## 3 State of the Art
### Financial Viability of Selected IoT Communication Technologies
In the specific use cases assessed, it can be observed that for the Citizen Science domain employing LoRaWAN, the costs ranged from 8900 euros for 50 installed nodes to 20,800 euros for 500 nodes. Similarly, in the Traffic Management domain utilizing LoRaWAN, the costs ranged from 14,250 euros for 250 nodes to 100,000 euros for 1800 nodes. The Energy Management use case employing LoRaWAN had costs of 118,000 euros for 500 nodes. On the other hand, the Traffic Management use case employing NB-IoT had costs of 1200 euros for 50 nodes, while the Environmental Monitoring use case had costs of 5700 euros for 250 nodes. In the Energy Management use case utilizing NB-IoT, the costs were 119,000 euros for 5000 nodes. These results indicate that NB-IoT technology initially offers cost advantages for smaller-scale deployments, as it can be integrated into existing cellular networks, resulting in lower hardware and installation costs. However, as the number of nodes increases, LoRaWAN becomes more cost-effective due to the use of lower-cost devices and the ability to support a higher number of nodes per gateway. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c} \hline \hline
**Assessment Activity Dimension.** & **Actual Activities** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Use Case Selection} & Identification of diverse domains: Smart city, \\  & environmental monitoring, energy management, citizen \\  & science, and traffic management. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Participant Engagement} & Contacted 15 entities deploying LoRaWAN or NB-IoT \\  & communication technologies in smart city environments, \\  & of which 9 participated in the evaluation. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Assessment Objective} & Evaluate usefulness, accuracy, usability, and identify \\  & areas for improvement. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Validation Steps} & Qualitative interaction of results and analysis of results. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Accuracy Verification} & Compare tool’s calculations with traditional cost \\  & accounting and Total Cost of Ownership \\  & (TCO) framework. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Usability Evaluation} & Expert evaluators assess ease of use, clarity of \\  & instructions, and accessibility for non-experts. \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Analysis of Results} & Identify patterns and trends across different use cases. \\ \cline{1-1}  & Extract insights and suggestions for tool enhancement \\ \cline{1-1}  & based on the assessment outcomes. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Overview on the assessment approach for the Pragmatic Computational Tool. These findings emphasize the importance of considering the scale of the deployment and the specific requirements of the use case when selecting the appropriate communication technology. Decision-makers need to carefully evaluate the cost-performance trade-offs between LoRaWAN and NB-IoT based on factors such as the number of nodes, hardware costs, installation expenses, and long-term maintenance requirements. Overall, the assessment highlights the cost dynamics between LoRaWAN and NB-IoT, showcasing the advantages of each technology at different scales of deployment. These insights can inform decision-making processes for selecting the most cost-effective communication technology for IoT applications. The cost performance disparity between the NB-IoT and LoRaWAN in scenarios with fewer sensors can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, LoRaWAN necessitates a workforce with specialized skills to operate and maintain the network, leading to higher labor costs. Additionally, the employment of gateways in LoRaWAN systems contributes to elevated hardware expenses per device. In contrast, NB-IoT offers advantages in terms of cost-efficiency by leveraging existing cellular networks, resulting in lower hardware and installation costs. However, as the number of devices escalates, LoRaWAN emerges as the more cost-effective option due to its utilization of economical devices and the ability to support a higher number of devices per gateway.