Existing systems
In this section of the survey, we queried participants about their current systems. This encompassed inquiries regarding their deployed sensors, monitoring methods for sensor health, event detection protocols, response procedures to those events, as well as questions related to delays in data acquisition.
research

Overview of sensor information

This section provides an overview of the sensors deployed across various sites



Energy sources by observatory

The participants were asked in this part of the survey to indicate the percentage of energy sources used to power the sensors in their observatories.





Communication techniques by observatory

In this question, we asked the participants to indicate the communication techniques used by the sensors on their site.





IT infrastructure in situ

We asked participants in this question to indicate whether they have any sort of IT infrastructure in situ. This includes any sort of computer, single board computer, proprietary data logger, or other device that is used to collect data in situ.





Number of sensors per site

Here we ask about the approximate number of sensors per site. This is a rough estimate, and we are not asking for an exact number.





Usage of data by operational players

The participants where asked if the data collected by their sites wereused by any operational players such as "vigilance crue".




Event detection

Several observatories are actively monitoring environmental events, including floods, heatwaves, and low-water situations. In this section, we inquired whether participants possess automated means of detecting such events and, if so, what types of systems they employ for this purpose.



Automated event detection

This graph shows the percentage of sites where events are detected automatically.




Event response

Upon detecting an event, certain sites may seek to respond by initiating specific actions. This could involve activating or deactivating a additional sensors, adjusting measurement frequencies, or issuing alerts to relevant individuals.



Automated event response

This graph shows the percentage of systems that have an automated event response system.




Pre processing

Sites often engage in data processing before transmitting it to the laboratory. This processing typically aims to minimize the time between data collection and publication or to reduce the volume of data for transmission. The upcoming graphs illustrate the responses to inquiries about the current pre-processing practices at today's sites.



In situ pre-processing

In this question, we ask the participants if they perform any sort of pre-processing to the data in situ before sending it the laboratory.





What happens to invalid data?

This pie chart shows the percentage of sites where invalid data is classified or deleted.





Data transmission delays per observatory

The data transmission delays in days per site are shown in the graph below. The minimal and maximal delays are represented by the boxes.





Data publication delays per observatory

The data publication delays in hours per site are shown in the graph below. The minimal and maximal delays are represented by the boxes. The sites that do not publish their data are not shown in the graph.




Health monitoring

Sensors may occasionally produce inaccurate measurements, necessitating the identification and replacement of faulty units when such instances occur frequently. In this survey section, participants were queried about their methods for detecting and addressing corrupted sensors



Automated defective sensor detection

This graph shows the number of sensors that have an automated defective sensor detection system.