# 6G Use Cases and Scenarios: A Comparison Analysis Between ITU and Other Initiatives
## 12 Comparative Analysis  
In this section, we describe the methodology we have adopted to compare the 6G use cases presented by ITU and the other initiatives. The results are discussed in the next section. Comparative analysis is carried out by analyzing the 6G use cases proposed by ITU and the other initiatives and the vertical market sectors. The flowchart detailing the comparison procedure is shown in Figure 3. The main purpose of this analysis is to provide an indication of how the proposed 6G use cases are in line with the necessities of the considered vertical market sectors and to evidence their impacts. The comparative analysis of many use cases with vertical market sectors has been carried out, taking as reference the technological aspects. In particular, as shown in Figure 3, the analysis starts by identifying the main digital technologies, applications and services that are deemed to be the most relevant, (i) for the realization of each 6G use case and (ii) for the objectives of the selected vertical market sectors. As indicated in the scheme in Figure 3, the comparative analysis starts with the characterization of the 6G use cases and the vertical market sectors in terms of the technologies and applications listed in Table 10. The results of this preliminary step are the generation of the two binary-valued matrices: (i) \"Use cases vs. Technologies\", and (ii) \"Vertical market sectors vs. Technologies\" that are reported in Figures A1 and A2, respectively, in Appendix A. The single entry in Figure A1 is a binary variable taking a value of 1 if the considered use case (row) requires (i.e., is enabled by) the considered technology/application (column) and 0 otherwise. Similarly, the single entry in Figure A2 is still a binary value taking a value of 1 if the selected vertical market sector (row) requires the selected technology/application and 0 otherwise. These two matrices are then used to perform the analysis necessary to obtain the results summarized in Table 11. These results also include the analysis and comparisons among (i) all the use cases proposed by the different stakeholders and (ii) the selected vertical market sector. Finally, we have conducted an analysis aimed at highlighting how the proposed use cases are in line with market trends and the requirements issued by the selected vertical market sector. The first analysis tries to establish how the 6G use cases fulfill the requirements of the vertical market sectors in terms of required technology/applications and services. From this analysis, we can identify the 6G use case(s) matching the technology needs for each of the considered vertical market sectors. The second analysis compares the use cases from  
Figure 3: Methodology adopted for comparative analysis. other initiatives with those proposed by ITU 6G usage scenarios. Its objective is to assess how the 6G use cases proposed by other stakeholders are close/far to/from those proposed by ITU. The objective of the third analysis is to identify the relationships among the ITU 6G use cases and those presented by other initiatives. This is useful to assess which use cases are closer from a technological point of view. A similar analysis is repeated for the considered vertical market sectors, so as to identify those sectors that are similar in terms of the required technologies/applications/services. Finally, in the last two analyses, we identify the technologies/applications/services that are most relevant for the considered 6G use cases and vertical market sectors. To assess the similarity of use cases and vertical market sectors, we have used the normalized Hamming distance [48]. The number of positions by which two strings differ is indicated by the Hamming distance. The ratio of the Hamming distance to the string's length is known as the normalized Hamming distance. A smaller normalized Hamming distance value indicates a greater similarity between the two strings. So, the normalized Hamming distance is calculated as the percentage of coordinates that differ [49].