# Resource Management and Secure Data Exchange for Mobile Sensors Using Ethereum Blockchain
## 5 Results
### Accomplished Result  
As discussed in the previous subsection, the final result is obtained after the complete saturation point of energy of all the sensors. The outcome of the proposed model is compared with some of the recently established works conducted by [PERSON] et al. [28], [PERSON] et al. [29], [PERSON] et al. [37], [PERSON] et al. [48], [PERSON] et al. [38], [PERSON] et al. [49], [PERSON] et al. [39], [PERSON] et al. [43], [PERSON] et al. [44], [PERSON] et al. [45], [PERSON] et al. [46], and [PERSON] et al. [47]. The main reasons for comparing the existing approaches with the proposed study are as follows: (i) the stated approaches use blockchain for both resource management and accomplishing primary objectives of applications; (ii) the stated approaches also present some of the unique implementations towards lightweight security and efficient data transmission for all sensor-supported network environments; (iii) the stated approaches also present distinguished consensus methods of blockchain for secure storage of data in various large-scale and distributed environments; and (iv) the stated approaches have also been tested using varied ranges of attacks. The features stated show that the existing approaches are more suitable for a comparative analysis with the proposed scheme, thereby yielding a fair opportunity for assessment. However, the existing approaches have different implementation environments and environment use cases, posing a challenge in comparative analysis. Hence, a uniform testbed was constructed, where the core methods of blockchain, security features, and resource management of the existing approaches were compared with the proposed study model. Table 4 shows the numerical outcomes obtained when the proposed and existing studies were assessed using a common testbed and a standard \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline
**Parameter** & **Values** \\ \hline Area of simulation & \(900\times 1100\) m\({}^{2}\) \\ No. of Mobile Sensors & 500 \\ Velocity of Mobile Sensors (Variable) & 5–10 m/s \\ Transmittance power & 15 dBm \\ Block size & 2000 kilobytes \\ Channel capacity of mobile sensor & 1000 bps \\ Channel capacity of AP & 2000 bps \\ Channel capacity of GN & 4000 bps \\ Initialized energy for Sensors & 10 J \\ Energy assigned to transmit 1 byte of data & 50 nj \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Simulation parameters. performance metric. Although various studies have been implemented and discussed in Section 2 regarding IoT security and blockchains, they are yet to be tested in a dynamic environment. Hence, the prime novelty of the result accomplishment is associated with better performance towards data delivery services in IoT, along with minimal complexity involvement in the proposed scheme. Furthermore, benchmarking has been carried out extensively, considering multiple performance metrics concerning all major existing methods in IoT security. A simulation environment was subjected to various traffic loads and attack scenarios to assess the robustness and seamless communication capability of the proposed system. The proposed scheme considers the standard performance metrics of validation time, latency, throughput, overhead, cost, and processing time, as listed in Table 4. To simplify the learning outcome of the simulation study, the intermediate numerical values were averaged, and the final mean score was presented. The numerical and graphical outcomes (Figures 6-11) exhibit better performance of the proposed model than the existing models.