## 5 The Proposed Protocol
### PDFH and SDFH Selection Utilizing the MPA
#### 5.2.2 The Iterative Phase
ASBO is typically calculated by analyzing how much of a particular area or viewpoint is blocked by surrounding buildings. This parameter exemplifies a CDFH\({}_{j}\) position (height) to the height of buildings around a PDFH as shown in Table 4 and Figure 8. As a result, \(ASBO_{CDFH_{i}}\), which also stands for \(DFFP_{5}\), can be defined as follows:  
\[DFFP_{5}=ASBO_{CDFH_{i}}=\frac{\sum\limits_{i=1}^{N_{b}}SBO_{CDFH_{i}}}{N_{b}} \text{, }\quad 0<DFFFP_{5}<1. \tag{28}\]  
where \(SBO_{CDFH_{i}}\) signifies the scale for building occlusions for each CDFH\({}_{j}\), and \(N_{b}\) is assigned to the number of buildings that may occlude CDFH\({}_{j}\) within the coverage area. To elaborate more on this, Tables 5-7 represent the interpretations for the scale. In essence, the scale preference indicates that lower is better. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Range** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Interpretation**} \\ \hline  & \(0-1/3r\) & Extremely close \\ \hline  & \(1/3r-2/3r\) & Close \\ \hline  & \(2/3r-r\) & Moderately close \\ \hline  & \(r-1\,1/3r\) & Moderately far \\ \hline  & \(1\,1/3r-1\,2/3r\) & Far \\ \hline  & \(1\,2/3r-2r\) & Extremely far \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Representation of building occlusions based on a PDFH position. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Scale** & **Interpretation** \\ \hline
0.2 & Extremely close \\ \hline
0.3 & Close \\ \hline
0.4 & Moderately close \\ \hline
0.5 & Far \\ \hline
0.6 & Extremely far \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: The scale for building occlusions at moderate height. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Scale** & **Interpretation** \\ \hline
0.3 & Extremely close \\ \hline
0.4 & Close \\ \hline
0.5 & Moderately close \\ \hline
0.6 & Moderately far \\ \hline
0.7 & Far \\ \hline
0.8 & Extremely far \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: The scale for building occlusions at high height. Figure 8: Representation of building occlusions based on a PDFH position and the coverage area. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Scale** & **Interpretation** \\ \hline
0.1 & Extremely close \\ \hline
0.2 & Close \\ \hline
0.3 & Moderately close \\ \hline
0.4 & Moderately far \\ \hline
0.5 & Far \\ \hline
0.6 & Extremely far \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: The scale for building occlusions at low height. * DFFF estimation: In order for the MPA to locate the best PDFH and FSDFH, one essential element is the DFFF. To discover a feasible solution, the MPA takes into account all of the aforementioned parameters when designing the DFFF. It is important to note that the CDFH\({}_{i}\) that has the lowest DFFF is selected to be PDFH, and the second lowest one is nominated as FSDFH. Thus, the following is the best linear combination of \(DFFF_{1}\), \(DFFF_{2}\), \(DFFF_{3}\), \(DFFF_{4}\), and \(DFFF_{5}\) for PDFH and FSDFH selection: \[DFFF=w_{1}\times DFFF_{1}+w_{2}\times DFFF_{2}+w_{3}\times DFFF_{3}+w_{4}\times DFFF _{4}+w_{5}\times DFFF_{5},\] (29) where \(w_{1}\), \(w_{2}\),\(w_{3}\), \(w_{4}\), and \(w_{5}\) stand for the weight's values for RM\({}_{1}\), RM\({}_{2}\), RM\({}_{3}\), RM\({}_{4}\), and RM\({}_{5}\), respectively, where \(w_{1}+w_{2}+w_{3}+w_{4}+w_{5}=1\). The values of \(w_{1}\), \(w_{2}\),\(w_{3}\), \(w_{4}\), and \(w_{5}\) are 0.3375, 0.2475, 0.18, 0.135, and 0.1, respectively. It is important to stress that an extensive amount of trial-and-error evaluation goes into determining these precise values. While Appendix A offers a thorough and informative example that clarifies the PDFH, FSDFH, and SSDFH selection process using the MPA, Algorithm 2 depicts the all-inclusive MPA-based PDFH and SDFH selection procedure.