Submitted:
04 July 2024
Posted:
05 July 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Background and Materials
2.1. Reliability of a Supply Chain
2.2. Fuzzy Inference System
2.3. Relevant Works and Gap Analysis in the Literature
- A glaring gap emerges from the failure to comprehensively address the reliability of the dairy supply chain. While Zarei-Kordshouli et al. (2023) touch upon sustainability and resilience, their focus primarily veers towards these aspects, relegating reliability to a mere indicator for sustainability calculations. The present study recognizes reliability as a pivotal factor, filling the void by clearly defining and meticulously evaluating the reliability of this chain, thereby bridging a significant gap in the literature.
- Despite the well-established utility of fuzzy inference systems in diverse fields such as sustainability and green supply chains, their potential remains untapped in assessing the reliability of supply chains, particularly within the dairy sector. The present study breaks new ground by harnessing the power of fuzzy inference systems to precisely gauge the reliability of the dairy supply chain, paving the way for innovative and accurate assessments previously unexplored in the literature.
- Another notable gap lies in the insufficient attention paid to risk factors and failures across all levels of the dairy supply chain, leaving it vulnerable to potential collapse. Existing studies predominantly focus on distributors, neglecting the possibility of failures at other critical stages. The present study fills this void by comprehensively analyzing risk factors and failures across all levels of the dairy supply chain, shedding light on overlooked vulnerabilities and offering proactive strategies to mitigate risks and enhance resilience.
3. Methodology
3.1. Identification of Effective Factors
- Initially, the study sets out to define the reliability of the dairy supply chain, establishing a foundational understanding of this critical aspect (Definition of Reliability).
- Following the definition, an exhaustive review of existing literature is conducted to identify factors pivotal for enhancing the performance and reliability of the dairy supply chain (Literature Review).
- Through the comprehensive literature review, key factors influencing the reliability of the dairy supply chain are meticulously identified, forming the basis for further analysis (Factor Identification).
- With the factors identified, a bespoke questionnaire is meticulously crafted, tailored to solicit invaluable insights from seasoned experts in the field (Questionnaire Design and Distribution) The questionnaire is available in Appendix A.
- Finally, the statistical significance of the identified factors is rigorously evaluated using the t-student test, leveraging state-of-the-art Minitab software for expert execution and analysis (Statistical Analysis). In fact, in order to rate the importance of each factor, a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 is used. Each expert assessed the significance of each factor and their average opinions are calculated. The factors as 'effective' are identified based on whether their average rating was greater than or equal to 3, which is the midpoint of the scale. Equation (2) formulates this step.
3.2. Fuzzy Inference System
- Fuzzification
- Fuzzy Inference Engine
- Deffuzification
3.3. Calculate Reliability of Supply Chain
3.4. Validation of Results
4. Case Study
4.1. Identification of Effective Factors
Statistical Analysis
4.2. Design of Fuzzy Inference System for Each Level of Supply Chain
4.2.1. Determining Membership Function
4.2.2. Defining Fuzzy Rules
4.2.3. Inference Engine and Defuzzification
4.3. Calculate Reliability of Supply Chain
4.4. Validation of Results
5. Conclusions and Discussion
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. The Research Questionnaire

References
- Adenso Diaz, B. M. C. G.-C. S. &. L. M., 2012. The impact of supply network characteristics on reliability. Supply Chain Management, 17, 263–276.
- Adenso Diaz, B., Mena, C., Garcia-Carbajal, S. & Liechty, M., 2012. The impact of supply network characteristics on reliability. Supply Chain Management, 17, 263–276. [CrossRef]
- Aqlan, F. & Lam, S. S., 2015. A fuzzy-based integrated framework for supply chain risk assessment. International Journal of Production Economics 161, 54–63. [CrossRef]
- Arab, S., Rezaee, K. and Moghaddam, G., 2021. A novel fuzzy expert system design to assist with peptic ulcer disease diagnosis. Cogent Engineering, 8, p.1861730. [CrossRef]
- Asses Awan, M. & Ali, Y., 2019. Sustainable modeling in reverse logistics strategies using fuzzy MCDM: Case of China Pakistan Economic Corridor. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 30, 1132–1151. [CrossRef]
- Azadeh, A., Sheikhalishahi, M. & Aghsami, A., 2015. An integrated FTA-DFMEA approach for reliability analysis and product configuration considering warranty cost. Production Engineering, 9, 635–646. [CrossRef]
- Bourlakis, M., Maglaras, G., Gallear, D. & Fotopoulos, C., 2013. Examining sustainability performance in the supply chain: The case of the Greek dairy sector. Industrial Marketing Management, 43, 56–66.
- Buede, D. M. & Miller, W. D., 2016. The engineering design of systems: models and methods. s.l.:John Wiley & Sons.
- Büyüközkan, G. & Güler, M., 2021. A combined hesitant fuzzy MCDM approach for supply chain analytics tool evaluation. Applied Soft Computing, 112, 107812.
- Büyüközkan, G. & Güleryüz, S., 2016. An integrated DEMATEL-ANP approach for renewable energy resources selection in Turkey. International Journal of production economics, 182, 435–448.
- Cannas, V. G., Ciccullo, F., Pero, M. & Cigilini, R., 2020. Sustainable innovation in the dairy supply chain:enabling factors for intermodal transportation. International Journal of Production Research, 58.
- Chari, F. & Ngcamu, B. S., 2017. An assessment of the impact of disaster risks on dairy supply chain performance in Zimbabwe. Cogent Engineering, 4, 1409389.
- Chari, F. and Ngcamu, B.S., 2017. An assessment of the impact of disaster risks on dairy supply chain performance in Zimbabwe. Cogent Engineering, 4, p.1409389.
- Chen, C. A., Lee, M. H. & Yang, Y. H., 2012. Branding Taiwan for tourism using ‘Decision Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory’ and ‘Analytic Network Process’ methods. The Service Industries Journal, 32, 1355–1373.
- Diabat, A., Jabbarzadeh, A. & Khosrojerdi, A., 2019. A perishable product supply chain network problem with reliability and disruption considerations. International Journal of Production Economics, 212, 125–138.
- FAO, 2018. Infographics; Milk Facts. FAO,., Rome, Italy: Retrieved September 10, 2019.
- Fasanghari, M. & Montazer, G. A., 2010. Design and implementation of fuzzy expert system for Tehran Stock Exchange portfolio recommendation. Expert Systems with Applications, 37, 6138–3147.
- Ghorbani, M., Mohammad Arabzadeh, S. & Shahin, A., 2013. A novel approach for supplier selection based on the kano model and fuzzy MCDM. International Journal of Production Research, 51, 5469–5484.
- Gorton, M., Dumitrashko, M. & White, J., 2006. Overcoming supply chain failure in the agri-food sector: A case study from Moldova. Food Policy, 31, 90–103.
- Gupta, S., 2015. Use of triangular membership function for prediction of compressive strength of concrete containing nanosilica. Cogent Engineering, 2, 1025578.
- Gupta, S., 2015. Use of triangular membership function for prediction of compressive strength of concrete containing nanosilica. Cogent Engineering, 2, p.1025578.
- Ha, C., Jun, H. B. & Ok, C., 2018. A mathematical definition and basic structures for supply chain reliability: A procurement capability perspective. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 120, 334–345.
- Hassan, A. et al., 2021. Safety Failure Factors Affecting Dairy Supply Chain: Insights from a Developing Economy. Sustainability, 13, 9500.
- He, M. et al., 2016. Capability Coordination in Automobile Logistics Service Supply Based on Reliability. s.l., Procedia Engineering, 325–333.
- Jain, N. & Singh, A. R., 2020. Sustainable supplier selection under must-be criteria through Fuzzy inference system. Journal of Cleaner Production, 248, 119275.
- Jouzdani, J. & Govindeh, K., 2021. On the sustainable perishable food supply chain network design: A dairy products case to achieve sustainable development goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 278, 123060.
- Kabir, S. & Papadopoulos, Y., 2018. A review of applications of fuzzy sets to safety and reliability engineering. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 100, 29–55.
- Kannan, G., NoorulHaq, A. & Devika, M., 2009. Analysis of closed loop supply chain using genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization. International Journal of production, 47, 1175–1200.
- Katsikeas, C. S., PaparoidamisN, N. G. & Katsikea, E., 2004. Supply source selection criteria: The impact of supplier performance on distributor performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 757–764.
- Khan, O., Stolte, T., Creazza, A. and Hansen, Z.N.L., 2016. Integrating product design into the supply chain. Cogent engineering, 3, p.1210478.
- Khan, S. A., Kusi-Sarpong, S., Arhin, F. K. & Kusi-sarpong, H., 2018. Supplier sustainability performance evaluation and selection: A framework and methodology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 205, 964–979.
- Laura, X., Xiao, X., Bin, M. & Ronald, L., 2007. AHP Based Supply Chain Performance Measurement System, Singapore: Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology.
- Lukinskiy, V., Lukinskiy, V. & Churilov, R., 2014. PROBLEMS OF THE SUPPLY CHAIN RELIABILITY EVALUATION. Transport and Telecommunication, 15, 120–129.
- Lundén, J. V. V. M. T. L. E. K. K. &. H. K. et al., 2014. Temperature control efficacy of retail refrigeration equipment. Food Control, 45, 109–114.
- Lundén, J., Vanhanen, V., Kotilainen, K., & Hemmin, 2014. Retail food stores’ internet based own-check databank records and health officers’ on-site inspection results for cleanliness and food holding temperatures reveal inconsistencies. Food Control, 35, 79–84.
- Mahanta, J. & Panda, S., 2020. Fuzzy expert system for prediction of prostate cancer. New Mathematics and Natural Computation, 16, 163–176.
- Majumdar, A., Sinha, S. K., Shaw, M. & Mathiyazhagan, K., 2021. Analysing the vulnerability of green clothing supply chains in South and Southeast Asia using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Production Research, 95, 752–771.
- Mamdani, E. H. & Assilian, S., 1975. An experiment in linguistic synthesis with a fuzzy logic controller. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 7, 1–13.
- Mao, R., Ma, X., Hao, Y., Pen, G., Zheng, X., Yang, N., Teng, D. and Wang, J., 2023. Perspective: A proposal on solutions of modern supply chain construction for lactoferrin. Journal of Dairy Science, 106, pp.7329-7335.
- Marseguerra, M., Zio, E., Podofillini, L. & Coit, D. W., 2005. Optimal design of reliable network systems in presence of uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 54, 243–253.
- Mina, H., Kannan, D., Gholami-Zanjani, S. M. & Biuki, M., 2021. Transition towards circular supplier selection in petrochemical industry: A hybrid approach to achieve sustainable development goals. Journal of Cleaner Production, 286, 125273.
- Mollajan, A., Iranmanesh, S. H. & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R., 2023. A systems approach to improve reliability of a contract by Modularising contract’s information flow architecture: a new contribution to risk mitigation in projects management. Enterprise Information Systems, 17, 1971773.
- Montgomery, H., Haughey, S. A. & Elliott, C. T., 2020. Recent food safety and fraud issues within the dairy supply chain (2015–2019). Global Food Security, 26, 100447.
- Motevali Haghighi, S., Torabi, S. A. & Ghasemi, R., 2016. An integrated approach for performance evaluation in sustainable supply chain networks (with a case study). Journal of Cleaner Production, 137, 579–597.
- Najmi, A. & Makui, A., 2010. Providing hierarchical approach for measuring supply chain performance. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 1, 199–212.
- Orji, I. J. & Wei, S., 2015. An innovative integration of fuzzy-logic and systems dynamics in sustainable supplier selection: a case on manufacturing industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 88, 1–12.
- Ozkan, O. & Kilic, S., 2019. A Monte Carlo Simulation for Reliability Estimation of Logistics and Supply Chain Networks. IFAC PapersOnLine, 52, 2080–2085.
- Paradowski, B., B˛ aczkiewicz, A. & W˛ atróbski, J., 2021. Towards proper consumer choices - MCDM based product selection. s.l., Procedia Computer Science, 1347–1358.
- Paraffin, A. S., Zindove, T. J. & Chimonyo, M., 2018. Perceptions of Factors Affecting Milk Quality and Safety among Large- and Small-Scale Dairy Farmers in Zimbabwe. Journal of Food Quality.
- Pourjavad, E. & Shahin, A., 2018. The application of Mamdani fuzzy inference system in evaluating green supply chain management performance. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 20, 901–912.
- Pourjavad, E. & Shirouyehzad, H., 2014. Analyzing maintenance strategies by FANP considering RAM criteria; a case study. International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, 18, 302–321.
- Qian, C., Murphy, S.I., Lott, T.T., Martin, N.H. and Wiedmann, M., 2023. Development and deployment of a supply-chain digital tool to predict fluid-milk spoilage due to psychrotolerant sporeformers. Journal of Dairy Science, 106, pp.8415-8433.
- Raut, R. D., Gardas, B. B., Narwane, V. S. & Narkhede, B. E., 2019. Improvement in the food losses in fruits and vegetable supply chain - a perspective of cold third-party logistics approach. Operations Research Perspectives, 6, 100117.
- Reiner, G., Teller, C. & Kotzab, H., 2013. Analyzing the Efficient Execution of In-Store Logistics Processes in Grocery Retailing—The Case of Dairy Products. Production and Operations Management, 22, 924–939.
- Rubio, R., Licón, C.C., Berruga, M.I., Molina, M.and Molina, A., 2011. Occurrence of aflatoxin M1 in the Manchego cheese supply chain. Journal of dairy science, 94, pp.2775-2778.
- Sarkar, S., 2016. Internet of Things—Robustness and reliability. In: Internet of Things. s.l.:Elsevier, 201–218.
- Shayganmehr, M., Kumar, A., Luthra, S. & Garza-Reyes, J. A., 2021. A framework for assessing sustainability in multi-tier supply chains using empirical evidence and fuzzy expert system,. Journal of Cleaner Production.
- Shen, L. et al., 2013. A fuzzy multi criteria approach for evaluating green supplier's performance in green supply chain with linguistic preferences. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 74, 170–179.
- Shokouhyar, S., Seifhashemi, S., Siadat, H. & Ahmadi, M. M., 2019. Implementing a fuzzy expert system for ensuring information technology supply chain. Expert Systems, 36, e12339.
- Sivanandam, S., Sumathi, S. & Deepa, S., 2007. Introduction to Fuzzy Logic Using MATLAB. Berlin: Springer.
- Sufiyan, M., Haleem, A., Khan, S. & Khan, M. I., 2019. Evaluating food supply chain performance using hybrid fuzzy MCDM technique. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 20, 40–57.
- Taghizadeh, H. & Hafezi, E., 2012. The investigation of supply chain’s reliability measure:a case study. Journal of Industrial Engineering International, 8, 1–10.
- Tavana, M. et al., 2013. A new network epsilon-based DEA model for supply chain performance evaluation. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 66, 501–513.
- Torun, H., Oztaysi, B. & Kahraman, C., 2011. A Fuzzy Inference System for Supply Chain Risk Management. Practical Applications of Intelligent Systems, 124, 429–438.
- Wang, H. et al., 2023. Collaborative decision-making in supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis. Cogent Engineering, 10, 2196823.
- Wang, H., Long, Z., Chen, J., Guo, Y. and Wang, A., 2023. Collaborative decision-making in supply chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis. Cogent Engineering, 10, p.2196823.
- Wasson, C. S., 2015. System engineering analysis, design, and development: Concepts, principles, and practices. s.l.:John Wiley & Sons.
- Wu, X. et al., 2018. Challenges to improve the safety of dairy products in China. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 76, 6–14.
- Xu, W. J., He, L. J. & Zhu, G. Y., 2021. Many-objective flow shop scheduling optimisation with genetic algorithm based on fuzzy sets. International Journal of Production Research, 59, 702–726. [CrossRef]
- Zadeh, L. A., 1965. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8, 338–353.
- Zaitsev, E., 2012. Supply chain reliability modelling. Scientific Journal of Logistics, 8, 61–69.
- Zarei-Kordshouli, F., Paydar, M. M., & Nayeri, S. (2023). Designing a dairy supply chain network considering sustainability and resilience: a multistage decision making framework. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 25, 2903-2927. [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M., Chen, J. & Chang, S. H., 2020. An adaptive simulation analysis of reliability model for the system of supply chain based on partial differential equations. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 59, 24012407. [CrossRef]
- Zimmermann, H., 1991. Fuzzy Set Theory and Its Applications. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
- Zubair, M. & Mufti, N. A., 2015. Identification and Assessment of Supply Chain Risks Associated with Dairy Products Sector. Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences, 11, 167-175. [CrossRef]













| System Structure | Operation | RSC (q) |
| Series | If all the components work correctly, the system works | |
| Parallel | If the components fail the system will fail | 1- |
| Parallel-Series | The series subsystems are connected in parallel | 1- |
| Series-Parallel | The parallel subsystems are connected in series | |
| k-out-of-n | System works if k or more among n components work properly |


| Level | Factors |
|---|---|
| Supply | Quality of raw material |
| Financial ability and credit | |
| Flexibility in volume | |
| Flexibility in variety | |
| Temperature | |
| Humidity | |
| Manufacturing | Flexible manufacturing system |
| Variety and volume of production | |
| Temperature | |
| Humidity | |
| Distribution | Flexibility in volume of product |
| Tracking | |
| Temperature | |
| Humidity |
| Level | Factors | T-Value | Significance level |
|---|---|---|---|
| Supply | Quality of raw material | 2.07 | 0.974 |
| Financial ability and credit | 3.62 | 0.999 | |
| Flexibility in volume | -7.02 | 0.000 | |
| Flexibility in variety | -9.20 | 0.000 | |
| Temperature | 0.00 | 0.500 | |
| Humidity | -2.22 | 0.019 | |
| Manufacturing | Flexible manufacturing system | 2.29 | 0.983 |
| Variety and volume of production | 0.33 | 0.626 | |
| Temperature | 1.16 | 0.871 | |
| Humidity | -1.99 | 0.030 | |
| Distribution | Flexibility in volume of product | -4.49 | 0.000 |
| Tracking | 0.74 | 0.765 | |
| Temperature | 5.51 | 1.000 | |
| Humidity | -8.75 | 0.000 |
| Factor | Linguistic Factors | Fuzzy Triangular Number |
| Temperature | Unsatisfactory Good Excellent |
(0,1,2) (1,2,3) (2,3,4) |
| Other factors | Low Medium High |
(0,1,2) (1,2,3) (2,3,4) |
| Type of Product/Material | Status | Linguistic Terms |
| A |
Frozen (< -18°C) | Excellent |
| Refrigerated (1°C < x<4°C) | Good | |
| Room temperature (15°C < x<25°C) | Unsatisfactory |
|
| B |
Frozen (< -18°C) | Good |
| Refrigerated (1°C < x<4°C) | Excellent | |
| Room temperature (15°C < x<25°C) | Good | |
| C | Frozen (< -18°C) | Unsatisfactory |
| Refrigerated (1°C < x<4°C) | Good | |
| Room temperature (15°C < x<25°C) | Excellent |
| Factor | Linguistic Factors | Fuzzy Triangular Number |
|---|---|---|
| Reliability | Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Very good Excellent |
(0,1/6,2/6) (1/6,2/6,3/6) (2/6,3/6,4/6) (3/6,4/6,5/6) (4/6,5/6,1) |
| Rules | IF | THEN | |
| Tracking | Temperature | ||
| 1 | Low | Unsatisfactory | Unsatisfactory |
| 2 | Medium | Excellent | Very good |
| ⁝ | ⁝ | ⁝ | ⁝ |
| 9 | High | Excellent | Excellent |
| Level (FIS) | Input | Value of Input | Value of Output (Reliability) |
| Supplier 1 (FIS1) | Temperature | 2 | 0.5 |
| Quality of raw material | 3 | ||
| Financial ability and credit | 1 | ||
| Supplier 2 (FIS1) | Temperature | 1 | 0.333 |
| Quality of raw material | 2 | ||
| Financial ability and credit | 1 | ||
| Manufacturing (FIS2) | Temperature | 3 | 0.833 |
| Flexible manufacturing system | 3 | ||
| Variety and volume of productions | 3 | ||
| Distribution 1 (FIS3) | Temperature | 2 | 0.667 |
| Tracking | 3 | ||
| Distribution 2 (FIS3) | Temperature | 3 | 0.5 |
| Tracking | 1 |
| Factors | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supplier | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.7 | |
| Manufacturer | 0.6 | 0.7 | 0.8 | |
| Distributer | 0.7 | 0.8 | 0.9 | |
| Level | Supplier | Manufacturer | Distributer |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -11.162 | -10.939 | -10.774 |
| 2 | -9.579 | -9.600 | -9.614 |
| 3 | -8.240 | -8.441 | -8.591 |
| Delta | 2.923 | 2.499 | 2.183 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Level | Supplier | Manufacturer | Distributer |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.2833 | 0.2920 | 0.2963 |
| 2 | 0.3340 | 0.3337 | 0.3387 |
| 3 | 0.3897 | 0.3813 | 0.3720 |
| Delta | 0.1063 | 0.0893 | 0.0757 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Factors | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Temperature | Unsatisfactory | Good | Excellent |
| Others | Low | Medium | High |
| Level | Quality of raw material | Temperature | Financial Ability and Credit |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -8.668 | -10.205 | -7.501 |
| 2 | -5.161 | -4.782 | -5.952 |
| 3 | -4.831 | -3.798 | -4.437 |
| Delta | 3.837 | 6.407 | 3.064 |
| Rank | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Level | Quality of raw material | Temperature | Financial Ability and Credit |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.4223 | 0.3357 | 0.5023 |
| 2 | 0.5600 | 0.5800 | 0.5120 |
| 3 | 0.5867 | 0.6467 | 0.6000 |
| Delta | 0.1643 | 0.3110 | 0.0977 |
| Rank | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Level | Flexible Manufacturing System | Variety and Volume of Production | Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | -8.219 | -8.219 | -10.144 |
| 2 | -7.375 | -7.859 | -5.173 |
| 3 | -5.819 | -5.173 | -5.173 |
| Delta | 2.400 | 3.046 | 4.970 |
| Rank | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Level | Flexible Manufacturing System | Variety and Volume of Production | Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.4113 | 0.4113 | 0.3335 |
| 2 | 0.4675 | 0.4425 | 0.5567 |
| 3 | 0.5233 | 0.5567 | 0.5567 |
| Delta | 0.1120 | 0.1453 | 0.2232 |
| Rank | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Level | Tracking | Temperature |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | -9.790 | -13.979 |
| 2 | -7.914 | -6.290 |
| 3 | -6.465 | -3.900 |
| Delta | 3.325 | 10.079 |
| Rank | 2 | 1 |
| Level | Tracking | Temperature |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.3467 | 0.2000 |
| 2 | 0.4500 | 0.5033 |
| 3 | 0.5567 | 0.6500 |
| Delta | 0.2100 | 0.4500 |
| Rank | 2 | 1 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).