ArticleScientific reports2026
Fuzzy multi-criteria selection of sensor architectures for coastal pollution monitoring.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper evaluates five sensor network architectures for coastal marine pollution monitoring using a fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making framework. Thirty domain experts assessed the alternatives against five criteria (detection performance, spatial coverage, life-cycle cost, energy demand, and robustness) using linguistic ratings, which were converted into triangular fuzzy numbers. A fuzzy decision matrix and the corresponding criterion weights were derived and analysed using Fuzzy TOPSIS. Spatial coverage (w = 0.26) and detection performance (w = 0.24) emerged as the most influential criteria. The glider-satellite architecture achieved the highest closeness coefficient (CC = 0.76), followed by a combined HF radar-innovative mooring system (CC = 0.71); the IoT node grid, fixed buoy network, and vessel-based system obtained coefficients of 0.63, 0.58, and 0.49, respectively. Sensitivity tests across multiple weight scenarios and a robustness check confirm that the top-ranked option is stable under plausible shifts in decision priorities. Methodologically, this study does not propose a new mathematical decision algorithm. Instead, it contributes a rigorously structured decision-support workflow that integrates established techniques, structured expert elicitation with consistency screening, fuzzy aggregation, and multi-scenario weight-sensitivity into a single, replicable pipeline tailored to the selection of coastal pollution monitoring architectures. The methodological contribution, therefore, lies in the systematic integration, operationalisation, and application of these components, rather than in modifying the underlying Fuzzy TOPSIS formulation. For decision-makers, the study clarifies which criteria drive architecture choice, when lower-cost opportunistic or IoT-grid options become competitive, and how to assemble hybrid monitoring designs that combine wide-area coverage with reliable detection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.