Data-Driven Calibration and Reference-Free Drift Detection for Multi-Modal Sensor Systems

Low-cost multi-modal sensors make high-resolution exposomic and urban-health monitoring affordable, but their data are only as useful as they are trustworthy. Measurement bias, cross-sensitivity, temporal drift and domain shift between devices and sites erode reliability, and reference instruments are rarely available for every sensor. We present a two-part reliability workflow for this realistic setting, in which reference data exist for only a subset of sensors, and evaluate it on five custom multi-modal devices deployed at two Brussels sites (9 to 68 days of data per device). For calibration, we benchmark Multiple Linear Regression, Elastic Net, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting and a Domain Adversarial Neural Network (DANN) for O3, NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 on the source device and on other devices at the same site and at the other site using MAE, RMSE, R2, bias, device-balanced aggregation and block-bootstrap intervals. Tree ensembles achieve the lowest source-device errors for most pollutants, yet for PM10, they lose their advantage over the uncalibrated sensor when transferred, a caution for any deployment that calibrates on one unit. DANN attains the highest mean Calibration Transfer Ratio in the transfer settings, although with the available device pairs, the differences are not statistically significant. For modalities without a reference, a cross-sensor residual monitor combined with statistical detectors reliably flags injected gradual drift in sensors that can be reconstructed from the others (UV bands, PM1, temperature, humidity and CO), while Lux, pressure and VOC remain harder. The monitor detects cross-sensor inconsistency rather than isolating the faulty sensor, and the results reflect an injected fault model, not real sensor ageing. Together, these results give a transparent, reproducible baseline and clear practical guidance for building trustworthy low-cost sensor networks.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Sensors
Published
2026-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/s26217016
Primary Topic
Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
article

Data-Driven Calibration and Reference-Free Drift Detection for Multi-Modal Sensor Systems

Sujay Narayana, Ramjee Prasad, Bruno da Silva, Argha Sen et al.
1 links
Sensors
Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
article

Data-Driven Calibration and Reference-Free Drift Detection for Multi-Modal Sensor Systems

Sujay Narayana, Ramjee Prasad, Bruno da Silva, Argha Sen, Laurent Segers, Kishor Arvind Mohandas Sivakumar
article en

Abstract

Low-cost multi-modal sensors make high-resolution exposomic and urban-health monitoring affordable, but their data are only as useful as they are trustworthy. Measurement bias, cross-sensitivity, temporal drift and domain shift between devices and sites erode reliability, and reference instruments are rarely available for every sensor. We present a two-part reliability workflow for this realistic setting, in which reference data exist for only a subset of sensors, and evaluate it on five custom multi-modal devices deployed at two Brussels sites (9 to 68 days of data per device). For calibration, we benchmark Multiple Linear Regression, Elastic Net, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting and a Domain Adversarial Neural Network (DANN) for O3, NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 on the source device and on other devices at the same site and at the other site using MAE, RMSE, R2, bias, device-balanced aggregation and block-bootstrap intervals. Tree ensembles achieve the lowest source-device errors for most pollutants, yet for PM10, they lose their advantage over the uncalibrated sensor when transferred, a caution for any deployment that calibrates on one unit. DANN attains the highest mean Calibration Transfer Ratio in the transfer settings, although with the available device pairs, the differences are not statistically significant. For modalities without a reference, a cross-sensor residual monitor combined with statistical detectors reliably flags injected gradual drift in sensors that can be reconstructed from the others (UV bands, PM1, temperature, humidity and CO), while Lux, pressure and VOC remain harder. The monitor detects cross-sensor inconsistency rather than isolating the faulty sensor, and the results reflect an injected fault model, not real sensor ageing. Together, these results give a transparent, reproducible baseline and clear practical guidance for building trustworthy low-cost sensor networks.

SensorsVol. 26(21)
Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE), Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur (IN), Delft University of Technology (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Air Quality Monitoring and Forecasting
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.

Laika access coming soon