Which one of the following words/phrases is most appropriately used to denote “an interoperable network of 3D virtual worlds that can be accessed simultaneously by millions of users, who can exert property rights over virtual items" ?

Explains that cryptocurrencies use 'encryption techniques' to create/control units and verify exchanges, linking the word 'crypto-' to encryption rather than virtual worlds.

A student could use this to infer that 'crypto' in technical terms refers to cryptographic/encoding methods, so equating 'cryptography' with a metaverse-like network would be a category mismatch to check.

Defines cryptocurrency as digital money based on decentralized ledger/blockchain technology (not as a virtual 3D world), showing 'crypto' terms often relate to digital currencies and security.

One could extend this to suspect that 'cryptography' more commonly denotes methods for secure digital transactions rather than an interoperable 3D virtual world, prompting lookup of standard definitions.

Gives a general definition of cyberspace as an electronic digital world accessible via the Internet, which is the broader domain that could contain virtual worlds or metaverses.

A student might combine this with knowledge of metaverse concepts (virtual worlds in cyberspace) to distinguish 'cyberspace' or 'metaverse' from the term 'cryptography'.

Notes taxation and formal recognition of 'virtual digital asset (cryptos)', implying governments treat certain virtual items as property/transferable assets.

Use this to reason that while virtual items can have property status, that fact addresses legal treatment of assets, not the meaning of 'cryptography' itself.

Describes intellectual property rights as rights over creations of the mind, a legal pattern for assigning exclusive rights that could apply to virtual items in digital worlds.

A student could extend this to evaluate whether 'property rights over virtual items' are typically categorized under IPR/asset regimes rather than being implied by the term 'cryptography'.

Describes Industry 4.0 digitalization enabling the building of a 'new virtual world' integrated with physical assets — shows usage of 'virtual world' as a constructed digital environment.

A student could link this to the idea of many connected 3D environments (metaverse-like spaces) by combining it with knowledge of existing virtual-world platforms and their architectures.

Mentions the 'meeting of the real and virtual worlds' via IT and cyber-physical systems — supports the pattern that virtual environments are treated as persistent spaces interacting with users and assets.

One could extend this to test whether 'virtual matrix' implies interoperability by comparing it to examples of integrated cyber-physical virtual platforms (e.g., connected virtual environments).

Defines 'cyberspace' as the electronic digital world encompassed by the Internet and notes its global, ubiquitous reach — relevant to the claim of wide simultaneous access.

Combine this with basic facts about global Internet user counts and infrastructure to judge plausibility that millions could access a shared virtual environment.

Explains 'network effects' where size begets size for digital platforms — a pattern explaining how large-scale shared virtual platforms can grow and support many users.

Use this rule plus data about platform scale and server capacity to assess whether a 'virtual matrix' could sustain millions and support exchange of virtual goods.

Describes the Internet as a central warehouse of data used for e‑commerce and money transactions — relevant to whether virtual items could be transacted and assigned property-like rights.

A student could combine this with knowledge of online marketplaces, digital ownership systems (e.g., accounts, tokens) to evaluate the claim about property rights over virtual items.