## 4 Discussion  
The proposed fire safety platform represents a marked departure from legacy fire suppression systems in both architectural philosophy and operational dynamics. While traditional approaches largely rely on passive detection and delayed mechanical response (e.g., sprinkler activation post-flame development), this system introduces a proactive, precision-guided mechanism that leverages edge AI, hybrid sensing, and zonal control. A key innovation lies in its architectural decoupling of detection, ventilation, and suppression functions. Rather than depending on centralized logic or singular sensor modalities, the system distributes intelligence at the edge and coordinates actions via real-time environmental feedback. This design enhances fault tolerance, as evidenced by successful operation under simulated cloud outage conditions. Furthermore, the modular hardware--such as motorized ceiling diffusers and rotating nozzles--enables fine-grained spatial targeting, which is not feasible with fixed sprinkler heads or binary ventilation controls. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Category** & **Frequency (F)** & **Impact (I)** & **Baseline Score** & **Proposed Score** & **Risk Level Change** \\ \hline Fatalities & 4 & 4 & 16 & 4 & H \(\rightarrow\) L \\ Property Damage & 3 & 4 & 12 & 5 & H \(\rightarrow\) M \\ Business Interruption & 3 & 3 & 9 & 3 & M \(\rightarrow\) L \\ Environmental (CO\({}_{2}\)) & 2 & 3 & 6 & 4 & M \(\rightarrow\) L \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Comparative risk assessment of the baseline and proposed fire response systems using ISO 31000 and NFPA 551 methodologies. Risk scores were calculated based on the product of frequency (F) and impact (I) for four key categories: life safety, asset loss, business interruption, and environmental (CO\({}_{2}\)) impact. The proposed system demonstrates significant reductions in all categories, shifting residual risks into the ALARP region. Improvements are grounded in probabilistic scenario modeling and FDS-based consequence simulations. However, the system is not without its limitations. First, spatial calibration of suppression nozzles poses a deployment challenge in irregularly shaped or cluttered indoor zones, necessitating detailed pre-installation modeling. Second, while the residue-free clean extinguishing agent demonstrated excellent compatibility with electronics, regulatory constraints (e.g., storage, recharging logistics) must be considered for broader adoption in high-density buildings. Third, integration with legacy building management systems (BMS) may require middleware customization, particularly where analog or serial infrastructure persists. Energy consumption and maintenance also warrant further examination. Although the system avoids the water damage and corrosion risks typical of sprinkler systems, it introduces moving components--such as stepper motors and mechanical vanes--that may increase long-term service requirements. Lifecycle cost modeling, including periodic actuator replacement and sensor recalibration, should therefore be incorporated in future techno-economic analyses. From a scalability perspective, the platform's reliance on IoT frameworks such as SmartThings Edge offers benefits in terms of remote diagnostics and predictive maintenance. However, concerns remain regarding cybersecurity and data integrity, especially when deployed in sensitive sectors such as transportation hubs or defense facilities. Future iterations may benefit from incorporating redundant communication protocols and secure firmware update mechanisms. According to recent literature, the integration of IoT edge frameworks such as SmartThings Edge provides considerable advantages in enabling remote diagnostics, real-time analytics, and predictive maintenance capabilities within fire safety systems [65; 66; 67].