## 5 Computational Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Input instance** & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Fitness value**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Execution time (min)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Success**} \\
**BCV3-46.2** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **CV (\%)** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **rate** \\ \hline First phase cycles = 0 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 25 & 42 & 31 & 5.55 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 1 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 16 & 31 & 25 & 4.37 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 2 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 21 & 45 & 39 & 11.52 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 3 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 19 & 57 & 35 & 11.94 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 4 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 26 & 49 & 38 & 6.13 & 100\% \\ First phase cycles = 5 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 30 & 49 & 40 & 5.6 & 100\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Investigating the effect of first phase’s number of cycles for input instance, BCV3-46.2. As shown in Table 9, 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 10, setting the value of swapping probability equal to 0.97 assists the algorithm in achieving the lowest best fitness value in the lowest execution time. In Tables 11-13, experimental results that investigate the effect of parameter setting to the algorithms' performance and behavior regarding input instance, MUSA, are presented. As shown in Table 11, 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, respectively. Except for that, if we do not use the first phase at all (first phase cycles = 0), execution times and success rate are rather worse. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Input instance**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Fitness value**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Execution time (min)**} & **Success** \\ \cline{2-11}
**BCV3-46.2** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **CV (\%)** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **rate** \\ \hline Swapping probability = 0.85 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 16 & 57 & 36 & 11.67 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.9 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 23 & 49 & 35 & 9.04 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.95 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 27 & 51 & 39 & 8.46 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.97 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 16 & 31 & 25 & 4.37 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.99995 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 11 & 61 & 30 & 12.84 & 100\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 10: Investigating the effect of swapping probability for input instance, BCV3-46.2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Input instance**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Fitness value**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Execution time (min)**} & **Success** \\ \cline{2-11}
**BCV3-46.2** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **CV (\%)** & **Best** & **Worst** & **Average** & **STD** & **rate** \\ \hline Swapping probability = 0.85 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 16 & 57 & 36 & 11.67 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.9 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 23 & 49 & 35 & 9.04 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.95 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 27 & 51 & 39 & 8.46 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.97 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 16 & 31 & 25 & 4.37 & 100\% \\ Swapping probability = 0.99995 & 894 & 894 & 894 & 0 & 0 & 11 & 61 & 30 & 12.84 & 100\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 10: Investigating the effect of swapping probability for input instance, BCV3-46.2.