with the cluster prominence and relation degrees obtained in Step 4.
To construct the digraph, weighted edges are utilized. Specifically, a weighted edge with a
value of 𝑧𝑢𝑣 exists from cluster 𝐶𝑢 to 𝐶𝑣 . if and only if the value of 𝑧𝑢𝑣 is greater than 0.
Furthermore, the centroid of the elements within each cluster, represented by 𝐶𝑢 , determines
the position of the cluster 𝐶𝑢 in the digraph.
The algorithm presented is an exploratory method that relies on domain knowledge to
interpret the resulting clustered relationships. By utilizing the prominence and relation
degrees of DEMATEL, the generated clusters can be understood as groups of barriers that
share similar structural characteristics. Consequently, it is natural to analyze the clusters
based on the collective behavior exhibited by the barriers they encompass. As a result, the
clusters generated can be seen as factors that encapsulate the included barriers. This
algorithm is particularly advantageous when expert-defined causal relationships are involved,
as traditional factor analysis may not be suitable. Therefore, the proposed algorithm offers a
valuable tool for identifying noteworthy patterns within expert-defined causal relationships.

27
 CHAPTER 4
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
4.1. Hierarchical modeling using ISM
STEP-1:
Through a thorough examination of existing literature, a total of 15 obstacles
hindering the implementation of Industry 4.0 in the Agri-Food Supply Chain (AFSC) have
been identified. These barriers have been extensively analyzed and elaborated upon in Table
2.1, providing a comprehensive understanding of their characteristics and the potential
consequences they may have on the industry. The table serves as a valuable resource,
shedding light on the intricate nature of these barriers and their impact on the adoption of
Industry 4.0 in the AFSC.

STEP-2:
The Structural Self-Interaction Matrix(SSIM) is created by using the notations V, A,
O, and X based on the responses gathered from industry experts through a questionnaire. The
resulting SSIM is presented in Table 4.1, which illustrates the relationships and connections
between different elements in a clear and organized manner.

Table 4.1 SSIM

STEP-3:
The initial reachability matrix (Table 4.2) is constructed by transforming the SSIM
matrix using the rules where V, A, X, and O are replaced with binary values of 0 and 1. By
applying these rules to the SSIM matrix, the initial reachability matrix is generated, providing
a binary representation of the relationships between elements.

28
 Table 4.2 Reachability Matrix

By considering the transitivity rule, a final reachability matrix(Table 4.3) is derived

from the above matrix. This final reachability matrix considers the indirect relationships
between elements, allowing for a more comprehensive representation of the overall
connectivity and influence among the elements.

Table 4.3 Final Reachability Matrix

STEP-4:
The next step involves Level Partitioning using the Reachability set, Antecedent set,
and Intersection set. In Table 4.4, barriers such as High expenditure in the adoption of
Industry 4.0 (B1), Lack of Industry 4.0 global standards (B2), Lack of a methodical execution
strategy (B9), Unwillingness to adapt (B14), and Anxiety of failing (B15) exhibit identical
reachability and intersection sets. As a result, they occupy the highest level in the hierarchy.
The subsequent iterations are documented in the following tables, namely Tables 4.5 and 4.6.

29
Table 4.4 Iteration-I

Table 4.5 Iteration-II

30
 Table 4.6 Iteration-III

Thus, the final level partitioning is shown in table 4.7

Table 4.7 Final Level Partitioning

31
STEP-5:
The ISM model illustrates that Low commitment and help from management(B4),
System of adequate maintenance assistance(B8), Disruption of current
employment(B10), No definite government plans(B11), Issues related to Law(B12) are
the most driving barriers (Refer to Figure)

Figure 4.1 ISM DIGRAPH

STEP-6:
The categorization reveals the presence of distinct clusters of barriers within the
system. The first cluster comprises autonomous barriers, which are relatively detached from
the system. In this cluster, there are a total of 4 barriers. Barrier B14 exhibits a driving power
of 1 and a dependence of 1. Barriers B2 and B15 have a driving power of 1 and a dependence
of 6, while barrier B1 has a driving power of 1 and a dependence of 7. Barrier B13 possesses
a driving power of 2 and a dependence of 6.
Moving on to the second cluster, we have the dependent barriers. The provided data
indicates that barriers B3, B5, B6, and B7 have a driving power of 5 and a dependence of 10,
while barrier B9 has a driving power of 1 and a dependence of 10. Consequently, they are
positioned in a manner that aligns with their respective driving power and dependence.

32
The third cluster pertains to linkage barriers, which implies that any impact on these barriers
is likely to affect other barriers as well. However, there are no linkage barriers identified in
this case.
Lastly, the fourth cluster encompasses independent barriers, consisting of barriers B4,
B8, B10, B11, and B12. These barriers exhibit a driving power of 6 and a dependence of 4.
Accordingly, they are positioned in accordance with their driving power and dependence, as
depicted in the accompanying figure.

Figure 4.2 MICMAC ANALYSIS

4.2 Causal-Effect Analysis using DEMATEL

STEP 1:
In DEMATEL analysis, the direct-relation matrix is the starting point for constructing
the aggregate direct-relation matrix. The direct-relation matrix is a square matrix that
represents the direct influence of each criterion or factor on the others. The expert group

33
evaluates the relationship between each criterion or factor on a scale of 0 to 4, where 0
indicates no influence and 4 indicates a very strong influence.
The responses obtained from 23 experts were used to make the average direct relation
matrix(A) as shown in table 4.8

Table 4.8 Average Direct Relation Matrix

STEP 2:
The Normalized direct relation matrix(D) can be calculated using the equations 3.2
and 3.3
Here the norm of the matrix obtained is 34.09
Thus we obtain the normalized matrix as shown in table 4.9

34
 Table 4.9 Normalized Direct Relation Matrix

STEP 3:
Derive the total relation matrix(T) as shown in the table 4.10 using the equation 3.4
Table 4.10 Total Relation Matrix

35
STEP 4:
Calculate the threshold value α from Total relation matrix T by calculating the
average of all the values
The values 𝑇𝑖𝑗 > α have a effect on other barriers so they are converted to 1 and the remaining
values are converted to 0.
Thus the adjacency matrix is obtained as shown in the table 4.11 below

Table 4.11 Adjacency Matrix

STEP 5:
The values of D (Dispatcher ) for each barrier is calculated by summing up the row
elements of each barrier. It signifies the amount of effect the particular barrier has caused to
the other barriers
The values of R ( Receiving ) for each barrier is calculated by summing up the
column elements of each barrier. It signifies the amount of effect it has received from other
barriers
The prominence value D+R for each barrier signifies the importance of the particular
barrier while the relation degree D-R for each barrier signifies the kind of relationship it has
with other barriers

36
 If, D-R>0, it’s a cause group barrier
D-R<0, it’s a effect group barrier
(Refer table 4.12)
A causal diagram is plotted between D-R and D+R as shown in the figure 4.3 below

Table 4.12 DEMATEL Results

Figure 4.3 Causal Diagram

37
4.3. Hybrid DEMATEL-K-Means clustering framework

There is a natural synergy between the DEMATEL and K-means clustering algorithm
when it comes to analyzing obtained data. While the DEMATEL is ideal for analyzing
intertwined data, its usefulness decreases as the number of involved factors increases. On the
other hand, the K-means clustering algorithm is not originally designed to analyze
intertwined data, but when combined with the prominence and relation degrees provided by
the DEMATEL, it becomes capable of exploring the structural characteristics of the system.
This combination of methods results in a powerful methodology that can be useful in various
management decision-making problems. Figure 4.4 displays the clustered barriers.

Figure 4.4 Optimal Clustering generated by the algorithm

With the generated clusters representing their member barriers, like their members,
they also possess relation and prominence degrees as presented in Table 4

38
 Table 4.13 Clustered DEMATEL Results

Cluster D+R D-R

C1 4.422873 0.315886

C2 6.043876 0.435935

C3 5.253177 -0.14262

C4 4.214398 -0.91785

To confirm that the clusters accurately represent their members, it is necessary for the
clusters to interact with other clusters in which their members also interact. This will allow us
to preserve the interactions between the barriers. To achieve this, we introduce the clustered
weighted adjacency matrix (presented in Table 9), which encodes such interactions. The
values in the matrix are normalized to ensure that the only possible weights lie within the
range of [0, 1]. Each element in the clustered weighted adjacency matrix is calculated by
dividing the total interactions between two clusters by the total possible interactions of the
two clusters as a complete bipartite graph. In other words, the weights indicate the degree to
which members of two clusters form a complete bipartite graph.

Table 4.14 Clustered weighted Adjacency Matrix

C1 C2 C3 C4
C1 0 0.75 0.44 0.166
C2 0.5833 0.9375 1 0.875
C3 0.0555 0.666 0.44 0.5833
C4 0 0 0 0

Using the clustered structural characteristics and the clustered weighted adjacency matrix, we
can construct a clustered causal digraph, as shown in Figure 4.5. This methodology provides
a valuable addition to the existing causal models in current literature that rely on expert
knowledge.

39
 0.6

C2, 0.435935327
0.4
C1, 0.315886389

0.2
D-R

0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
C3, -0.142615091
-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

C4, -0.917854965
-1

D+R
Figure 4.5 Clustered Causal Digraph

40
 CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION & FUTURE SCOPE

5.1. CONCLUSION

In this study, we aimed to delve into the adoption status of Industry 4.0 in the
Agriculture and Food Supply Chain (AFSC). Our focus was to analyze the barriers hindering
the adoption of Agri 4.0, using a combination of the Integrated Structural Modeling (ISM)
approach and a novel hybrid algorithm that integrates DEMATEL and K-means clustering
techniques. Our findings showcased the effectiveness of the proposed hybrid algorithm in
dealing with the complex and intertwined nature of Agri 4.0 barriers. It successfully extracted
distinct clusters that corresponded to specific barriers, offering valuable insights into the
adoption challenges faced by the AFSC. This study holds significant contributions for the
existing literature. Firstly, we introduced a novel algorithm that can tackle the intricate factors
commonly encountered in complex management decision-making problems. This approach has
broader implications beyond Agri 4.0 adoption.
Furthermore, our study provides a conceptual framework that aids scholars in
developing theoretical perspectives to better comprehend the dynamics of Agri 4.0 adoption
and the associated innovations in the AFSC. Lastly, we addressed the emerging research area
of hybrid approaches for decision-making, highlighting the potential benefits and practical
implications of integrating diverse methodologies. The results and findings of our study hold
practical value for management modelers and decision-makers alike. The proposed algorithm
offers a useful tool for analyzing the interrelationships among factors within a system.
Stakeholders interested in Agri 4.0 adoption can leverage our study to gain valuable insights
and inform their decision-making processes.

5.2. FUTURE SCOPE

The model employed in this study yielded valuable insights into the dynamics of Agri
4.0 adoption across organizations. However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of
the algorithm. Its exploratory nature necessitates modelers to interpret the generated clusters
of intertwined factors. This limitation is not exclusive to the proposed methodology, but rather
a common challenge encountered in exploratory factor analysis and unsupervised machine

41
learning algorithms. Consequently, addressing this inherent limitation remains an active
research area in the realms of machine learning and statistics.
In future research, confirmatory analyses could be conducted to delve deeper into the
causal structure of Agri 4.0 barriers. Additionally, there is potential for further enhancement
and extension of the proposed methodology as a potential avenue for future investigation.

42
 REFERENCES

[1] Sunil Luthra and Sachin Kumar Mangla. "Evaluating challenges to Industry 4.0
initiatives for supply chain sustainability in emerging economies", 2018.

[2] Jaiprakash Bhamu and Kuldip Singh Sangwan. "Analysis of Barriers to Industry 4.0
adoption in Manufacturing Organizations: an ISM Approach", 2021.

[3] Md. Abdul Moktadir, Syed Mithun Ali and Simonov Kusi-Sarpong. "Assessing
challenges for implementing Industry 4.0: Implications for process safety and environmental
protection", 2018.

[4] Ankit Sharma. "Barriers to the adoption of industry 4.0 technologies in the
manufacturing sector: An inter-country comparative perspective", 2019.

[5] Deeraj Nimawat, "Challenges facing by manufacturing industries towards

implementation of industry 4.0: an empirical research", 2022.

[6] Pankaj Goel and Raman Kumar. "Deployment of Interpretive Structural Modeling in
Barriers to Industry 4.0: A Case of Small and Medium Enterprises", 2022.

[7] Dheeraj Nimawat and B.D. Gidwani. "Identification of cause and effect relationships
among barriers of Industry 4.0 using decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory method",
2020.

[8] Ahmad Reshad Bakhtari. "Industry 4.0 Implementation Challenges in Manufacturing

Industries: an Interpretive Structural Modelling Approach", 2020.

[9] Abhijit Majumdar. " Managing the barriers of Industry 4.0 adoption and
implementation in textileand clothing industry: Interpretive structural model and triple helix
framework", 20 20.

43
[10] Dheeraj Nimawat and B.D. Gidwani. " Prioritization of barriers for Industry 4.0
adoption in the context of Indian manufacturing industries using AHP and ANP analysis",
2021.

[11] Vinay Surendra Yadav, A.R. Singh, Rakesh D. Raut, Sachin Kumar Mangl, Sunil
Luthr, Anil Kumar. "Exploring the application of Industry 4.0 technologies in the agricultural
food supply chain: A systematic literature review "

[12] Vinay Surendra Yadav and A. R. Singh. "A Systematic Literature Review of
Blockchain Technology in Agriculture"

[13] Maulshree Singh, Rupal Srivastava, Evert Fuenmayor, Vladimir Kuts, Yuansong Qiao
, Niall Murray and Declan Devine. "Applications of Digital Twin across Industries: A
Review"

[14] Charvi Arora, Aditya Kamat, Saket Shanker and Akhilesh Barve. "Integrating
agriculture and industry 4.0 under “agri-food 4.0” to analyze suitable technologies to
overcome agronomical barriers"

[15] Rodrigo García, Jose Aguilar, Mauricio Toro, Angel Pinto, Paul Rodríguez . "A
systematic literature review on the use of machine learning in precision livestock farming"

[16] Ilaria Zambon, Massimo Cecchini, Gianluca Egidi, Maria Grazia Saporito and
Andrea Colantoni. "Revolution 4.0: Industry vs. Agriculture in a Future Development for
SMEs"

[17] Guoqing Zhaoa, Shaofeng Liua , Carmen Lopezb , Haiyan Lua , Sebastian Elguetac,
Huilan Chena , Biljana Mileva Boshkoska. "technology in agri-food value chain
management: A synthesis of applications, challenges and future research directions"

[18] Shashank Kumar, Rakesh D. Raut, Kirti Nayal, Sascha Kraus, Vinay Surendra Yadav,
Balkrishna E. Narkhede. "To identify industry 4.0 and circular economy adoption barriers in
the agriculture supply chain by using ISM-ANP"

44
 APPENDIX

The questionnaire sent to the experts is as follows:

Objective: The purpose of this study is to understand the significance of barriers and their
interrelationship for the implementation of Industry 4.0 in the context of Indian Agro-Food
Supply Chain (AFSC). The descriptions of barriers are provided on page 2 and 3 of this
sheet. Furthermore, we need the response about the both strength and influencing intensity
of barrier on a scale mentioned below.
No (N) – 0; Very low (VL) – 1; Low (L) – 2; High (H) – 3;
Very high (VH) – 4.

Instruction for filling the response:

1. Strength value is to be filled in diagonal of the matrix (highlighted in the table).
2. Put influence intensity of barrier i on barrier j in row i and column j of matrix
(here, table given below). For example, if barrier B1 has high influence on barrier
B2, then the corresponding entry will be 3 (example provided in the table).
3. The influence intensity of barrier i on barrier j is not necessarily equal to the
influence intensity of barrier j on barrier i. Barrier i may affect barrier j, but
barrier j may not affect barrier i.
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15

45
Responses:
1) ITC (Chirala)
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

2) Deeselva Company (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 1 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 2 3 3 3 3 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 4 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 3 3 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 0
B8 1 4 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 0 3 0 1 0 1 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 3
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 2 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0

3) Vivasayi Agro Agency (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 1 2 2 3 0 3 4 2 0 0 3 1 0
B2 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 3 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0

46
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 4 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 3 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 3 3 3 0 2 2
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

4) Excel Agro Tech (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 3 3 0 3 3 2 1 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 1 0 3 3 0 1 0 2
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 2 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 4 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 1 1 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 3 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 4 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 1 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

5) Cauveri Agro services (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 1 2 3 0 0 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 0 1
B2 2 0 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 3
B3 2 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 3
B4 2 3 3 0 1 2 1 2 1 3 4 4 3 3 4
B5 2 2 4 1 0 3 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 1
B6 0 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 1
B7 1 2 1 0 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1
B8 0 2 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 3 1 2
B9 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1
B10 2 2 2 1 4 3 3 1 2 0 2 3 2 3 1
B11 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 0 1 0 2 2 2 4
B12 1 2 3 2 2 1 2 4 3 3 3 0 1 2 2
B13 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 0 3 1
B14 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 4 0 2
B15 4 3 2 3 4 3 3 4 1 1 3 3 1 1 0

47
 6) Sri Vari Agencies Argri-tech Solutions (Trichy)
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 1 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 3 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 3 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 1 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 4 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

7) Saravana Farm Services (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 1 1
B3 1 0 0 2 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 2 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 3 3 4
B9 2 1 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 4 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 1 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 4 2 0 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 3 2 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

8) Meejan Agro Services (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 1 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 1 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 1 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 3 3 3 0 3 1 3 1 2 1 2 2 2
B7 4 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 1 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1

48
B10 1 3 0 1 1 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 2
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 4 3 0 3 4 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

9) Sree Meenashi Agro Service (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 1 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 0 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 3 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 2 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 4 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 2 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 1 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 4 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

10) Sree Dharshini Agro Services (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 2 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1
B2 1 0 3 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 1 3
B3 2 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 4
B4 2 3 3 0 2 2 1 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4
B5 2 2 3 1 0 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 1
B6 0 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 1
B7 1 2 1 1 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1
B8 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 2 1 2
B9 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1
B10 2 2 2 1 4 3 3 1 2 0 3 3 2 2 1
B11 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 4 0 1 0 2 2 2 4
B12 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 0 2 2 2
B13 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 1 0 2 1
B14 0 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 4 0 1
B15 4 3 2 3 3 4 3 4 1 2 3 3 1 1 0

49
 11) Raja Agro Agencies (Trichy)
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 1
B2 0 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 2 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 1 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 1 3 2 0 3 3 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 2 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 1 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 2 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 4 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0

12) VAF Green (Trichy)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 3 3 0 2 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 2 0 0 1 2
B4 1 1 1 0 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 3 4 4 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 2 0 3 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 3 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 2 1 2 3 3 0 3 3
B14 1 2 0 3 1 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 0

13) IIM Shillong

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15

B1 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1

B2 1 0 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 3

B3 2 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 3

B4 2 3 3 0 1 2 1 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4

B5 2 2 3 1 0 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 1

50
B6 0 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 1

B7 1 2 1 1 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1

B8 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 3 1 2

B9 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1

B10 2 2 2 1 4 3 3 1 3 0 3 3 2 2 1

B11 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 4 0 1 0 2 2 2 4

B12 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 0 2 2 2

B13 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 0 3 1

B14 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 4 0 1

B15 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 1 2 3 3 1 1 0

14) IIM Shillong

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15

B1 0 1 2 3 0 1 1 1 2 2 0 2 2 1 1
B2 1 0 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 1 3
B3 2 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 3
B4 2 3 3 0 1 2 1 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4
B5 2 2 3 1 0 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 1
B6 1 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 2
B7 1 2 1 1 3 2 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1
B8 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 3 1 2
B9 1 3 2 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1
B10 2 2 2 1 4 3 3 1 3 0 3 3 2 2 1
B11 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 4 0 1 0 2 2 2 4
B12 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 0 2 2 2
B13 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 3 0 3 1
B14 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 4 0 1
B15 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 1 2 0

15) Uma Venkata Agro Agencies (Vizag)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 2 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 1 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 4 1 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 4

51
B9 3 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 1 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 3 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 1 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

16) Farmkrate Pvt Ltd (Vizag)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 4 3 1 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 1 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 1 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 2 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 4 0 4 1 3 1 1 1 1 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 2 0
B8 2 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 2
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 4 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 2 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

17) Lakshmi Kubera Enterprises (Vizag)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 4 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 3 0 3 2 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 2 0
B8 1 3 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 1 0 3 3 3 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 2 0 3 2 4 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 1
B15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0

52
 18) Anthelia Living Solutions and Services (Vizag)
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 4 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 4 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 0 1 1 2 2 2
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 2 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 2 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 1
B13 3 2 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 2 0

19) Indira Agrotech (Chennai)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 1 1 3 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 1
B2 1 0 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 3
B3 3 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 3
B4 2 3 3 0 1 2 1 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 3
B5 2 2 3 2 0 4 4 3 2 3 4 2 3 2 1
B6 0 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 1
B7 1 2 1 1 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1
B8 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 3 1 2
B9 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1
B10 2 2 2 1 3 3 3 1 3 0 3 3 2 2 1
B11 2 2 1 3 3 3 4 4 0 1 0 2 2 1 4
B12 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 0 2 2 2
B13 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 0 3 1
B14 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 4 0 1
B15 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 1 0

20) Jfarm Services (Chennai)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 3 3 2 0 0 3 2 0
B2 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 3 3 0 1 0 1
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 2

53
B7 3 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 1 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 0 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 2 4 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 3 2 3 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 1 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 3 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 0

21) Paalar Urban (Chennai)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1
B2 1 0 3 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 1 3
B3 2 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 3
B4 2 3 3 0 1 2 1 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4
B5 2 2 3 1 0 3 4 3 2 3 3 2 3 2 1
B6 0 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 1
B7 1 2 1 1 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1
B8 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 3 1 2
B9 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1
B10 2 2 2 1 4 3 3 1 3 0 3 3 2 2 1
B11 2 2 1 3 3 3 3 4 0 1 0 2 2 2 4
B12 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 4 3 3 3 0 2 2 2
B13 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 0 3 1
B14 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 3 2 2 4 0 1
B15 4 3 2 3 3 3 3 4 1 2 3 3 1 1 0

22) Agrit Solutions Pvt Ltd (Chennai)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15
B1 0 0 0 2 2 4 1 3 3 2 0 0 2 2 0
B2 0 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 1 3 3 0 1 0 2
B3 1 0 0 3 3 3 3 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2
B4 2 1 0 0 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 1 3 3 3
B5 2 0 3 2 0 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1
B6 2 0 4 3 3 0 4 1 3 1 2 1 2 2 2
B7 4 0 2 0 4 3 0 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0
B8 1 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 3 3 3
B9 2 1 0 1 2 2 2 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 1
B10 1 3 0 1 0 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 2 3 3
B11 1 4 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 3 2 1 3
B12 0 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 0 3 3 0 3 3 2
B13 3 3 0 3 2 3 2 3 1 2 3 3 0 2 3
B14 1 2 0 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 3 3 2 0 2
B15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 0

54
 23) Ayyan Agro Services (Chennai)

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15

B1 0 2 1 3 0 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 2 1 0
B2 1 0 3 1 0 3 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 1 3
B3 2 4 0 3 4 4 2 1 1 4 2 3 2 2 3
B4 2 3 3 0 1 2 1 2 3 3 4 3 3 3 4
B5 2 2 3 1 0 3 4 4 2 3 3 2 3 2 1
B6 1 2 3 2 4 0 3 1 3 4 1 2 3 3 2
B7 1 2 1 1 2 2 0 0 3 3 2 2 2 2 1
B8 0 1 3 2 1 1 3 0 0 1 4 3 3 1 2
B9 1 3 2 1 1 3 3 1 0 4 1 0 3 3 1
B10 3 2 2 1 4 3 3 1 3 0 3 3 2 2 1
B11 2 2 1 3 2 3 3 4 0 1 0 2 2 2 4
B12 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 4 3 2 3 0 2 2 2
B13 3 2 3 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 3 0 3 1
B14 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 2 4 0 1
B15 3 4 2 4 3 3 3 3 1 2 3 3 1 2 0

55