## 4 Results
### Evaluation of Variables and Alternatives
We compared CPEC to Taiwan in terms of cost, location, security, and management in Table 9. And logisticians assessed the options based on the hubs and ports shown in Table 10.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{1}{c}{**Location**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Criteria**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **1** & **2** & **3** & **4** & **5** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Port (Pakistan)} & GW & (2.80, 4.9, 4.9) & (1.28, 3.15, 4.9) & (4.20, 4.9, 4.9) & (3.0, 4.9, 4.9) & (1.9, 4.2, 4.9) \\  & OR & (2.11, 3.80, 4.30) & (2.53, 3.70, 4.20) & (4.43, 4.00, 4.45) & (1.50, 4.10, 4.70) & (3.40, 3.80, 4.10) \\  & QA & (2.20, 4.10, 4.40) & (1.71, 3.20, 4.10) & (2.44, 3.60, 4.30) & (4.00, 4.50, 4.80) & (3.20, 4.70, 4.90) \\  & PA & (3.50, 3.90, 4.20) & (2.80, 3.30, 4.00) & (4.10, 3.80, 4.10) & (1.50, 3.90, 4.40) & (3.40, 4.20, 4.50) \\  & GI & (3.20, 4.00, 4.30) & (2.60, 3.50, 4.00) & (3.80, 4.10, 4.40) & (1.90, 3.70, 4.20) & (3.00, 4.30, 4.60) \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Hubs (Pakistan)} & PE & (2.90, 3.70, 4.10) & (2.30, 3.90, 4.20) & (3.50, 4.20, 4.60) & (2.00, 3.80, 4.40) & (2.80, 4.00, 4.30) \\  & QU & (3.10, 3.80, 4.20) & (2.40, 3.70, 4.10) & (3.60, 3.90, 4.30) & (2.10, 4.00, 4.20) & (2.90, 4.10,Different locations in the CPEC are compared in Table 9 with respect to important variables like cost, security, and management. A score is assigned to each of these factors for the following locations: Gwadar (GW), Ormara (OR), Qasim (QA), Pasni (PS), Gilgit (GI), Peshwar (PE), Quetta (QU), Karachi (KA), Tianjin (TI), and Kashgar (KH). Better performance in a particular area is indicated by a higher score. For example, Gwadar performs well in terms of price and location, but Tianjin shines in terms of security. Conversely, Taiwan has a distinctive geographic location but a relatively low security rating. To help decision-makers evaluate the viability and appropriateness of CPEC and Taiwan for logistical consideration, the comparison provides a brief summary of the advantages and disadvantages of each location. Table 9 lists the elements that determine the rankings of different locations. Peshawar received the best score in this category and thus holds the top spot due to its excellent administration. Qasim takes second place because of its well-balanced performance in terms of cost, location, security, and management. Tianjin shines out in third place with excellent management and security ratings. Karachi is in fourth place, demonstrating a strong balance between location, security, affordability, and management considerations. Gwadar ranks fifth despite having a lower security rank because of its competitive score in other areas. In sixth location, Quetta, is not far behind, showing a well-rounded performance in several areas. With strong points for affordability and location but slightly lower marks for security and management, Gilgit takes seventh place. Ormara is in eighth place, showing steady performance without standing out in any particular area. Khashgar comes in at position nine, with a very even score across the board but without special characteristics. Pasni ranks tenth, with its overall ranking impacted by weaker security and management rankings. Taiwan's poor rankings in cost, security, and management concerns put it at the bottom of the list. Figure 5 shows the comparison with a particular emphasis on location and cost, and Figure 6 shows the comparison with a focus on security and management. These geographic depictions provide a comprehensive and clear understanding of the comparative advantages and disadvantages of Taiwan and CPEC in these crucial areas. Using Equations (7) and (8), the positive ideal (\(A^{*}\)) and negative ideal (\(A^{-}\)) possibilities for each factor were determined. The distances between every alternative and the positive ideal (\(d_{i}^{*}\)) and negative ideal options (\(d_{i}^{-}\)) were calculated, as well as the relative proximity of each alternative to the relative closeness (\(fC_{j}\)). There was a ranking constructed for the