Considering variations in operating conditions and sensor performance, this value is commonly approximated to an uncertainty level of approximately 13% for mobile monitoring systems based on low-cost sensors. Although mobile stations exhibit lower metrological accuracy compared with fixed stations, their ability to provide high spatial coverage and detect localized pollution hotspots makes them a valuable complementary tool for urban air quality monitoring. Comparative Reliability Analysis Overall, the reliability of measurements differs significantly between fixed and mobile monitoring systems due to their operating conditions. Fixed stations provide the highest measurement reliability because they operate in stable and controlled envi-ronments with reference-grade analyzers and standardized calibration procedures, re-sulting in uncertainties typically around 1,2–2,5%. In contrast, mobile monitoring sys-tems are exposed to dynamic operational disturbances such as vehicle vibrations, vari-ations in speed, and rapidly changing environmental conditions, which increase measurement uncertainty to approximately 13%. Despite this lower metrological pre-cision, mobile stations offer valuable complementary capabilities by providing wider spatial coverage and enabling the detection of localized pollution hotspots that may not be captured by fixed monitoring networks.

When accounting for different operating conditions and how sensors perform, mobile monitoring systems that use low-cost sensors typically have an uncertainty level of around 13%. While mobile stations don't match the measurement precision of fixed stations, they offer significant value as a complementary monitoring tool because they can cover large areas and identify localized pollution hotspots in urban environments. Comparative Reliability Analysis The measurement reliability between fixed and mobile monitoring systems varies considerably due to how they operate. Fixed stations deliver the most reliable measurements since they function in stable, controlled settings using reference-grade analyzers and standardized calibration methods, which keeps uncertainties between 1.2% and 2.5%. Mobile monitoring systems face different challenges, including vehicle vibrations, changing speeds, and shifting environmental conditions that boost measurement uncertainty to about 13%. Even though mobile stations have lower measurement precision, they provide important complementary benefits by offering broader spatial coverage and the ability to detect localized pollution hotspots that fixed monitoring networks might miss.