## 4 Requirements  
The relevant identification of the requirements for each specific use case belonging to UC1-UC14 that have been distinguished in Section 3 is troublesome. It has to be noted that the restrictions are related to the specific application, e.g., the data rate consumed in UC8 will vary depending on the video resolution, frames per second, etc. Therefore, to enable later assessments, the peak requirements of the most common applications found in each use case group have been identified. The analysis has been performed based on the relevant 3 GPP Stage 1 documents for 5 GS [83; 84; 85], as well as applicable scientific papers. It has to be noted that several use cases are not yet well described in the literature or identified by the 3 rd Generation Partnership Project (3 GPP) standardization groups. Therefore, if non-existent, the requirement assessment has been performed by calculations using the data from the deployed systems or their typical setups. Such an approach has been taken in the case of field mapping, the remote evaluation of crops/plant properties, yield mapping, and effector programming (UC2, UC3, UC5, and UC9, respectively) in which the volume of data produced per hectare of operation has been calculated (based on SmA-specific data sources) and combined with information about how often the data have to be sent to the processing entities to maintain the proper functioning of the system. The details can be found in [58]. The identification of the requirements for each use case includes the traffic intensity, type of data exchange, data rate, maximum latency, and reliability, as presented in Table 2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Use Case**} & \multicolumn{5}{c}{**Sector**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **Smart Agriculture** & **Smart Forestry** & **Biodiversity Monitoring** & **Water Management** \\ \hline UC1 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & \\ \hline UC2 & ✓ & ✓ & & \\ \hline UC3 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & \\ \hline UC4 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline UC5 & ✓ & & & \\ \hline UC6 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline UC7 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & \\ \hline UC8 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline UC9 & ✓ & ✓ & & \\ \hline UC10 & ✓ & ✓ & & ✓ \\ \hline UC11 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline UC12 & ✓ & ✓ & & \\ \hline UC13 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline UC14 & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ & ✓ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Use cases by sector. The first observation is the diversity in the requirements of the use case groups in the case of data rates and latencies. It has to be noted that several use cases also require large data rates in the UL, e.g., UC3, UC4, and UC13. The majority of the use cases need low to moderate reliability with the exception of distributed control systems due to the crucial role played by the UC10 group. The most demanding use case belonging to UC10 is the real-time control (RTC) smart water grid. In order to enable automated control and maintain the faultless operation of the water distribution system, requirements similar to those for the automation and monitoring of critical infrastructure (e.g., electrical smart grids) have to be met. Ultra-reliable communication, as well as millisecond-order latency, is, e.g., required to regulate and maintain appropriate pressure levels in the distribution system pipes by controlling pressure-reducing valves [86]. To implement accurate object tracking methods (UC7) based on RT video analysis, both the video resolution and frame rate have to be relatively high. According to [87], the accuracy improves with the increase in the video frame rate, resulting in a higher algorithm processing time. Considering the algorithmic complexity (video of only a few frames-per-second is usually used for tracking [87]), process offloading to external processing units can be required. Regarding the required latency, the majority of objects move with relatively low speeds, except UAVs (e.g., SmA/SmF use case of aerial seeding).