Table 6 Comparative analysis of WGWO energy consumption parameter
From: Hybrid WGWO: whale grey wolf optimization-based novel energy-efficient clustering for EH-WSNs
Nodes vs. energy consumption (mJ) | % Improvements of WGWO as compared with existing schemes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of nodes ↓ | TBC | Partition-based LEACH | LCM | ETSSEP | WGWO | % Improvements of WGWO as compared with ETSSEP | % Improvements of WGWO as compared with LCM | % Improvements of WGWO as compared with partition-based LEACH | % Improvements of WGWO as compared with TBC |
100 | 400 | 300 | 150 | 50 | 30 | 40.00 | 80.00 | 90.00 | 92.50 |
200 | 545 | 336.5 | 192.5 | 76.5 | 45 | 41.18 | 76.62 | 86.63 | 91.74 |
300 | 576.5 | 400 | 266 | 116 | 72.5 | 37.50 | 72.74 | 81.88 | 87.42 |
400 | 600 | 437.5 | 300 | 150 | 104.5 | 30.33 | 65.17 | 76.11 | 82.58 |
500 | 636.5 | 482 | 336.5 | 188 | 150 | 20.21 | 55.42 | 68.88 | 76.43 |
Average % improvements → | 33.84 | 69.99 | 80.70 | 88.56 | |||||