## 2 Related Work
### Localization-Aware Routing Protocols  
In [16], the authors included the use of mobile sensor nodes to reduce the energy hole and keep the sink in its precise position. Clusters are installed on the network for this purpose, and data processing uses mobile nodes. To achieve fuel consumption, smoother network life, and load balancing, this routing approach is intended. The cost of a high end-to-end delay will be compensated by this approach, though. The writers have suggested a cross-layer reactive routing protocol for [17]. Furthermore, this scheme covered the difficulties described by the standard CARP scheme when the authors did not follow the re-usability estate. Avoiding packet management guarantees longer network life and reduced energy consumption. However, owing to the constant rotating of the nodes, the consequence of this scheme is a decreased throughput and a high loss of course. In [18], the author's aim is to develop an efficient routing algorithm for secure transmission to each of the sinks while also solving the void hole problem. Like DBR, several mobile pontoons are spread on the surface of the water as holding a sink. It has two greedy packet-forwarding mode switches and dealing with a void in communication. However, in DBR, a subset of the upper depth nodes is specified for data-packet forwarding. When a void node is discovered, a detour path for data-packet transmission should be identified. Consequently, knowledge is guided up to lower depths. The gauge used in this way improves the routing performance under continuous node movement conditions. However, it is necessary to measure the node's depth correctly. The PDR has been strengthened, and inefficient performance and heavy energy consumption are its drawbacks. The authors take into account the depth of the existing node, as well as the depth of the next forwarding node in the paper, [19], to reduce the risk of empty holes and resource consumption. The issue of the void hole is not solved by switching packets over two hops, however. The authors of [20] use a technique that adapts the pipeline radius to change the packet-forwarding area to help eliminate redundant packets. This method results in a higher packet delivery ratio, lower energy consumption, and a short end-to-end delay. There is still an issue with the void hole, though. In [21], authors have developed for asynchronous wireless sensor networks, and calculate the best forwarders based on an estimate of the forwarding score and estimation of residual power. This protocol resolves problems related to load balancing, loss of coverage, and accessibility. Voltage is provided to pick up a node for the forwarder. However, since the cycling responsibility in this protocol is not as low as 140, asynchronous duty-cycling caused massive delays in waiting times for the next-hop node to wake up. Residual energy chooses a node forwarder. Nevertheless, asynchronous duty-cycling caused the next-hop node to wake up with tremendous delay waiting times as cycling is not as small as 140 in this protocol requirement and the number of forwarders will start waking up simultaneously and result in repetition of packets. To forward data to the destination node, the authors of [22] suggested a greedy routing scheme. To avoid duplication in GEDAR, nodes that are on lower priority suppress their packet transmission. The key function of this technique is that if a void hole occurs, it employs a depth correction scheme, i.e., it moves the node to a new depth in the case of a void node resuming a greedy forwarding. When the void hole is effectively covered, the reliability of the network that uses this device is increased. Moving nodes into new depths, on the other hand, consumes a lot of energy and increases end-to-end latency. In [23], the authors developed an efficient routing algorithm for safe transmission to each of the sinks as well as solving the void hole problem. The forwarding node is chosen based on the status of the data packet and the cost of the connection.