## 4 Experiments and Results
### The Power Consumption in Transmission Part (\(P_{send}\))
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Polling Technique**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Deep Sleep Technique**} \\ \hline
**Round** & **15 s** & **30 s** & **60 s** & **90 s** & **120 s** & **150 s** & **15 s** & **30 s** & **60 s** & **90 s** & **120 s** & **150 s** \\ \hline
1 & 5.92 & 5.30 & 4.44 & 4.01 & 3.95 & 4.00 & 5.67 & 4.79 & 4.36 & 3.33 & 3.42 & 3.31 \\
2 & 5.90 & 5.37 & 4.42 & 3.93 & 3.98 & 3.88 & 5.62 & 4.77 & 4.43 & 3.38 & 3.18 & 3.19 \\
3 & 5.94 & 5.34 & 4.43 & 4.02 & 3.91 & 3.89 & 5.66 & 4.75 & 4.42 & 3.41 & 3.31 & 3.20 \\
4 & 5.93 & 5.25 & 4.45 & 3.97 & 3.95 & 3.82 & 5.71 & 4.75 & 4.38 & 3.40 & 3.42 & 3.34 \\
5 & 5.94 & 5.31 & 4.45 & 3.98 & 3.94 & 3.74 & 5.64 & 4.77 & 4.40 & 3.48 & 3.32 & 3.29 \\
6 & 5.93 & 5.21 & 4.49 & 3.99 & 3.94 & 3.82 & 5.61 & 4.74 & 4.40 & 3.42 & 3.54 & 3.13 \\
7 & 5.89 & 4.79 & 4.42 & 3.95 & 3.95 & 3.71 & 5.69 & 5.33 & 4.38 & 3.39 & 3.41 & 3.11 \\
8 & 5.92 & 5.25 & 4.41 & 3.93 & 3.94 & 3.94 & 5.57 & 4.82 & 4.42 & 3.40 & 3.47 & 3.09 \\
9 & 5.93 & 5.32 & 4.42 & 3.97 & 3.93 & 3.80 & 5.67 & 4.70 & 4.35 & 3.34 & 3.33 & 3.16 \\
10 & 5.91 & 5.38 & 4.42 & 3.98 & 3.97 & 3.71 & 5.56 & 4.79 & 4.37 & 3.40 & 3.26 & 3.17 \\ \hline mean & 5.92 & 5.31 & 4.43 & 3.97 & 3.95 & 3.83 & 5.64 & 4.77 & 4.39 & 3.40 & 3.37 & 3.20 \\ s.d. & 0.014 & 0.054 & 0.023 & 0.028 & 0.018 & 0.096 & 0.048 & 0.033 & 0.024 & 0.041 & 0.106 & 0.089 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Comparison of current consumption (A) of 40 times per round analysis is crucial for optimizing energy consumption during idle periods in system design, highlighting the deep sleep technique as a potentially superior approach for minimizing power usage. The bar chart in Figure 7 compares the average current consumption of the polling technique and the deep sleep technique across various time intervals (15, 30, 60, 100, 120, and 150 s). The polling technique consistently shows higher average current consumption, starting near 6 A at 15 s and decreasing to around 3.8 A at 150 s. In contrast, the deep sleep technique demonstrates lower average current consumption, beginning at approximately 5.6 A at 15 s (4.73%) and reducing to about 3.2 A at 150 s (16.45%). The error bars, indicating variability, are relatively small for both techniques, suggesting consistent measurements. overall, the deep sleep technique appears more energy-efficient than the polling technique. We also confirm the experimental result in Table 4 with the statistical method. The normality tests (Shapiro-Wilk) for the polling technique (\(W=0.7893\), \(p\approx 0.0000\)) and the deep sleep technique (\(W=0.8189\), \(p\approx 0.0000\)) yielded \(p\)-values significantly less than 0.05, indicating that neither variable follows a normal distribution. Given this non-normality, a one-tailed Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare the distributions of the two variables. The test result showed a U statistic of 2291.0 and a \(p\)-value of 0.0050, leading to rejecting the null hypothesis. This indicates that significant evidence supports the claim that the polling technique is superior to the deep sleep technique.