X-Git-Url: https://bilbo.iut-bm.univ-fcomte.fr/and/gitweb/LiCO.git/blobdiff_plain/69295a437968b7724acd8bc875a6b8943817854a..6e67cd1710fa21d39721677080e1e5578f04431b:/PeCO-EO/articleeo.tex~ diff --git a/PeCO-EO/articleeo.tex~ b/PeCO-EO/articleeo.tex~ index 45982a2..0acbf9b 100644 --- a/PeCO-EO/articleeo.tex~ +++ b/PeCO-EO/articleeo.tex~ @@ -833,7 +833,7 @@ Figure \ref{fig333}. \begin{figure}[h!] \centering -\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{R/ASR.eps} +\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figure6.eps} \caption{Active sensors ratio for 200 deployed nodes.} \label{fig444} \end{figure} @@ -856,8 +856,8 @@ while keeping a good coverage level. \begin{figure}[h!] \centering \begin{tabular}{@{}cr@{}} - \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{R/EC95.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(a)} \\ - \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{R/EC50.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(b)} + \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{figure7a.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(a)} \\ + \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{figure7b.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(b)} \end{tabular} \caption{Energy consumption per period for (a)~$Lifetime_{95}$ and (b)~$Lifetime_{50}$.} \label{fig3EC} @@ -888,8 +888,8 @@ Figure~\ref{fig3LT}(a) because the gain induced by our protocols increases with \begin{figure}[h!] \centering \begin{tabular}{@{}cr@{}} - \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{R/LT95.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(a)} \\ - \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{R/LT50.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(b)} + \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{figure8a.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(a)} \\ + \includegraphics[scale=0.475]{figure8b.eps} & \raisebox{2.75cm}{(b)} \end{tabular} \caption{Network Lifetime for (a)~$Lifetime_{95}$ \\ and (b)~$Lifetime_{50}$.} @@ -911,7 +911,7 @@ size. DiLCO is better for coverage ratios near 100\%, but in that case PeCO is not ineffective for the smallest network sizes. \begin{figure}[h!] -\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{R/LTa.eps} +\centering \includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figure9.eps} \caption{Network lifetime for different coverage ratios.} \label{figLTALL} \end{figure}