“…Prob10 (25,18,25,140,10,10,15,7,25,8,8) NED gke ∼N(10, 3) ENV S2P v ∼N(10, 3) VLost P−E jeg ∼N (30,5) Prob11 (30,20,28,150,10,10,20,8,30,10,10) Demand cg ∼N(50, 10) ENV P2D v ∼N(10, 3) VLost D−L rlg ∼N (30,5) Prob12 (30,22,30,180,10,10,20,8,35,10,10) Cap jeg ∼N(500,10) ENV C v ∼N (10,3) TA B L E 3 The potential levels considered for the parameters of the proposed meta-heuristic algorithms It can be seen easily from Table 5 that for the case of small size test problems, the MGWO, MALO, and MDA approaches perform better than the NSGAII and SPEAII approaches in all of the evaluation metrics. In most of the test problems 1 to 4, the MALO and MGWO approaches perform better than the MDA approach in approximately all metrics.…”