Figure 4
Three Pareto front graphs illustrate the distribution of feasible solutions across varying objective priorities, with weight adjustments ranging from 0 to 1 in 11 iterations for each bi-objective combination. These trade-offs provide critical insights for decision-makers, enabling them to select optimal solutions that balance conflicting objectives based on their operational priorities.The image features three Pareto front graphs labeled as (a), (b), and (c), each illustrating feasible solutions across different axes. Graph (a) compares Z1 and Z2, with Z1 representing time in minutes and Z2 in thousands, while the data table lists corresponding values for Z1 and Z2 alongside their weights. Graph (b) presents the relationship between Z1 and Z3, where Z3 is measured in kilometers, with a similar structured data table beneath. Graph (c) displays the comparison between Z2 and Z3, again including a data table with weights and values for Z2 and Z3. Each graph is marked with a dashed Pareto line and includes labeled axes, while the tables highlight weight distributions, demonstrating a consistent arrangement of data across all three sections.

(a) Pareto frontier of response time and budget planning, (b) pareto frontier of response time and evacuation distance, (c) pareto frontier of budget planning and evacuation distance

Source: Authors’ own work

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal