Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 30;20(9):2566. doi: 10.3390/s20092566

Table 7.

Comparison between the coverage values obtained by the non-collaborative approaches (CACOC0 and CACOC) and ABISS in case studies having unreachable zones (mean of 30 scenarios). The improvements achieved by ABISS with respect to CACOC0 and CACOC are also reported. The second best configuration values are indicated by asterisks. The best results are in bold.

Case Study Coverages (%)
CACOC0 CACOC ABISS
Total UZ Total UZ Total Improvement vs. UZ Improvement vs.
CACOC0 CACOC CACOC0 CACOC
50x50.2z1 76.4 50.5 80.4 58.1 84.6 +10.7% + 5.2% 70.1 +38.8% + 20.7%
50x50.4z1 89.9 70.9 93.0 83.9 94.4 + 5.0% + 1.5% 88.8 +25.2% +5.8%
100x100.4z1 51.2 12.9 59.8 36.6 62.9 + 22.9% + 5.2% 39.6 + 207.0% + 8.2%
100x100.4z2 47.8 38.3 56.6 57.2 62.9 + 31.6% + 11.1% 67.1 + 75.2% + 17.3%
100x100.4z3 50.4 24.6 57.2 36.7 61.8 + 22.6% + 8.0% 51.5 + 109.3% + 40.3%
100x100.6z1 64.0 25.7 71.9 41.0 76.1 + 18.9% + 5.8% 55.4 + 115.6% + 35.1%
100x100.6z2 62.2 48.5 70.1 71.8 76.4 + 22.8% + 9.0% 77.3 + 59.4% + 7.7%
100x100.6z3 63.7 39.6 75.4 67.4 * 75.3 + 18.2% −0.1% * 65.8 + 66.2% −2.4%
Mean: 63.2 38.9 70.6 56.6 74.3 17.6% 5.3% 64.5 65.8% 13.9%