Identification of Deadliest Mosquitoes Using Wing Beats Sound Classification on Tiny Embedded System Using Machine Learning and Edge Impulse Platform
Abstract
Mosquitoes are the deadliest animal on the planet, infecting about 700 million people each year and causing over one million deaths, accounting for 17% of all infectious illnesses worldwide. We are still fighting the three most deadly mosquito species, Anopheles, Aedes, and Culex, 124 years after Sir Ronald Ross made the first pivotal discovery. Mosquitoes are difficult to detect manually since they are small and fly rapidly. The auditory categorization of mosquito wing beats may be used to detect them using machine learning. This article discusses an Arduino Nano BLE 33 Sense-based prototype that collects audio data from mosquito wing beats and utilizes TinyML to automatically classify mosquito species. With 88.3% accuracy, the TinyML system developed by Edge Impulse based on the HumBug project mosquito wing beats dataset recognizes mosquito types. To conduct this research, the frequency of mosquito wing beats was graphically represented as a feature using a spectrogram. Furthermore, live mosquito detection studies using the low-cost Arduino Nano BLE 33 Sense yielded excellent results. During testing, the model had an accuracy of 88.3% and a loss of 0.26. The use of machine learning to solve the challenge of manual mosquito type identification is efficient and has the potential to have a large impact on vector-borne illness management. The model may still be fine-tuned to get more accurate results with reduced latency. In addition, the deployment went as expected.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
[107] obtained an accuracy ranging from 53.6% to 69.9% for emotion recognition.
“After deploying the data collect by sensors on trained ML models, [107] obtained an accuracy that ranges from 53.6% to 69.9%, in contrast, [106] achieved an accuracy of 69% to 73.08%”
From A Comprehensive Survey on TinyML (2023) · cites this paper as [107]
Cites
Hawkins, D. M. (2004) · Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · doi:10.1021/ci0342472 · Cited by 2,522 · see citing works
Emergency department management of mosquito-borne illness: malaria, dengue, and West Nile virus.
Caraballo, H., & King, K. (2014) · PubMed · Cited by 291 · see citing works
Using mobile phones as acoustic sensors for high-throughput mosquito surveillance
Mukundarajan, H., Hol, F. J. H., Castillo, E. A., Newby, C., & Prakash, M. (2017) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.27854 · Cited by 127 · see citing works
Detecting Aedes aegypti mosquitoes through audio classification with convolutional neural networks
Fernandes, M. S., Cordeiro, W., & Recamonde-Mendoza, M. (2021) · Computers in Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.104152 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Anopheles mosquito transmission of brain tumor
Lehrer, S. P. (2009) · Medical Hypotheses · doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.005 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Demonstration of Venezuelan Equine Encephalomyelitis Virus in Tissues of Aedes Aegypti
Larsen, J. R., & Ashley, R. F. (1971) · American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · doi:10.4269/ajtmh.1971.20.754 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Comprehensive Survey on TinyML
Abadade, Y., Temouden, A., Bamoumen, H., Benamar, N., Chtouki, Y., & Hafid, A. S. (2023) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3294111 · Cited by 366 · see citing works
“The model of [107] achieves an accuracy of 88.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialHeydari, S., & Mahmoud, Q. H. (2025) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s25103191 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Prakash, S., Stewart, M. P., Banbury, C., Mazumder, M., Warden, P., Plancher, B., & Reddi, V. J. (2023) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/3608473 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Automatic synthesis of insects bioacoustics using machine learning: a systematic review
Kyalo, H., Tonnang, H. E. Z., Egonyu, J. P., Olukuru, J., Tanga, C. M., & Senagi, K. (2025) · International Journal of Tropical Insect Science · doi:10.1007/s42690-024-01406-2 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Classifying mosquito wingbeat sound using TinyML
Altayeb, M., Zennaro, M., & Rovai, M. J. (2022) · International Conference on Information Technology for Social Good (GoodIT) · doi:10.1145/3524458.3547258 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Huang, M., & Garcia, A. (2023) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app132011379 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
A low-cost TinyML model for Mosquito Detection in Resource-Constrained Environments
Kimutai, G., & Förster, A. (2023) · International Conference on Information Technology for Social Good (GoodIT) · doi:10.1145/3582515.3609514 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Retracted: Mosquito Type Identification using Convolution Neural Network
Kumar, V. S., Prasad, V. V., Kunaisa, K., Swain, M. P., Anandaram, H., & Kumar, A. (2022) · International Conference on Smart Electronics and Communication (ICOSEC) · doi:10.1109/icosec54921.2022.9951979 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
RetractedGuzmán-Quezada, E., Mancilla-Jiménez, C., Rosas-Agraz, F., Romo‐Vázquez, R., & Vélez-Pérez, H. A. (2024) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s24113264 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Morgan, O., Kayan, H., & Perera, C. (2022) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI) · doi:10.1109/iotdi54339.2022.00022 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Dehnaw, A. M., Lu, Y.-J., Shih, J.-H., Yao, C.-K., Bitew, M. A., & Peng, P. (2024) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr12122638 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
An autonomous robot for removing Underwater pollution : OCTACLEANER
Reddy, A. N. N., Pavani, D., Rakshitha, B. S., & Saw, N. (2023) · IEEE International Conference on Technology, Engineering, Management for Societal Impact using Marketing, Entrepreneurship and Talent (TEMSMET) · doi:10.1109/temsmet56707.2023.10150012 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Mosquitoes Species Classification Using Acoustic Features of Wing Beats
Bilal, M., Rehman, A. U., & Razzaq, S. (2023) · International Conference on Communication Technologies (ComTech) · doi:10.1109/comtech57708.2023.10165480 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Emerging application use cases and future directions
Ghorpade, S. N., & Chougule, S. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-44-322202-3.00024-5 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Yarham, S., Behjati, M., & Nordin, R. (2025) · International Conference on Computer, Internet of Things and Smart City (CIoTSC) · doi:10.1109/ciotsc67482.2025.11413126 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Hybrid Machine Learning Approach using Wingbeat Frequencies for Mosquito Species Classification
Chaudhari, S. S., Kulkarni, P., Vadivel, K. S., & Latha Kamatchi, S. (2025) · IEEE International Conference on Communication Systems and Network Technologies (CSNT) · doi:10.1109/csnt64827.2025.10968635 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Accurate Acoustic Based Deep Learning Model for Mosquitoes Species ClassificationPreprint
Bilal, M., Rehman, A. U., Rafique, W., & Fernández-Reyes, D. (2023) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3247762/v1 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
(2021) · ITU Kaleidoscope Academic Conference (ITU K) · doi:10.23919/ituk53220.2021.9662099
Field Monitoring and Insect Detection
Praneesha, D., Hemanth, I., Charan, R., & Thangam, S. (2024) · IEEE International Conference on Data, Decision and Systems (ICDDS) · doi:10.1109/icdds62937.2024.10910327
Machine Learning Models of Sounds to Predict Textural Attributes of Snack ChipsPreprint
Serrano, T., & KERR, W. L. (2025) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-6514631/v1
A Parameter-Efficient Cascaded Framework for Mosquito Species Identification using MFCC Features
Kiriwanna, N., Nukoolkit, C., & Triyason, T. (2026) · doi:10.1145/3816713.3818800
- Authors
- Trivedi, K., & Shroff, H.
- Venue
- 2021 ITU Kaleidoscope: Connecting Physical and Virtual Worlds (ITU K)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2021-12-06
- Pages
- 1-6
- OpenAlex
- W4206324076
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 2.28
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- ITU Kaleidoscope Academic Conference (ITU K) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Signal Processing › Music and Audio Processing
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Arduino and IoT Applications
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
- Keywords
- mosquito detection, mosquito taxonomy, acoustic classification, TinyML, Edge Impulse, spectrogram features, Anopheles, Aedes, Culex, vector-borne diseases, low-cost hardware
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
