Automated Water Quality Survey and Evaluation Using an IoT Platform with Mobile Sensor Nodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Internet of Things (IoT) platform with capabilities of sensing, data processing, and wireless communication has been deployed to support remote aquatic environmental monitoring. In this paper, the design and development of an IoT platform with multiple Mobile Sensor Nodes (MSN) for the spatiotemporal quality evaluation of surface water is presented. A survey planner is proposed to distribute the Sampling Locations of Interest (SLoIs) over the study area and generate paths for MSNs to visit the SLoIs, given the limited energy and time budgets. The SLoIs are chosen based on a cellular decomposition that is composed of uniform hexagonal cells. They are visited by the MSNs along a path ring generated by a planning approach that uses a spanning tree. For quality evaluation, an Online Water Quality Index (OLWQI) is developed to interpret the large quantities of online measurements. The index formulations are modified by a state-of-the-art index, the CCME WQI, which has been developed by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment (CCME) for off-line indexing. The proposed index has demonstrated effective and reliable performance in online indexing a large volume of measurements of water quality parameters. The IoT platform is deployed in the field, and its performance is demonstrated and discussed in this paper.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".