Multi-criteria assessment of wireless communication options for subaquatic pollution detection

Effective underwater pollution monitoring depends on reliable wireless communication technologies capable of transmitting data in challenging aquatic environments. This study evaluates three communication technologies, acoustic, optical, and radio frequency (RF), using input from 35 experts across five criteria: data rate, power efficiency, range, cost, and environmental impact. Results show that acoustic communication is the top choice, excelling in range and energy efficiency. RF ranks second for its balanced performance and cost-effectiveness, while optical communication scores lowest due to limited range and adaptability. The study highlights the usefulness of multi-criteria decision-making for selecting technologies for marine environmental monitoring, while noting limitations, such as subjective inputs and context-specific findings.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Water Science
Published
2026-02-04
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-026-02772-7
Primary Topic
Underwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Multi-criteria assessment of wireless communication options for subaquatic pollution detection

Jianyong Yu, Abeer Ali Alnuaim, Kai Jin, M. Mehdi Shafieezadeh et al.
Applied Water Science
Underwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
article

Multi-criteria assessment of wireless communication options for subaquatic pollution detection

Jianyong Yu, Abeer Ali Alnuaim, Kai Jin, M. Mehdi Shafieezadeh, Jong Hyuk Park, Amr Tolba
article en

Abstract

Effective underwater pollution monitoring depends on reliable wireless communication technologies capable of transmitting data in challenging aquatic environments. This study evaluates three communication technologies, acoustic, optical, and radio frequency (RF), using input from 35 experts across five criteria: data rate, power efficiency, range, cost, and environmental impact. Results show that acoustic communication is the top choice, excelling in range and energy efficiency. RF ranks second for its balanced performance and cost-effectiveness, while optical communication scores lowest due to limited range and adaptability. The study highlights the usefulness of multi-criteria decision-making for selecting technologies for marine environmental monitoring, while noting limitations, such as subjective inputs and context-specific findings.

Applied Water ScienceVol. 16(3)
Seoul National University of Science and Technology (KR), Ningxia University (CN), King Saud University (SA), Ningxia Seismological Bureau (CN), Sanya University (CN)
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 67%
Underwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Multi-criteria assessment of wireless communication options for subaquatic pollution detection — Jianyong Yu, Abeer Ali Alnuaim, et al. · Applied Water Science (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS