## 5 Comparative Analysis and Results  
Many authors have suggested frameworks, covering all the bases when it comes to SSI needs, including privacy, data integrity, and security. This research has made use of [PERSON]'s [40] \"Self-Sovereign Identity Evaluation Framework\". In order to assess how well the existing and proposed identity systems adhere to these standards, this study evaluates the identity system for the Metaverse based on this framework. We used this evaluation framework as a reference to evaluate the current state of Self-Sovereignty in the published and proposed authentication solution for the Metaverse. In this analysis, we assess five proposed solutions for Metaverse authentication: a secure authentication framework to guarantee the traceability of avatars in the Metaverse (SMC) [37], a Secure and Privacy-Preserving Authentication Scheme Using Decentralized Identifiers in a Metaverse Environment (DIM) [41], gaze-based authentication (GBA) [42], and knowledge-based authentication (KBA) [43], in addition to evaluating MetaSSI. The proposed Metaverse authentication model (SMC) addresses some SSI principles but lacks clarity on user data control and consent. It emphasizes limiting shared information but needs more detail on decentralization and transparency. The DIM framework ties virtual and physical identities, raising privacy and decentralization concerns. It lacks clarity on scalability and interoperability. Gaze-based authentication (GBA) has potential but required strong encryption and transparency. KBA methods like passwords and PINs lack user control and scalability, presenting usability challenges in AR and VR environments. Paired accounts show promise but require further development to align with principles. Our proposed framework, which uses blockchain technology as a distributed identity repository, was set out to create guidelines and a structure for autonomous identities in the Metaverse. The proposed solution is based on the idea that users ought to be in total control of their online personas. Attribute credentials can be made more visible and accessible at the user level. The selective disclosure makes use of zero-knowledge proof, an advanced technique for enhancing privacy. To protect user privacy without sacrificing functionality, we also use decentralized identifiers and public and private keys for every relationship. Since each DID is intrinsically linked to a private agent's network address, users can securely exchange information, including verified claims, with one another over an encrypted private channel. These private investigators can choose to operate on edge devices or in the cloud. Our ledger complies with security requirements since it does not store any personally identifiable information. No third party should ever have access to a user's personal information, regardless of how trustworthy or committed to serving their best interests it may be. The protocol layer bears the responsibility of carrying out all necessary verifications and assurances. The problems of openness and trust are addressed by the webs of trust and reputation. The private information that consumers have opted to keep on their devices or with an agent will never be accessible through any of the systems or databases of the service providers. Identity owners can recover their credentials and private keys in the event of loss because we provide a decentralized method of revocation using cryptographic accumulators. It is used in a manner independent of systems to enable data portability across providers. The ability to remove certain operational data from the SSI system is a necessary component of an individual's right to be forgotten; as such, it is best if identities can remain active indefinitely or for as long as the owner desires. Wherever you go, you can carry your identity services and personal data with you. Transportable identities ensure that the user keeps control over their identity while also improving identity persistence over time.