## 5 Results and Discussion  
The application of the proposed multi-criteria approach to the assessment of technologies situated at the interface of two paradigms, Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0, is presented below. The analysis covers six transformation areas (K1-K6), identified through a comprehensive literature review and expert consultations, and 22 modern technologies (L11-L64) related to them. The first three areas (K1-K3) correspond to the key features of Industry 4.0,such as digital automation, data-driven optimization, and intelligent system connections. The remaining areas (K4-K6) reflect the fundamental principles of Industry 5.0--human-centricity, sustainable development, and system resilience. The analysis directly addresses Q1 by identifying the technologies considered by experts to be the most strategic in the context of the transformation towards Industry 5.0. The assessment process involved eleven domain experts, invited from manufacturing firms, digital technology consultancies, and academic institutions in industrial innovation. The panel consisted of five experts specializing in production systems and six in digital transformation and Industry 4.0/5.0 strategies. All participants had a minimum of five years of relevant professional experience and held at least a doctoral degree (PhD). Each expert self-declared a high level of subject-matter familiarity. To minimize bias, all assessments were collected individually and anonymously. The experts assessed the strength of direct influence between individual areas of transformation, using a scale from 0 to 4. To ensure the reliability of the assessments, the Kendall coefficient of concordance \((W)\) was calculated, which is a frequently used measure of the degree of agreement between independent assessments [84]. \[W=\frac{12S}{n^{2}(k^{3}-k)} \tag{11}\]  
The value \(S\) represents the sum of the squares of the deviations of the sums of the item ratings from their mean value. An analysis of inter-expert consistency, conducted on the basis of data obtained from 11 experts assessing 22 technologies, yielded a coefficient value of \(W=0.60\), at \(S=76,507\). The obtained result indicates a satisfactory level of compliance in the assessment of cause-effect relationships between the analysed technologies. In accordance with the DEMATEL methodology, individual initial impact matrices (1) were developed, which were then transformed (2) into an aggregated direct impact matrix, \(A\) (Appendix A, Table 1), normalized (3) to the \(N\) matrix (Appendix A, Table 2), and then transformed (4) to the total impact matrix \(T\) (Appendix A, Table 3). As part of the analysis of the resulting interaction structure, a quantitative evaluation of the roles of individual components within the industrial transformation system was performed. Based on the total impact matrix, two indicators (5) were determined for each area (K1-K6) and each technology (L11-L64): centrality \((D_{i}+R_{i})\), reflecting the hierarchy of key factors, and causality \((D_{i}-R_{i})\), indicating the direction of the dominant influence. These values are presented in Table 3. The obtained values enable the identification of both the key drivers of transformation and more reactive components that are influenced by other factors and that depend on the system context.