measured the Energy consumption, SLATAH, and VM Migration.\

Energy Consumption
------------------

Fig. 5 (a) and (b) shows the energy consumption of our proposed MxMT algorithm along with the combination of IQR and LRR. The proposed IQR-MxMT-1.2 reduced the energy consumption by 19% on average when compared to IQR-MMT-1.2. On the other hand LRR-MxMT-1.2 saves over 18% on average of energy consumption compared to LRR-MMT-1.2.\
The proposed MAD-MxMT-2.5 and THR-MxMT-0.8 have reduced energy consumption by over 18% and 19% respectively on average. The simulation result of MAD-MMT-2.5 and MAD-MxMT are shown in Fig. 6 (a) and another simulation results of THR-MMT-0.8 and THR-MxMT-0.8 are shown in Fig. 6 (b).\
Given the simulation result shown in Fig. 7 (a), our proposed MxMT algorithm reduced over 20% of energy consumption on average compared to the previously proposed algorithm. Next, the proposed LR-MxMT-1.2 policy cut-off around 18% energy consumption on average compared to LR-MMT-1.2 policy as shown in Fig. 7 (b).\

SLA Time Per Active Host
------------------------

Our experimental result shows that the SLA time per active host has greatly increased. As Fig. 8 (a) IQR-MxMT-1.5 shows an average of 43% SLATAH, while the average was 5% in IQR-MMT-1.5. Similar results had been observed 