## 4 Results and Discussion
Table 7 exhibits the average % effectiveness of the proposed novel framework compared to the ABC-based framework and GA-based framework as 35.59% and 53.85%, respectively. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**No. of RNs with Variations in the Size of the Network**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**\% Effectiveness of Proposed FRGNWS Framework with Existing Frameworks**} \\ \hline
**Size of** & **GA-Based** & **ABC-Based** & **FRGNWS** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Framework with** & **\% Framework with** & **\% Framework with** \\
**Network \(\downarrow\)** & **Framework** & **Framework** & **Framework** & **ABC-Based Framework** & **GA-Based Framework** & **GA-Based Framework** \\ \hline
400 \(\times\) 400 & 7 & 5 & 3 & 40.00 & 57.14 \\ \hline
600 \(\times\) 600 & 13 & 9 & 5 & 44.44 & 61.54 \\ \hline
800 \(\times\) 800 & 18 & 13 & 8 & 38.46 & 55.56 \\ \hline
1000 \(\times\) 1000 & 23 & 16 & 11 & 31.25 & 52.17 \\ \hline
1200 \(\times\) 1200 & 28 & 21 & 16 & 23.81 & 42.86 \\ \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{Avg. \% Effectiveness\(\rightarrow\)} & & 35.59 & 53.85 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: The average % effectiveness of the proposed novel framework for the number of RNs metric with variations in the network size. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Lifetime of Network (Seconds) with Variations in the Size of the Network**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**\% Effectiveness of Proposed FRGNWS Framework with**} \\ \hline
**Size of** & **GA-Based** & **ABC-Based** & **FRGNWS** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Effectiveness of FRGNWS Framework with** & **\% Framework with** \\
**Network \(\downarrow\)** & **Framework** & **Framework** & **Framework** & **ABC-Based Framework** & **GA-Based Framework** \\ \hline
400 \(\times\) 400 & 13,590 & 16,250 & 18,000 & 9.72 & 24.50 \\ \hline
600 \(\times\) 600 & 10,600 & 13,120 & 15,500 & 15.35 & 31.61 \\ \hline
800 \(\times\) 800 & 8 The proposed novel framework is energy efficient. Minimum relay nodes are deployed for maintaining the effective coverage in the proposed framework. The remaining available energy of each node in the route along with the energy consumption of the edge between adjacent nodes in the route are the two main factors out of a total of six factors considered while selecting the best reliable node-disjoint route from each SN to BS. Therefore, the proposed novel framework show efficacy in effective utilization of energy in the network and results in lower energy consumption compared with existing frameworks, the latter lacking energy efficiency. In the proposed novel framework, the maximum node-disjoint routes from all SNs to BS are explored using a minimum number of RNs. Next, from each SN to BS, \(k\)-node-disjoint routes use the minimum number of RNs. Further, the best reliable node-disjoint route is selected out of the \(k\)-node-disjoint routes from each SN to BS for routing. The existing frameworks lack in providing efficient coverage capabilities, since the ABC-based framework considers only two factors, namely, cost and connectivity; this framework thus lack consideration of the energy-depletion rate. On the other hand, the GA-based framework considers the connectivity factor, although this framework lacks considering the energy level along with coverage issue. Furthermore, considering Figure 6b, this figure shows the excellent performance of the proposed novel framework for the network lifetime metric with existing frameworks. Table 8 exhibits the average % effectiveness of the proposed novel framework compared to the ABC-based framework and GA-based framework as 19.46% and 38.52%, respectively.