Cited by 53Smart Agriculture and AIIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingInternet of Things and AI

TinyML Smart Sensor for Energy Saving in Internet of Things Precision Agriculture platform

Nicolas, Chollet, Naila, Bouchemal, Amar, Ramdane-Cherif·2022·2022 Thirteenth International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN)

Abstract

Smart agriculture researchers bring numerous tools and prospects to the farm ecosystem to improve its productivity and, mainly, its sustainability. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is widely used in precision agriculture as Internet of Things (IoT) technologies have brought a huge volume of data to exploit to provide useful insights for farmers such as weather prediction, pest development detection, or harvest time estimation. AI algorithms are mostly executed in the cloud due to their inherent computing constraints, thus requiring the different sensors to offload their data to the appropriate server. Depending on the amount and volume of data exchanged, the need for computer offloading may induce privacy, security, and latency issues in addition to weighting on the sensor’s battery consumption as wireless transmission methods have a high-energy demand. To overcome this difficulty, recent research has tried to bring AI computation closer to the end device with edge or fog computing and more recently with the Tiny Machine Learning (TinyML) paradigm that aims to embed the AI algorithm directly into the sensor’s microcontroller. In that context, this paper proposes a prototype of smart sensor capable of detecting fruits presence with TinyML. We then study the energy consumption of our system in different IoT scenarios.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icufn55119.2022.9829675

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The final model utilized in the soundscape monitoring system was a CNN based on mel-frequency cepstral coefficients, with an accuracy of 81.6%.

    “The final model utilized in the system was a CNN based on mel-frequency cepstral coefficients (MFCCs), with an accuracy of 81.6%.”

    From A Comprehensive Survey on TinyML (2023) · cites this paper as [94]

  • The soundscape monitoring system's machine learning algorithms were able to identify noises into four categories: anthrophony, traffic, biophony, and geophony.

    “The system's machine learning algorithms were able to identify noises into four categories: anthrophony (human sounds), traffic, biophony (animal sounds), and geophony (environmental sounds).”

    From A Comprehensive Survey on TinyML (2023) · cites this paper as [94]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 13 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Nicolas, C., Naila, B., & Amar, R.-C.
Affiliations
  • ECE, LISV,Paris,France
  • ECE,Paris,France
  • LISV,Versailles,France
Venue
2022 Thirteenth International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (ICUFN)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2022-07-05
Pages
256-259
OpenAlex
W4286248462
Cited by
53
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 2
FWCI
19.05
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Conference on Ubiquitous and Future Networks (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › IoT and Edge/Fog Computing
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Internet of Things and AI
Keywords
TinyML, smart sensors, precision agriculture, Internet of Things, energy conservation, edge computing, microcontroller, fruit detection, energy consumption, on-device AI

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review