## 5 Computational Results
As shown in Table 16, setting the value of swapping probability equal to 0.5 assists the algorithm in achieving the lowest best and average fitness values in the lowest best and average execution times, respectively, as well as the highest success rate. In Tables 17-19, experimental results that investigate the effect of parameter setting to algorithms' performance and behavior regarding input instance, BCV4-13.1, are presented. As shown in Table 17, setting the first phase's number of cycles equal to 1 assists the algorithm in achieving the lowest best and average fitness values in the lowest best and average execution times. For this specific input instance, if we do not use the first phase at all (first phase cycles = 0), experimental results are much less the same. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Input instance**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Fitness value**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Execution time (s)**} & **Success** \\ \cline{2-11}  & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **CV (\%)** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **rate** \\ \hline Swapping probability = 0.4 & 301 & 303 & 301.6 & 0.9 & 0.29 & 0.85 & 5.23 & 2.1 & 0.33 & 55\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.45 & 301 & 303 & 301.5 & 0.55 & 0.18 & 1.27 & 5.66 & 2.2 & 1.36 & 63\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.5 & 301 & 305 & 301.48 & 0.93 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 5.5 & 1.85 & 1.4 & 67\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.55 & 301 & 303 & 301.5 & 0.4 & 0.13 & 1.2 & 2.6 & 2.4 & 1.6 & 65\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.6 & 301 & 303 & 301.5 & 0.7 & 0.23 & 1.1 & 4.9 & 2.2 & 1.1 & 64\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 16: Investigating the effect of swapping probability for input instance, LLR. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Input instance**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Fitness value**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Execution time (s)**} & **Success** \\ \cline{2-11}  & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **CV (\%)** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **rate** \\ \hline First phase cycles = 0 & 10 & 10 & 10 & 0 & 0 & 5.84 & 7.23 & 6.21 & 0.52 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 1 & 10 & 10 & 10 & 0 & 0 & 3 & 14.2 & 7.1 & 2.65 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 2 & 10 & 10 & 10 & 0 & 0 & 6.95 & 12.3 & 8.43 & 1.66 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 3 & 10 & 10 & 10 & 0 & 0 & 7.46 & 14.4 & 10.36 & 1.99 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 4 & 10 & 10 & 10 & 0 & 0 & 9.42 & 14.3 & 10.99 & 1.45 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 5 & 10 & 10 & 10 & 0 & 0 & 9.35 & 15 & 13.15 & 1.77 & 100\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 17: Investigating the effect of first phase’s number of cycles for input instance, BCV4-13.1. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Input instance**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Fitness value**} & \multicolumn{6}{c}{**Execution time (s)**} & **Success** \\ \cline{2-11}  & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **CV (\%)** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **rate** \\ \hline POPSIZE = 1 & 301 & 305 & 302.2 & 1.6 & 0.53 & 0.74 & 2.38 & 1.5 & 0.6 & 50\% \\ POPSIZE = 2 & 301 & 305 & 301.48 & 0.93 & 0.3 & 0.3 & 5.5 & 1.85 & 1.4 & 67\% \\ POPSIZE = 3 & 301 & 303 & 301.7 & 1.06 & 0.35 & 0.98 & 7.08 & 2.9 & 2.2 & 60\% \\ POPSIZE = 4 & 301 & 303 & 301.8 & 0.8 & 0.27 & 0.23 & 3.21 & 1.32 & 0.9 & 45\% \\ POPSIZE = 5 & 301 & 303 & 301.6 & 0.7 & 0.23 & 0.38 & 4.03 & 1.72 & 1.2 & 55\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 15: Investigating the effect of population size for input instance, LLR. As shown in Table 18, setting the value of population size equal to 2 assists the algorithm in achieving the lowest best and average fitness values in the lowest best and average execution times, respectively. As shown in Table 19, setting the value of swapping probability equal to 0.97 assists the algorithm to achieve the lowest best and average fitness values in the lowest best and average execution times, respectively.