Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 149 references

A Survey of TinyML Applications in Beekeeping for Hive Monitoring and Management

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Beehive monitoring can be run with low-power, on-device machine learning rather than cloud processing.

desk verdict A useful survey whose ultra-low-power framing overreaches its SBC/GPU evidence base; the taxonomy and gap analysis hold up. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.08822 v1 pith:P2J4D7FU submitted 2025-09-10 cs.LG

Willy Sucipto , Jianlong Zhou , Ray Seung Min Kwon , Fang Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.LG
keywords TinyMLbeekeepinghivemonitoringedgemachinelearningswarmpredictionVarroadetectionsensorfusionprecisionapiculture
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This survey argues that TinyML—machine learning squeezed onto low-power edge devices—can make hive monitoring continuous, non-invasive, and practical in remote apiaries. It organizes the field into four functional areas: hive conditions, bee behavior, pests and diseases, and swarm forecasting, and shows that each has credible demonstrations using acoustic, visual, environmental, or chemical sensing. The paper also identifies the real bottleneck: datasets and benchmarks are fragmented, so results cannot be compared across studies or generalized across apiaries. If the central claim holds, the path to scalable AI-driven pollinator management is primarily a data-standardization problem, not an algorithmic feasibility problem.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is an end-to-end edge-computing pipeline: sensors embedded in or near the hive capture audio, images, vibration, temperature, humidity, weight, or volatile organic compounds; lightweight models are trained on those signals and then quantized, pruned, or distilled so they fit on microcontrollers or small edge accelerators; inference happens locally in real time, with only compact alerts or summaries transmitted over low-power links. The paper uses this pipeline to unify four functional areas—hive conditions, bee behavior, pest and disease detection, and swarm prediction—and treats it as the shared backbone of every successful demonstration it reviews.

What would settle it

Measure the average power draw during inference for every deployment the survey counts as TinyML. If a substantial share of the cited successes consume watts (single-board computers or desktop GPUs) rather than milliwatts (microcontrollers), then the 'ultra-low-power, edge-only' feasibility claim is not yet established for the devices TinyML promises.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that TinyML is a viable, scalable, and non-invasive alternative to both manual hive inspections and cloud-based monitoring. It synthesizes published work showing that lightweight models can classify bee behaviors, detect Varroa mites and other pests, flag disease via volatile organic compounds, and predict swarming events days or minutes ahead from acoustic, vibration, visual, temperature, humidity, weight, and gas signals. The authors conclude that the technology is mature enough for field deployments, and that remaining obstacles are data scarcity, inconsistent benchmarking, hardware trade-offs, and off-grid energy constraints rather than fundamental algorithmi

Load-bearing premise

The review's central claim relies on the assumption that the cited studies are genuinely TinyML deployments—low-power, on-device inference on resource-constrained hardware—but several demonstrated systems use single-board computers or GPUs that draw far more power than microcontrollers.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A beekeeper with a solar-powered microcontroller and a microphone could receive real-time swarm or queen-loss alerts without relying on internet connectivity.
  • Pest and disease detection can shift from destructive lab tests and manual comb inspection to passive sensing of visual, acoustic, or chemical cues.
  • The same TinyML pipeline will transfer across hives and regions only after datasets are standardized; otherwise models trained in one apiary will not generalize to another.
  • Standardized TinyML-specific benchmarks would let practitioners compare accuracy, latency, memory, and energy per inference across different sensing modalities and hardware.
  • Off-grid apiaries become addressable because local inference avoids constant cloud communication, with only small telemetry or event flags transmitted over low-power networks.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If data scarcity is truly the bottleneck, then a coordinated effort to label a few large, multimodal hive datasets would likely accelerate progress more than further model architecture design.
  • A testable extension: acoustic models trained on one apiary will show a sharp accuracy drop when tested on another apiary unless the training set includes broad environmental and seasonal variation; confirming this would validate the paper's generalization concern.
  • The same edge-monitoring pipeline could transfer to other managed pollinators or invasive-species surveillance, since the sensing modalities—audio, vibration, imaging, and volatile organic compounds—are not bee-specific.
  • Because some of the reviewed successes run on single-board computers or desktop-class GPUs, the 'ultra-low-power' framing may overstate true microcontroller readiness; a systematic power-budget audit of the cited systems would clarify which demonstrations genuinely belong to TinyML.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This survey reviews TinyML applications in beekeeping, organizing the literature around four functional areas: hive conditions, bee behavior, pest/disease detection, and swarm forecasting. It catalogs sensing modalities, ML models, public datasets, benchmark practices, hardware platforms, and deployment challenges, concluding that edge-deployable ML is a viable path for non-invasive hive monitoring and that the principal bottlenecks are dataset standardization and benchmarking rather than algorithmic feasibility.

Significance. The survey is timely and useful for an emerging applied field. Its strengths include honest limitation sections (e.g., §4.3), a useful dataset inventory (Table 2), an explicit disclaimer about the radar-style hardware comparison (Figure 6), and a clear articulation of the missing benchmark infrastructure. However, the central feasibility claim—that TinyML enables ultra-low-power real-time monitoring on edge devices—is not supported by the evidence as categorized, because the survey treats SBCs, GPUs, and desktop pipelines as TinyML deployments. If the scope definition is tightened and the claims are correspondingly tempered, this would be a valuable reference; in its current form it overreaches.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sections 1, 2.2, 5.1; Tables 3 and 4] The central claim—that TinyML delivers 'ultra-low power consumption' and 'ultra-efficient inference pipelines'—is not supported by the evidence as presented. Table 4 defines TinyML hardware to include SBCs (Raspberry Pi, Jetson), and Table 3 benchmarks YOLO variants on a GTX-980 GPU with Raspberry Pi as a secondary target (Kulyukin et al. [60]). Section 3.1 cites Ngo et al. [77] as a TinyML-style success although it runs YOLOv3-tiny on a Jetson TX2. Section 5.1 itself concedes that SBC power draw 'limits their use in battery-only apiaries,' and Section 4.3 concedes that most evaluations are desktop-class. The authors should impose an operational TinyML inclusion criterion (e.g., MCU/ULP-class power budget, on-device inference) and either reclassify SBC/GPU work as adjacent edge-ML or temper the abstract and conclusions to claim edge ML broadly.
  2. [Section 6.1, reference [14]] The BeeStar platform is presented as a practical example that 'demonstrates the feasibility of deploying TinyML for real-time hive monitoring at scale,' but the only citation is a company website, and the example is authored by a BeeSTAR-affiliated co-author. No accuracy, power, throughput, independent validation, or dataset is reported. In a survey, this is unsupported evidence. The passage should be removed, replaced with peer-reviewed examples, or accompanied by concrete data and a transparent conflict-of-interest statement.
  3. [Section 4; Tables 2 and 3] The survey does not report a systematic literature search or explicit inclusion/exclusion criteria, so the claims of 'comprehensive' and 'structured synthesis' cannot be checked for selection bias. This is especially consequential given the definitional ambiguity of the TinyML label: Table 2 mixes datasets with very different modalities, sizes, and availability, while Table 3 mixes GPU/desktop and edge hardware without a screening criterion for what counts as a TinyML evaluation. State the search method, time window, and inclusion rules, and use them to justify the tables.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2.3] The subsection on nano-enabled IoT sensors is forward-looking and contains no demonstrated TinyML deployment. It would fit better as a future-direction subsection, or it should be explicitly connected to the survey's TinyML scope.
  2. [Figure 6] The radar chart presents numerical scores (1–5) with no uncertainty or underlying data. Although the text disclaims that the scores are synthesized, the visual format suggests quantitative measurement. Consider qualitative labels or a tabular summary instead.
  3. [Table 2] NU-Hive's availability row is ambiguous: 'Public / Not available / Not available' for audio, temperature, and humidity. Please clarify whether the full multimodal dataset is public or only the audio subset, and if so, which subset.
  4. [Table 5] In the 'Chemical VOC-based' row, Rigakis [102] is cited for VOC monitoring, but reference [102] describes a multisensory device and time-series prediction, not a VOC study. Also, the 'Integrated Multi-modal' row lists generic model classes without a specific example study; either add citations or remove the row.
  5. [References / throughout] Several references are malformed or contain typos, e.g., reference [7] has a garbled author list, reference [36] reads 'Colonie' instead of 'Colony,' and reference [48] is a Kaggle dataset without an access date or version. A careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the survey is a self-contained synthesis of external benchmarks, with only a minor non-load-bearing self-promotional example.

full rationale

This is a survey paper, not a derivation. It does not fit parameters, make predictions, or invoke uniqueness theorems. The central claim—that TinyML enables low-power, on-device hive monitoring—is supported by citations to external studies with reported accuracies (e.g., Kim et al. 91.93%, Kulyukin et al. 99.93%, Iqbal et al. 99%, Ngo et al. F1=0.94). These benchmarks anchor the synthesis independently of the authors' own work. The only self-referential item is the BeeStar example in Section 6.1, citing the company website [14] of an affiliated author; it is presented as 'a practical example' and is not load-bearing for any conclusion. Section 5.1 itself acknowledges that SBCs such as Raspberry Pi/Jetson have 'high power draw, which limits their use in battery-only apiaries,' and Section 4.3 concedes that most benchmarking is 'desktop-class' rather than TinyML-specific. These are honest limitations; they weaken the abstract's broad low-power framing but are not circular reasoning. The tension between the paper's ultra-low-power definition of TinyML and its inclusion of SBC/GPU platforms is an inclusion-criteria inconsistency, not a self-definitional derivation. No quoted equation or construction reduces a claimed result to its input, so no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

A survey adds no free parameters and no invented entities. The load-bearing inputs are the reliability of the cited literature and the operational definition of TinyML used to include studies; the latter is stretched to fit SBC-class hardware.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The surveyed primary studies are accurately characterized and their reported accuracies are trustworthy.
    The survey's conclusions about feasibility of TinyML depend on the correctness of the numbers and methods it cites (e.g., Sections 3.1-3.3, Table 3).
  • ad hoc to paper TinyML can be defined broadly enough to include single-board computers and edge accelerators, not only MCU-class devices.
    Section 5.1 and Table 4 group MCUs, SBCs (Raspberry Pi, Jetson), and AI accelerators under the TinyML umbrella, while the introduction defines TinyML as ultra-low-power; this conflation is unflagged.
  • domain assumption The BeeStar platform is a valid demonstrative example of TinyML in beekeeping.
    Section 6.1 cites only the company website [14] and is co-authored by a BeeSTAR-affiliated author; no independent evaluation is presented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Survey of TinyML Applications in Beekeeping for Hive Monitoring and Management." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P2J4D7FU

@misc{pith2026250908822,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Survey of TinyML Applications in Beekeeping for Hive Monitoring and Management},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P2J4D7FU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.08822}
}
read the original abstract

Honey bee colonies are essential for global food security and ecosystem stability, yet they face escalating threats from pests, diseases, and environmental stressors. Traditional hive inspections are labor-intensive and disruptive, while cloud-based monitoring solutions remain impractical for remote or resource-limited apiaries. Recent advances in Internet of Things (IoT) and Tiny Machine Learning (TinyML) enable low-power, real-time monitoring directly on edge devices, offering scalable and non-invasive alternatives. This survey synthesizes current innovations at the intersection of TinyML and apiculture, organized around four key functional areas: monitoring hive conditions, recognizing bee behaviors, detecting pests and diseases, and forecasting swarming events. We further examine supporting resources, including publicly available datasets, lightweight model architectures optimized for embedded deployment, and benchmarking strategies tailored to field constraints. Critical limitations such as data scarcity, generalization challenges, and deployment barriers in off-grid environments are highlighted, alongside emerging opportunities in ultra-efficient inference pipelines, adaptive edge learning, and dataset standardization. By consolidating research and engineering practices, this work provides a foundation for scalable, AI-driven, and ecologically informed monitoring systems to support sustainable pollinator management.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.08822 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Manual hive inspections are essential but limited in detecting early signs of stress, underscoring the need [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. System overview of TinyML-enabled hive monitoring, integrating local inference from in-hive sensors with optional low-power data transmission to support real-time beekeeper insights. These nano-sensors are capable of detecting volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that signal subtle hive disturbances, including queen pheromone imbalances, pathogen activity, or poor ventilation. Recent studies have highlighted the diagno… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. TinyML workflow for hive monitoring applications, illustrating key stages from data preparation and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A CNN-based image classification pipeline used for identifying bee health status. The model takes bee images as input and classifies them into categories such as pollen-bearing, Varroa-infected, or healthy, supporting automated monitoring and early detection of threats…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Pipeline for swarm behavior detection using acoustic data: audio signals are collected via microphones, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Radar comparison of hardware categories for TinyML in beekeeping (scores 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Per-modality dataset composition (percent shares within each modality) based on datasets listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

149 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [77]

    Thi Nha Ngo, Dan Jeric, Arcega Rustia, En-Cheng Yang, and Ta-Te Lin. 2021. Automated monitoring and analyses of honey bee pollen foraging behavior using a deep learning -based imaging system. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 187 (2021), 106239. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2021.106239

    arXiv 2021

  2. [60]

    Kulyukin and Aleksey V

    Vladimir A. Kulyukin and Aleksey V. Kulyukin. 2023. Accuracy vs. Energy: An Assessment of Bee Object Inference in Videos from On -Hive Video Loggers with YOLOv3, YOLOv4 -Tiny, and YOLOv7 -Tiny. Sensors 23, 15 (8 2023). doi:10.3390/s23156791

    work page doi:10.3390/s23156791 2023

  3. [1]

    Biosecurity Code of Practice VERSION 1 Nationally endorsed by industry Biosecurity Code of Practice

    2016. Biosecurity Code of Practice VERSION 1 Nationally endorsed by industry Biosecurity Code of Practice . Technical Report

    2016

  4. [2]

    Youssef Abadade, Anas Temouden, Hatim Bamoumen, Nabil Benamar, Yousra Chtouki, and Abdelhakim Senhaji Hafid

  5. [3]

    Haron M Abdel -Raziq, Daniel M Palmer, Phoebe A Koenig, Alyosha C Molnar, and Kirstin H Petersen. 2021. System design for inferring colony -level pollination activity through miniature bee -mounted sensors. Scientific Reports 11 (2021), 4239. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82537-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-021-82537-1 2021

  6. [4]

    Mahsa Abdollahi, Pierre Giovenazzo, and Tiago H. Falk. 2022. Automated Beehive Acoustics Monitoring: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature and Recommendations for Future Work. Applied Sciences (Switzerland) 12, 8 (4 2022). doi:10.3390/app12083920

    work page doi:10.3390/app12083920 2022

  7. [5]

    Guimarães, Nico Coallier, Ségolène Maucourt, Pierre Giovenazzo, and Tiago H

    Mahsa Abdollahi, Yi Zhu, Heitor R. Guimarães, Nico Coallier, Ségolène Maucourt, Pierre Giovenazzo, and Tiago H. Falk. 2024. UrBAN: Urban Beehive Acoustics and PheNotyping Dataset. Scientific Data (6 2024). doi:10.1038/s41597025-04869-1 26 , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication date: September 2025

    work page doi:10.1038/s41597025-04869-1 2024

  8. [6]

    H. F. Abou-Shaara, A. A. Owayss, Y . Y . Ibrahim, and N. K. Basuny. 2017. A review of impacts of temperature and relative humidity on various activities of honey bees. Insectes Sociaux 64, 4 (11 2017), 455 –463. doi:10.1007/s00040-017- 0573-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s00040-017- 2017

Show all 149 references
  1. [7]

    N P ; F ; Addeo, F ; Lazzari, F ; Manganello, F Bovera, Pier Paolo Danieli, Nicola Francesco Addeo, Filippo Lazzari, Federico Manganello, and Fulvia Bovera. 2024. Precision Beekeeping Systems: State of the Art, Pros and Cons, and Their Application as Tools for Advancing the Be...

    2024 doi

  2. [9]

    A.A.Che Ali, B

    M. A.A.Che Ali, B. Ilias, N. Abdul Rahim, S. A.Abdul Shukor, A. H. Adom, and M. A.H. Saad. 2021. A Review on the Stingless Beehive Conditions and Parameters Monitoring using IoT and Machine Learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 2107. IOP Publishing Ltd. doi:...

    2021 doi

  3. [10]

    Doreid Ammar, Jean Savinien, and Lionel Radisson. 2019. The Makers’ Beehives: Smart Beehives for Monitoring Honey-Bees’ Activities. Association for Computing Machinery (2019). doi:10.1145/3365871.3365887

    2019

  4. [11]

    Omar Anwar, Adrian Keating, Rachel Cardell -Oliver, Amitava Datta, and Gino Putrino. 2023. Apis -Prime: A deep learning model to optimize beehive monitoring system for the task of daily weight estimation. Applied Soft Computing 144 (2023), 110546. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110546

    2023

  5. [12]

    Colby Banbury, Emil Njor, Andrea Mattia Garavagno, Matthew Stewart, Pete Warden, Manjunath Kudlur, Nat Jeffries, Xenofon Fafoutis, and Vijay Janapa Reddi. 2024. Wake Vision: A Tailored Dataset and Benchmark Suite for TinyML Computer Vision Applications. arXiv preprint arXiv:24...

    2024 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Colby R. Banbury, Vijay Janapa Reddi, Max Lam, William Fu, Amin Fazel, Jeremy Holleman, Xinyuan Huang, Robert Hurtado, David Kanter, Anton Lokhmotov, David Patterson, Danilo Pau, Jae-sun Seo, Jeff Sieracki, Urmish Thakker, Marian Verhelst, and Poonam Yadav. 2021. Benchmarking ...

    2021 arXiv

  7. [14]

    BeeStar Australia. 2024. BeeStar Smart Beehive Monitoring. https://www.beestar.com.au/

    2024

  8. [15]

    Bojana Bekić Šarić, Etleva Dashi Muça, Jonel Subić, Irena Džimrevska, and Slađan Rašić. 2023. Environmental threats to beekeeping in the Western Balkan countries-beekeepers’ perceptions. Environmental Research Communications 5 (2023). doi:10.1088/2515-7620/acd913

    2023 doi

  9. [16]

    Martin Bencsik, Joseph Bencsik, Michael Baxter, and Andrei Lucian. 2011. Identification of the honey bee swarming process by analysing the time course of hive vibrations. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 76 (2011), 44–50. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2011.01.004

    2011 doi

  10. [17]

    Bikaun, Tiffane Bates, Maike Bollen, Gavin R

    Jessica M. Bikaun, Tiffane Bates, Maike Bollen, Gavin R. Flematti, Joanna Melonek, Praveen Praveen, and Julia Grassl

  11. [18]

    Simon Bilik, Ilona Janakova, Adam Ligocki, and Dominik Ficek Karel Horak. 2024. Computer Vision Approaches for Automated Bee Counting Application. In IFAC-PapersOnLine, Vol. 58. Elsevier B.V., 43–48. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2024.07. 369

    2024 doi

  12. [19]

    Diogo Braga, Ana Madureira, Fabio Scotti, Vincenzo Piuri, and Ajith Abraham. 2021. An Intelligent Monitoring System for Assessing Bee Hive Health. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 89009–89019. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3089538

    2021

  13. [20]

    Augustin Bricout, Philippe Leleux, Pascal Acco, Christophe Escriba, Jean -Yves Fourniols, Georges Soto-Romero, and Rémi Floquet. 2024. Bee Together: Joining Bee Audio Datasets for Hive Extrapolation in AI-Based Monitoring. Sensors (2024). doi:10.3390/s24186067

    2024 doi

  14. [21]

    Jerry J Bromenshenk, Garon C Smith, Bruce E King, Robert A Seccomb, Ghassan Alnasser, Colin B Henderson, ; Christopher, L Wrobel, Matthew R Loeser, and J Ili. 1996. New and Improved Methods for Monitoring Air Quality and the Terrestrial Environment PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR. Tech...

    1996

  15. [22]

    Daniel S Bush, Bernarda Calla, May R Berenbaum, and S Bush. 2024. An Aspergillus flavus strain from bee bread of the Western honey bee (Apis mellifera) displays adaptations to distinctive features of the hive environment. Ecology and Evolution 14 (2024). doi:10.1002/ece3.10918

    2024 doi

  16. [23]

    Stefania Cecchi, Susanna Spinsante, Alessandro Terenzi, and Simone Orcioni. 2020. A smart sensor -based measurement system for advanced bee hive monitoring. Sensors (Switzerland) 20, 9 (5 2020). doi:10.3390/s20092726

    2020 doi

  17. [24]

    Stefania Cecchi, Alessandro Terenzi, Simone Orcioni, Paola Riolo, Sara Ruschioni, and Nunzio Isidoro. 2018. A Preliminary Study of Sounds Emitted by Honey Bees in a Beehive. In 144th Audio Engineering Society (AES) Convention. Audio Engineering Society (AES). A Survey of TinyM...

    2018

  18. [25]

    Urmila Chakraborty, Ajeet Kaushik, Ganga Ram Chaudhary, and Yogendra Kumar Mishra. 2024. Emerging nanoenabled gas sensor for environmental monitoring – Perspectives and open challenges. Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 37 (2 2024), 100532. doi:10.1016/J.COESH....

    2024

  19. [26]

    Nadine Chapman. 2020. Plan Bee - Australian honey bee genetic improvement program - Professional Beekeepers. https://extensionaus.com.au/professionalbeekeepers/plan-bee-australian-honey-bee-genetic- improvementprogram/

    2020

  20. [27]

    Vasileia Chatzaki, Marta Montoro, Rámi El-Rashid, Annette Bruun Jensen, and Antoine Lecocq. 2023. A New Approach for Detecting Sublethal Effects of Neonicotinoids on Bumblebees Using Optical Sensor A New Approach for Detecting Sublethal Effects of Neonicoti noids on Bumblebees...

    2023 doi

  21. [28]

    Dario De Nart, Cecilia Costa, Gennaro Di Prisco, and Emanuele Carpana. 2022. Image recognition using convolutional neural networks for classification of honey bee subspecies. Apidologie 1 (2022), 3. doi:10.1007/s13592-022-00918-5

    2022 doi

  22. [29]

    Andrea De Simone, Luca Barbisan, Student Member, Giovanna Turvani, and Fabrizio Riente. 2024. Advancing Beekeeping: IoT and TinyML for Queen Bee Monitoring Using Audio Signals. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT 73 (2024), 2024. doi:10.1109/TIM.2024.3449981

    2024

  23. [30]

    Water Department of Agriculture and the Environment. 2020. Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment Delivering Ag2030. Technical Report. Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment

    2020

  24. [31]

    S. K. Devitt, P . W. J. Baxter, and G. Hamilton. 2021. The Ethics of Biosurveillance. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32, 5-6 (11 2021), 709–740. doi:10.1007/s10806-019-09775-2

    2021 doi

  25. [32]

    Doinea, I

    M. Doinea, I. Trandafir, C. Toma, M. Popa, and A. Zamfiroiu. 2024. IoT Embedded Smart Monitoring System with Edge Machine Learning for Beehive Management. International Journal of Computers, Communications and Control 19, 4 (2024). doi:10.15837/IJCCC.2024.4.6632

    2024 doi

  26. [33]

    Zina Sabrina Duma, Tomas Zemcik, Simon Bilik, Tuomas Sihvonen, Peter Honec, Satu Pia Reinikainen, and Karel Horak

  27. [34]

    Abdelrahman Elgendy. 2025. Beekeeping with computer vision: Smarter hive monitoring. https://www.ultralytics. com/blog/beekeeping-with-computer-vision-smarter-hive-monitoring

    2025

  28. [35]

    Etxegarai-Legarreta, Olatz and Sanchez-Famoso, and Valeriano. 2022. The Role of Beekeeping in the Generation of Goods and Services: The Interrelation between Environmental, Socioeconomic, and Sociocultural Utilities. Agriculture 12 (4 2022). doi:10.3390/agriculture12040551

    2022 doi

  29. [36]

    Richard M Florio. 2011. Bees Biology Threats and Colonie. Nova Science

    2011

  30. [37]

    Amira Ghezal, Christian Jair Luis Peña, and Andreas König. 2024. Varroa Mite Counting Based on Hyperspectral Imaging. Sensors 24, 14 (7 2024). doi:10.3390/s24144437

    2024 doi

  31. [38]

    Aleš Gregorc and Blair Sampson. 2019. diversity Diagnosis of Varroa Mite (Varroa destructor) and Sustainable Control in Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Colonies-A Review. Diversity 11 (2019). doi:10.3390/d11120243

    2019 doi

  32. [39]

    Hugo Hadjur, Doreid Ammar, and Laurent Lefèvre. 2022. Toward an intelligent and efficient beehive: A survey of precision beekeeping systems and services. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 192 (2022), 106604. doi:10.1016/j. compag.2021.106604

    2022

  33. [40]

    Hamza, Rahman Tashakkori, Bejamen Underwood, William O’Brien, and Chris Campell

    Abdelbaset S. Hamza, Rahman Tashakkori, Bejamen Underwood, William O’Brien, and Chris Campell. 2023. BeeLive: The IoT platform of Beemon monitoring and alerting system for beehives. Smart Agricultural Technology 6 (12 2023), 100331. doi:10.1016/J.ATECH.2023.100331

    2023

  34. [41]

    Gyan P Harwood and Adam G Dolezal. 2020. Pesticide-Virus Interactions in Honey Bees: Challenges and Opportunities for Understanding Drivers of Bee Declines. Viruses (2020). doi:10.3390/v12050566

    2020 doi

  35. [42]

    Huu-Tuong Ho, Minh-Tien Pham, Quang-Duong Tran, Quang-Huy Pham, Thi-Thu-Hong Phan, and Ho Chi Minh. 2023. Evaluating Audio Feature Extrac -tion Methods for Identifying Bee Queen Presence. (2023). doi:10.1145/3628797. 3628852

    2023 doi

  36. [43]

    Kainat Iqbal, Bayan Alabdullah, Naif Al Mudawi, Asaad Algarni, Ahmad Jalal, and Jeongmin Park. 2024. Empirical Analysis of Honeybees Acoustics as Biosensors Signals for Swarm Prediction in Beehives. IEEE Access 12 (1 2024), 148405–148421. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3471895

    2024

  37. [44]

    Vikram Jain, Sebastian Giraldo, Jaro De Roose, Linyan Mei, Bert Boons, and Marian Verhelst. 2023. TinyVers: A Tiny Versatile System-on-Chip With State -Retentive eMRAM for ML Inference at the Extreme Edge. IEEE JOURNAL OF SOLID-STATE CIRCUITS 58, 8 (2023). doi:10.1109/JSSC.202...

    2023

  38. [45]

    Kyungchang Jeong, Hongseok Oh, Yeongyu Lee, Hanbit Seo, Gyuchan Cho, Jaemin Jeong, Gyutae Park, Jungseok Choi, Young-Duk Seo, Ji -Hoon Jeong, and Euijong Lee. 2024. IoT and AI Systems for Enhancing Bee Colony Strength in Precision Beekeeping: A Survey and F uture Research Dire...

    2024

  39. [46]

    Joe Air Jiang, Jen Cheng Wang, Chien Peng Huang, Mu Hwa Lee, An Chi Liu, Hung Jen Lin, Chien Hao Wang, Cheng Ying Chou, and En Cheng Yang. 2024. Foraging flight-based health indicators for honey bee colonies using automatic monitoring systems. Computers and Electronics in Agri...

    2024

  40. [47]

    Divason Jose. 2024. Analysis of Varroa Mite Colony Infestation Level Using NewOpen Software Based on Deep Learning Techniques. (2024). doi:10.3390/s24123828

    2024 doi

  41. [48]

    Anna Jyang. 2023. Smart Bee Colony Monitor: Clips of Beehive Sounds. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/annajyang/ beehive-sounds

    2023

  42. [49]

    Charbel Kady, Anna Maria Chedid, Ingred Kortbawi, Charles Yaacoub, Adib Akl, Nicolas Daclin, François Trousset, François Pfister, Gregory Zacharewicz, and A A Lb. 2021. IoT-Driven Workflows for Risk Management and Control of Beehives. (2021). doi:10.3390/d13070296

    2021 doi

  43. [50]

    Selcan Kaplan Berkaya, Efnan Sora Gunal, and Serkan Gunal. 2021. Deep learning -based classification models for beehive monitoring. Ecological Informatics 64 (9 2021). doi:10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101353

    2021

  44. [51]

    Khalifa, Esraa H

    Shaden A.M. Khalifa, Esraa H. Elshafiey, Aya A. Shetaia, Aida A.Abd El-Wahed, Ahmed F. Algethami, Syed G. Musharraf, Mohamed F. Alajmi, Chao Zhao, Saad H.D. Masry, Mohamed M. Abdel-Daim, Mohammed F. Halabi, Guoyin Kai, Yahya Al Naggar, Mokhtar Bishr, Mohamed A.M. Diab, and Hes...

    2021 doi

  45. [53]

    Dimitrios I Kiromitis, Christos V Bellos, Konstantinos A Stefanou, Georgios S Stergios, Thomas Katsantas, and Sotirios Kontogiannis. 2022. Bee Sound Detector: An Easy -to-Install, Low-Power, Low-Cost Beehive Conditions Monitoring System. (2022). doi:10.3390/electronics11193152

    2022 doi

  46. [54]

    Barron, and Mathieu Lihoreau

    Simon Klein, Amélie Cabirol, Jean Marc Devaud, Andrew B. Barron, and Mathieu Lihoreau. 2017. Why Bees Are So Vulnerable to Environmental Stressors. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 32, 4 (4 2017), 268–278. doi:10.1016/j.tree. 2016.12.009

    2017 doi

  47. [55]

    Olivia Kline and Neelendra K Joshi. 2020. Mitigating the Effects of Habitat Loss on Solitary Bees in Agricultural Ecosystems. Agriculture (2020). doi:10.3390/agriculture10040115

    2020 doi

  48. [56]

    Von Knoblauch, T ; Jensen, A B ; Mülling, Tammo Von Knoblauch, Annette B Jensen, Christoph K W Mülling, Heike Aupperle-Lellbach, and Elke Genersch. 2024. Chalkbrood Disease Caused by Ascosphaera apis in Honey Bees (Apis mellifera)-Morphological and Histological Changes in Infe...

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    Sotirios Kontogiannis. 2024. Beehive Smart Detector Device for the Detection of Critical Conditions That Utilize Edge Device Computations and Deep Learning Inferences. Sensors (2024). doi:10.3390/s24165444

    2024 doi

  50. [58]

    Grzegorz Krzywoszyja, Ryszard Rybski, and Grzegorz Andrzejewski. 2019. Bee Swarm Detection Based on Comparison of Estimated Distributions Samples of Sound. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENT 68, 10 (2019). doi:10.1109/TIM.2018.2878594

    2019

  51. [59]

    Vladimir Kulyukin, Sarbajit Mukherjee, and Prakhar Amlathe. 2018. Toward Audio Beehive Monitoring: Deep Learning vs. Standard Machine Learning in Classifying Beehive Audio Samples. Appl. Sci 8 (2018). doi:10.3390/app8091573

    2018 doi

  52. [61]

    Urszula Libal and Pawel Biernacki. 2024. MFCC Selection by LASSO for Honey Bee Classification. Applied Sciences (2024). doi:10.3390/app14020913

    2024 doi

  53. [62]

    Ji Lin, Ligeng Zhu, Wei Ming Chen, Wei Chen Wang, and Song Han. 2023. Tiny Machine Learning: Progress and Futures. IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine 23, 3 (2023), 8–34. doi:10.1109/MCAS.2023.3302182

    2023

  54. [63]

    Bruno Loureiro Coelho, Pablo Rafael Bodmann, Niccolò Cavagnero, Christopher Frost, and Paolo Rech. 2025. Vision Transformer Reliability Evaluation on the Coral Edge TPU. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science 72, 4 (2025), 1443–

    2025

  55. [64]

    Rüdiger Machhamer, Jannik Altenhofer, Kristof Ueding, Levin Czenkusch, Florian Stolz, Maximilian Harth, Michael Mattern, Azhar Latif, Swen Haab, Jürgen Herrmann, Anke Schmeink, Klaus-Uwe Gollmer, and Guido Dartmann. 2020. Visual Programmed IoT Beehive Moni toring for Decision ...

    2020

  56. [65]

    Coffman, and Christie A

    Katherine McNamara Manning, Reid R. Coffman, and Christie A. Bahlai. 2024. Insect pollinator and natural enemy communities in green roof and ground-level urban habitats. Urban Ecosystems (1 2024). doi:10.1007/s11252-023- 01499-6

    2024 doi

  57. [66]

    Francesco Marinello, Xiongzhe Han, Tianyi Wang, Shreyas M Guruprasad, and Benjamin Leiding. 2024. BeeOpen-An Open Data Sharing Ecosystem for Apiculture. Agriculture (2024). doi:10.3390/agriculture14030470

    2024 doi

  58. [67]

    Francesco Marinello, Efthymios Rodias, and Vasileios Kilimpas. 2024. AgriEngineering Remote Monitoring of Bee Apiaries as a Tool for Crisis Management. AgriEngineering (2024). doi:10.3390/agriengineering6030133

    2024 doi

  59. [68]

    Peter Mattson Google, Brain Vijay, Janapa Reddi, Christine Cheng, Cody Coleman, Greg Diamos, David Kanter, David Patterson, Guenther Schmuelling, Hanlin Tang, Gu -Yeon Wei, and Carole -Jean Wu. 2020. MLPerf: An Industry Standard Benchmark Suite for Machine L earning Performanc...

    2020

  60. [69]

    M Michalczyk, R Sokół, A Bancerz -Kisiel, and R Sok. 2024. Presence of Lotmaria passim, Crithidia mellificae and Nosema spp. in differently aged Apis mellifera brood. Journal of Apicultural Reseach (2024). doi:10.1080/00218839. 2022.2055265

    2024

  61. [70]

    Avshalom Mizrahi and Yaacov Lensky. 1997. Bee Products: Properties, Applications and Apitherapy. Springer Science and Business Media. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-9371-0

    1997 doi

  62. [71]

    Abdul M Mouazen, Viacheslav Adamchuk, Massimiliano Micheli, Giulia Papa, Ilaria Negri, Matteo Lancini, Cristina Nuzzi, and Simone Pasinetti. 2024. Sensorizing a Beehive: A Study on Potential Embedded Solutions for Internal Contactless Monitoring of Bees Activity. Sensors (2024...

    2024 doi

  63. [72]

    Dariusz Mrozek, Rafał G ˙ Orny, Anna Wachowicz, Bo˙ Zena Małysiak -Mrozek, Agostino Forestiero, and Anna Wachowicz@polsl Pl. 2021. Edge -Based Detection of Varroosis in Beehives with IoT Devices with Embedded and TPU-Accelerated Machine Learning. (2021). doi:10.3390/app112211078

    2021 doi

  64. [73]

    Muhammad Mulhim Md Jani, Muhammad Asraf Hairuddin, Hajar Ja, Ilham Rustam, Ali Abd Almisreb, and Nur Dalila Khirul Ashar. [n. d.]. Real-Time IoT-Blynk Application for Log Hive Weight Monitoring in Stingless Bees. International Information and Engineering Technology Asso ([n. d...

    doi

  65. [74]

    Narcia -Macias, Joselito Guardado, Jocell Rodriguez, Joanne Rampersad -Ammons, Erik Enriquez, and Dong-Chul Kim

    Christian I. Narcia -Macias, Joselito Guardado, Jocell Rodriguez, Joanne Rampersad -Ammons, Erik Enriquez, and Dong-Chul Kim. 2023. IntelliBeeHive: An Automated Honey Bee, Pollen, and Varroa Destructor Monitoring System. arXiv preprint (9 2023). http://arxiv.org/abs/2309.08955

    2023 arXiv

  66. [75]

    Abdul Nasir, Muhammad Obaid Ullah, and Muhammad Haroon Yousaf. 2023. AI in apiculture: A novel framework for recognition of invasive insects under unconstrained flying conditions for smart beehives. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 119 (3 2023). doi:10.1016/...

    2023

  67. [76]

    Shahin Nekoei, Mahsa Rezvan, Faham Khamesipour, Christopher Mayack, Marcelo Beltrão Molento, and Pablo Damián Revainera. 2023. A systematic review of honey bee (Apis mellifera, Linnaeus, 1758) infections and available treatment options. Veterinary Medicine and Science 9, 4 (7 ...

    2023 doi

  68. [78]

    Dinh Tu Nguyen, Thi Nhung Le, Thi Huong Phung, Duc Manh Nguyen, Hong Quan Nguyen, Hong Thai Pham, Thi Thu Hong Phan, Hai Vu, and Thi Lan Le. 2024. Improving pollen -bearing honey bee detection from videos captured at hive entrance by combining deep learning and handling imbala...

    2024

  69. [79]

    Duy-Tung Nguyen, Duc-Manh Nguyen, Dinh-Tan Pham, Khoat Than, Hong-Thai Pham, Hai Vu, and Ho Chi Minh. 2023. Bayesian method for bee counting with noise-labeled data. (2023). doi:10.1145/3628797.3628969

    2023

  70. [80]

    Hai Cong Nguyen, Dinh -Tu Nguyen, Thi-Huong Phung, Thi-Lan-Anh Nguyen, Toi Van Nguyen, Pham Thai, ThuHong Phan, Thi-Lan Le, Xuan Dung Nguyen, Ngoc Lan, Tran Thi, and Vu Hai. 2022. A method for automatic honey bees detection and counting from images with high density of bees. (...

    2022

  71. [81]

    Hien Nguyen Thi, Thi-Thu-Hong Phan, and Cao Truong Tran. 2023. Ge-netic Programming for Bee Audio Classification. (2023). doi:10.1145/3591569.3591612

    2023

  72. [82]

    Malika Nisal, Ratnayake Id, Adrian G Dyer Id, and Alan Dorin Id. 2021. Tracking individual honeybees among wildflower clusters with computer vision -facilitated pollinator monitoring. Plos One (2021). doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0239504 30 , Vol. 1, No. 1, Article . Publication ...

    2021 doi

  73. [83]

    Inês Nolasco and Emmanouil Benetos. 2018. To bee or not to bee: Investigating machine learning approaches for beehive sound recognition. In Detection and Classification of Acoustic Scenes and Events (DCASE) Workshop. DCASE Community. https://dcase.community/documents/workshop2...

    2018

  74. [84]

    Inês Nolasco, Alessandro Terenzi, Stefania Cecchi, Simone Orcioni, Helen L Bear, and Emmanouil Benetos. 2019. Audio-Based Identification of Beehive States. IEEE (2019)

    2019

  75. [85]

    Elias Ntawuzumunsi, Santhi Kumaran, and Louis Sibomana. 2021. Self -Powered Smart Beehive Monitoring and Control System. Sensors 21 (5 2021). https://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/21/10/3522

    2021

  76. [86]

    O’Connell, Kevin Healy, Jack Wilton, Cristina Botías, and Julia C

    Darren P . O’Connell, Kevin Healy, Jack Wilton, Cristina Botías, and Julia C. Jones. 2025. A systematic meta-analysis of the efficacy of treatments for a global honey bee pathogen - the Varroa mite. Science of the Total Environment 963 (2 2025). doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.178228

    2025

  77. [87]

    Olatz Etxegarai-Legarreta and Valeriano Sanchez-Famoso. 2022. Bee swarm activity acoustic classification for an iot- based farm service. Sensors (Switzerland) 20, 1 (1 2022). doi:10.3390/s20010021

    2022 doi

  78. [88]

    Prof Benjamin Oldroyd and Prof Andrew Barron. 2024. National Honey Bee Breeding Strategy. Technical Report. 16 pages. www.agrifutures.com.au

    2024

  79. [89]

    Jose Manuel Oliveira, Ashan Milinda, Bandara Ratnayake, Hartini Mohd Yasin, Abdul Ghani Naim, and Pg Emeroylariffion Abas. 2024. Buzzing through Data: Advancing Bee Species Identification with Machine Learning. Applied System Innovation (2024). doi:10.3390/asi7040062

    2024 doi

  80. [90]

    Gizem Sonmez Oskay, Gulsen Sude Uygur, Devrim Oskay, and Nazli Arda. 2023. Impact of stress factors internal and external to the hive on honey bees and their reflection on honey bee products: a review. Journal of Apicultural Research (2023). doi:10.1080/00218839.2023.2247840

    2023

  81. [91]

    Gyutae Park, Hyunsu Choi, Jinho Cho, and Seyeon Chang. 2024. Effects of Bee Products (propolis, royal jelly and honeybee comb extracts) on physico -chemical and storage characteristics of pork patties. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research (2024)

    2024

  82. [92]

    Murphy, Peter G

    Kit Prendergast, Mark V. Murphy, Peter G. Kevan, Zong Xin Ren, and Lynne A. Milne. 2025. Introduced honey bees (Apis mellifera) potentially reduce fitness of cavity-nesting native bees through a male-bias sex ratio, brood mortality and reduced reproduction. Frontiers in Bee Sc...

    2025

  83. [93]

    Gomes, Richard Rogers, Edgar E

    Antonio Rafael Braga, Danielo G. Gomes, Richard Rogers, Edgar E. Hassler, Breno M. Freitas, and Joseph A. Cazier

  84. [94]

    Visal Rajapakse. 2023. Intelligence at the Extreme Edge: A Survey on Reformable TinyML. ACM 282 (2023). doi:10.1145/3583683

    2023 doi

  85. [95]

    Ramya, P

    M. Ramya, P . Senthil Kumar, Gayathri Rangasamy, V. Uma shankar, G. Rajesh, K. Nirmala, A. Saravanan, and Alagumalai Krishnapandi. 2022. A recent advancement on the applications of nanomaterials in electrochemical sensors and biosensors. Chemosphere 308 (12 2022). doi:10.1016/...

    2022

  86. [96]

    Neha Rathore and Dheeraj Agrawal. 2024. Automated precision beekeeping for accessing bee brood development and behaviour using deep CNN. Bulletin of Entomological Research 114, 1 (2 2024), 77 –87. doi:10.1017/S0007485323000639

    2024 doi

  87. [97]

    Dyer, and Alan Dorin

    Malika Nisal Ratnayake, Don Chathurika Amarathunga, Asaduz Zaman, Adrian G. Dyer, and Alan Dorin. 2023. Spatial Monitoring and Insect Behavioural Analysis Using Computer Vision for Precision Pollination. International Journal of Computer Vision 131, 3 (3 2023), 591–606. doi:10...

    2023 doi

  88. [98]

    Sandeep Ravindran. 2025. What’s tinyML? The Global South’s alternative to power-hungry, pricey AI. AAAS Articles DO Group 387 (2 2025). doi:10.1126/science.387.6736.784

    2025 doi

  89. [99]

    Partha Pratim Ray. 2022. A review on TinyML: State-of-the-art and prospects. 1595–1623 pages. doi:10.1016/j.jksuci. 2021.11.019

    2022 doi

  90. [100]

    Taylor Reams, Juliana Rangel, and Margarita Lopez-Uribe. 2022. Understanding the Enemy: A Review of the Genetics, Behavior and Chemical Ecology of Varroa destructor, the Parasitic Mite of Apis mellifera. Journal of Insect Science 22, 1 (2022), 18–19. doi:10.1093/jisesa/ieab101

    2022 doi

  91. [101]

    Vijay Janapa Reddi, Christine Cheng, David Kanter, Peter Mattson, Guenther Schmuelling, and Carole Jean Wu. 2021. The Vision behind MLPerf: Understanding AI Inference Performance. IEEE Micro 41, 3 (5 2021), 10 –18. doi:10.1109/MM.2021.3066343 A Survey of TinyML Applications in...

    2021

  92. [102]

    Iraklis Rigakis, Ilyas Potamitis, Nicolas Alexander Tatlas, Giota Psirofonia, Efsevia Tzagaraki, and Eleftherios Alissandrakis. 2023. A Low -Cost, Low -Power, Multisensory Device and Multivariable Time Series Prediction for Beehive Health Monitoring. Sensors 23, 3 (2 2023). do...

    2023 doi

  93. [103]

    Robles-Guerrero, A ; Saucedo -Anaya, and T ; Guerrero -Mendez. 2023. Comparative Study of Machine Learning Models for BeeColony Acoustic Pattern Classification on LowComputational Resources. Sensors (2023). doi:10.3390/s23010460

    2023 doi

  94. [104]

    Antonio Robles -Guerrero, Salvador Gómez -Jiménez, Tonatiuh Saucedo -Anaya, Daniela López -Betancur, David Navarro-Solís, and Carlos Guerrero -Méndez. 2024. Convolutional Neural Networks for Real Time Classification of Beehive Acoustic Patterns on Constrained Devices. Sensors ...

    2024 doi

  95. [105]

    M Carmen Robustillo, Lizbeth Naranjo, M Isabel Parra, and Carlos J Pérez. 2024. Addressing multidimensional highly correlated data for forecasting in precision beekeeping. (2024). doi:10.1016/j.compag.2024.109390

    2024

  96. [106]

    Rodriguez, Remi Megret, Edgar Acuna, Jose L

    Ivan F. Rodriguez, Remi Megret, Edgar Acuna, Jose L. Agosto -Rivera, and Tugrul Giray. 2018. Recognition of PollenBearing Bees from Video Using Convolutional Neural Network. In Proceedings - 2018 IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, WACV 2018, Vol. 2018-J...

    2018

  97. [107]

    Sasan Salmani Pour Avval, Nathan D Eskue, Roger M Groves, and Vahid Yaghoubi. 2025. Systematic review on neural architecture search. Artificial Intelligence Review (2025). doi:10.1007/s10462-024-11058-w

    2025 doi

  98. [108]

    Mirella Sangiovanni, Gerard Schouten, and Willem Jan van den Heuvel. 2020. An IoT Beehive Network for Monitoring Urban Biodiversity: Vision, Method, and Architecture. Communications in Computer and Information Science 1310 (2020), 33–42. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-64846-6{_}3/FIGURES/3

    2020 doi

  99. [109]

    Alberto Satta, Matteo Lezzeri, Giuseppe Brundu, Ignazio Floris, Nicola Palmieri, · Roberto, Antonio Pantaleoni, Panagiotis Theodorou, Michelina Pusceddu, A Satta, · M Lezzeri, · G Brundu, · I Floris, · N Palmieri, R A Pantaleoni, · M Pusceddu, and P Theodo rou. 2024. How seaso...

    2024 doi

  100. [110]

    Jason Schukraft. 2019. Managed honey bee welfare: problems and potential interventions - Rethink Priorities. https://rethinkpriorities.org/research-area/managed-honey-bee-welfare-problems-and-potential-interventions/

    2019

  101. [111]

    Stefan Schurischuster, Beatriz Remeseiro, Petia Radeva, and Martin Kampel. 2018. A Preliminary Study of Image Analysis for Parasite Detection on Honey Bees. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in ...

    2018 doi

  102. [112]

    Bianca Sousa Soares, Jederson Sousa Luz, Valderlândia Francisca De Macêdo, Romuere Rodrigues Veloso E Silva, Henrique Duarte De Araújo, and Deborah Maria Vieira Magalhães. 2022. MFCC-based descriptor for bee queen presence detection. Expert Systems With Applications 201 (2022)...

    2022

  103. [113]

    Thanaphon Suwannaphong, Ferdian Jovan, Ian Craddock, and Ryan McConville. 2025. Optimising TinyML with quantization and distillation of transformer and mamba models for indoor localisation on edge devices. Scientific Reports 15, 1 (12 2025). doi:10.1038/s41598-025-94205-9

    2025 doi

  104. [114]

    Syntiant Corp. 2024. Syntiant NDP101 Neural Decision Processor - Chips and Hardware - Syntiant. https://www. syntiant.com/hardware

    2024

  105. [115]

    Andrzej Szczurek, Monika Maciejewska, Beata B¸ak, Jerzy Wilde, and Maciej Siuda. 2019. Semiconductor gas sensor as a detector of Varroa destructor infestation of honey bee colonies -Statistical evaluation. (2019). doi:10.1016/j.compag. 2019.04.033

    2019 doi

  106. [116]

    Dániel Tamás Várkonyi, José Luis, Seixas Junior, and Tomáš Horváth. 2023. Dynamic noise filtering for multi -class classification of beehive audio data. Expert Systems With Applications 213 (2023), 118850. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2022.118850

    2023

  107. [117]

    Rahman Tashakkori, Abdelbaset S Hamza, and Michael B Crawford. 2021. Beemon: An IoT-based beehive monitoring system. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 190 (2021), 106427. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2021.106427

    2021

  108. [118]

    Sarasie Tennakoon, Armando Apan, Tek Maraseni, Richard Dein, and D Altarez. 2023. Decoding the impacts of space and time on honey bees: GIS based fuzzy AHP and fuzzy overlay to assess land suitability for apiary sites in Queensland, Australia. Applied Geography (2023). doi:10....

    2023

  109. [119]

    Alessandro Terenzi, Nicola Ortolani, Inês Nolasco, Emmanouil Benetos, and Stefania Cecchi. 2021. Comparison of Feature Extraction Methods for Sound -Based Classification of Honey Bee Activity. IEEE/ACM TRANSACTIONS ON AUDIO, SPEECH, AND LANGUAGE PROCESSING 30 (2021), 2022. doi...

    2021

  110. [120]

    Todor Todorov and Valentin Tonkov. 2023. IoT based beehive monitoring system. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies (CompSysTech) . ACM. doi:10.1145/3606305.3606316

    2023

  111. [121]

    Mohamed Torky, Aida A Nasr, · Aboul, and Ella Hassanien. 2023. Recognizing Beehives’ Health Abnormalities Based on Mobile Net Deep Learning Model. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems 16, 3 (2023), 135. doi:10.1007/s44196-023-00311-9

    2023 doi

  112. [122]

    Hermelindo Hernández Torres, Alexander Georgievich Kirejtshuk, Carolina Núñez Vázquez, and Oswaldo García Martínez. 2021. On Aethina tumida Murray (Coleoptera: Nitidulidae: Nitidulinae) in hives of Apis mellifera Linnaeus (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Campeche, México. Journal of A...

    2021

  113. [123]

    Simone Tosi, Cynthia Sfeir, Edoardo Carnesecchi, Dennis vanEngelsdorp, and Marie Pierre Chauzat. 2022. Lethal, sublethal, and combined effects of pesticides on bees: A meta -analysis and new risk assessment tools. Science of The Total Environment 844 (10 2022), 156857. doi:10....

    2022

  114. [124]

    Vasileios Tsoukas, Eleni Boumpa, and Athanasios Kakarountas. 2024. A Review on the emerging technology of TinyML. ACM Comput. Surv 56, 10 (2024). doi:10.1145/3661820

    2024 doi

  115. [125]

    Agatha Turyagyenda, Andrew Katumba, Roseline Akol, Mary Nsabagwa, and Mbazingwa Elirehema Mkiramweni

  116. [126]

    Jiří Ulrich, Martin Stefanec, Fatemeh Rekabi-Bana, Laurenz Alexander Fedotoff, Tomáš Rouček, Bilal Yağız Gündeğer, Mahmood Saadat, Jan Blaha, Jiří Janota, Daniel Nicolas Hofstadler, Kristina Žampachů, Erhan Ege Keyvan, Babür Erdem, Erol Şahin, Hande Alemdar, Ali Emre Turgut, F...

    2024 doi

  117. [127]

    United Nations Environment Programme. 2022. Why bees are essential to people and planet. https://www.unep.org/ news-and-stories/story/why-bees-are-essential-people-and-planet

    2022

  118. [128]

    Marek Urban and Róbert Chlebo. 2024. Current Status and Future Outlooks of Precision Beekeeping Systems and Services. Reviews in Agricultural Science 12 (2024), 165–181. doi:10.7831/ras.12.0{_}165

    2024 doi

  119. [129]

    Cassandra Uthoff, Masun Nabhan Homsi, and Martin Von Bergen. 2023. Acoustic and vibration monitoring of honeybee colonies for beekeeping -relevant aspects of presence of queen bee and swarming. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture (2023). doi:10.1016/j.compag.2022.107589

    2023

  120. [130]

    Traynor, Michael Andree, Elinor M

    Dennis VanEngelsdorp, Kirsten S. Traynor, Michael Andree, Elinor M. Lichtenberg, Yanping Chen, Claude Saegerman, and Diana L. Cox-Foster. 2017. Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) and bee age impact honey bee pathophysiology. PLoS ONE 12, 7 (7 2017). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0179535

    2017 doi

  121. [131]

    Ekin Varol and Banu Yücel. 2019. The Effects of Environmental Problems on Honey Bees in view of Sustainable Life. Mellifera 19, 2 (2019), 23–32

    2019

  122. [132]

    Monica Vercelli, Silvia Novelli, Paola Ferrazzi, Giada Lentini, and Chiara Ferracini. 2021. A Qualitative Analysis of Beekeepers’ Perceptions and Farm Management Adaptations to the Impact of Climate Change on Honey Bees. Insects (2021). doi:10.3390/insects12030228

    2021 doi

  123. [133]

    George Voudiotis, Sotirios Kontogiannis, and Christos Pikridas. 2021. Proposed Smart Monitoring System for the Detection of Bee Swarming. Inventions (2021). doi:10.3390/inventions6040087

    2021 doi

  124. [134]

    George Voudiotis, Anna Moraiti, and Sotirios Kontogiannis. 2022. Deep Learning Beehive Monitoring System for Early Detection of the Varroa Mite. Signals 3, 3 (9 2022), 506–523. doi:10.3390/signals3030030

    2022 doi

  125. [135]

    Anna Wachowicz, Jakub Pytlik, Bożena Małysiak -Mrozek, Krzysztof Tokarz, and Dariusz Mrozek. 2022. Edge Computing in IoT-Enabled Honeybee Monitoring for The Detection of Varroa Destructor. International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science 32, 3 (9 2022), 355–36...

    2022 doi

  126. [136]

    Pete Warden and Daniel Situnayake. 2019. TinyML Machine Learning with TensorFlow Lite on Arduino and Ultra - LowPower Microcontrollers. O’Reilly Media

    2019

  127. [137]

    Alphus Dan Wilson. 2023. Developments of Recent Applications for Early Diagnosis of Diseases Using Electronic - Nose and Other VOC -Detection Devices. Sensors 2023, Vol. 23, Page 7885 23, 18 (9 2023), 7885. doi:10.3390/S23187885

    2023 doi

  128. [138]

    Aleksejs Zacepins, Armands Kviesis, Vitalijs Komasilovs, and Fakhri Rido Muhammad. 2020. Monitoring system for remote bee colony state detection. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing 8, 3 (2020), 461 –470. doi:10.22364/BJMC.2020. 8.3.05 A Survey of TinyML Applications in Beekeep...

    2020 doi

  129. [139]

    Muhammad Zahid Sharif, Nayan Di, and Fanglin Liu. 2022. Monitoring honeybees (Apis spp.) (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in climate-smart agriculture: A review. Applied Entomology and Zoology 57 (2022), 289–303. doi:10.1007/s13355- 02100765-3

    2022 doi

  130. [140]

    Asaduz Zaman and Alan Dorin. 2023. A framework for better sensor -based beehive health monitoring. Computer and Electronics in Agriculture (2023). doi:10.1016/j.compag.2023.107906

    2023

  131. [141]

    Andrej Zgank. 2021. Iot -based bee swarm activity acoustic classification using deep neural networks. Sensors (Switzerland) 21, 3 (2 2021), 1–14. doi:10.3390/s21030676

    2021 doi

  132. [142]

    Ge Zhang, Rae L Olsson, and Brandon Kingsley Hopkins. 2022. Strategies and techniques to mitigate the negative impacts of pesticide exposure to honey bee. Environmental Pollution (2022). doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2022.120915

    2022

  133. [143]

    Qinglong Zhao, Xinning Wang, Ahsan Mustafa, Ying Wang, Hongfang Wang, Xuepeng Chi, Baohua Xu, and Zhenguo Liu. 2025. Varroa Volatiles Offer Chemical Cues to Honey Bees for Initial Parasitic Recognition. Biomolecules (2025). doi:10.3390/biom15010066

    2025 doi

  134. [144]

    Yi Zhu, Mahsa abdollahi, Ségolène Maucourt, Nico Coallier, Heitor R Guimarães, Pierre Giovenazzo, and tiago H Falk

  135. [149]

    Scientific Data 11 (2024)

    MSPB: a longitudinal multi-sensor dataset with phenotypic trait measurements from honey bees. Scientific Data 11 (2024). doi:10.1038/s41597-024-03695-1

    2024 doi

  136. [1451]

    doi:10.1109/TNS.2024.3513774

    2024

  137. [2020]

    Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 169 (2 2020)

    A method for mining combined data from in -hive sensors, weather and apiary inspections to forecast the health status of honey bee coloni es. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 169 (2 2020). doi:10.1016/j.compag.2019.105161

    2020

  138. [2022]

    Science of The Total Environment 845 (11 2022), 157123

    Volatile biomarkers for non-invasive detection of American foulbrood, a threat to honey bee pollination services. Science of The Total Environment 845 (11 2022), 157123. doi:10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2022.157123

    2022

  139. [2023]

    IEEE Access 11 (2023), 96892–96922

    A Comprehensive Survey on TinyML. IEEE Access 11 (2023), 96892–96922. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3294111

    2023

  140. [2024]

    Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 224 (9 2024), 109219

    Varroa destructor detection on honey bees using hyperspectral imagery. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 224 (9 2024), 109219. doi:10.1016/J.COMPAG.2024.109219

    2024

  141. [2025]

    doi:10.3390/ai6020026

    IoT and Machine Learning Techniques for Precision Beekeeping: A Review. doi:10.3390/ai6020026

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.