How ECOPEACE uses autonomous robots and data to monitor and maintain urban water bodies.
Updated
January 8, 2026 6:27 PM
A school of fish swimming among debris and waste. PHOTO: UNSPLASH
South Korea–based water technology company ECOPEACE is working on a practical challenge many cities face today: keeping urban water bodies clean as pollution and algae growth become more frequent. Rather than relying on periodic cleanup drives, the company focuses on systems that can monitor and manage water conditions on an ongoing basis.
At the core of ECOPEACE’s work are autonomous water-cleanup robots known as ECOBOT. These machines operate directly on lakes, reservoirs and rivers, removing algae and surface waste while also collecting information about water quality. The idea is to combine cleaning with constant observation so changes in water conditions do not go unnoticed.
Alongside the robots, ECOPEACE uses a filtration and treatment system designed to process polluted water continuously. This system filters out contaminants using fine metal filters and treats the water using electrical processes. It also cleans itself automatically, which allows it to run for long periods without frequent manual maintenance.
The role of AI in this setup is largely about decision-making rather than direct control. Sensors placed across the water body collect data such as pollution levels and water quality indicators. The software then analyses this data to spot early signs of issues like algae growth. Based on these patterns, the system adjusts how the robots and filtration units operate, such as changing treatment intensity or water flow. In simple terms, the technology helps the system respond sooner instead of waiting for visible problems to appear.
ECOPEACE has already deployed these systems across several reservoirs, rivers and urban waterways in South Korea. Those projects have helped refine how the robots, sensors and software work together in real environments rather than controlled test sites.
Building on that experience, the company has begun expanding beyond Korea. It is currently running pilot and proof-of-concept projects in Singapore and the United Arab Emirates. These deployments are testing how the technology performs in dense urban settings where waterways are closely linked to public health, infrastructure and daily city life.
Both regions have invested heavily in smart city initiatives and water management, making them suitable test beds for automated monitoring and cleanup systems. The pilots focus on algae control, surface cleaning and real-time tracking of water quality rather than large-scale rollout.
As cities continue to grow and climate-related pressures on water systems increase, managing waterways is becoming less about occasional intervention and more about continuous oversight. ECOPEACE’s approach reflects that shift by using automation and data to address problems early and reduce the need for reactive cleanup later.
Keep Reading
HKU professor apologizes after PhD student’s AI-assisted paper cites fabricated sources.
Updated
January 8, 2026 6:33 PM
.jpg)
The University of Hong Kong in Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong Island. PHOTO: ADOBE STOCK
It’s no surprise that artificial intelligence, while remarkably capable, can also go astray—spinning convincing but entirely fabricated narratives. From politics to academia, AI’s “hallucinations” have repeatedly shown how powerful technology can go off-script when left unchecked.
Take Grok-2, for instance. In July 2024, the chatbot misled users about ballot deadlines in several U.S. states, just days after President Joe Biden dropped his re-election bid against former President Donald Trump. A year earlier, a U.S. lawyer found himself in court for relying on ChatGPT to draft a legal brief—only to discover that the AI tool had invented entire cases, citations and judicial opinions. And now, the academic world has its own cautionary tale.
Recently, a journal paper from the Department of Social Work and Social Administration at the University of Hong Kong was found to contain fabricated citations—sources apparently created by AI. The paper, titled “Forty Years of Fertility Transition in Hong Kong,” analyzed the decline in Hong Kong’s fertility rate over the past four decades. Authored by doctoral student Yiming Bai, along with Yip Siu-fai, Vice Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and other university officials, the study identified falling marriage rates as a key driver behind the city’s shrinking birth rate. The authors recommended structural reforms to make Hong Kong’s social and work environment more family-friendly.
But the credibility of the paper came into question when inconsistencies surfaced among its references. Out of 61 cited works, some included DOI (Digital Object Identifier) links that led to dead ends, displaying “DOI Not Found.” Others claimed to originate from academic journals, yet searches yielded no such publications.
Speaking to HK01, Yip acknowledged that his student had used AI tools to organize the citations but failed to verify the accuracy of the generated references. “As the corresponding author, I bear responsibility”, Yip said, apologizing for the damage caused to the University of Hong Kong and the journal’s reputation. He clarified that the paper itself had undergone two rounds of verification and that its content was not fabricated—only the citations had been mishandled.
Yip has since contacted the journal’s editor, who accepted his explanation and agreed to re-upload a corrected version in the coming days. A formal notice addressing the issue will also be released. Yip said he would personally review each citation “piece by piece” to ensure no errors remain.
As for the student involved, Yip described her as a diligent and high-performing researcher who made an honest mistake in her first attempt at using AI for academic assistance. Rather than penalize her, Yip chose a more constructive approach, urging her to take a course on how to use AI tools responsibly in academic research.
Ultimately, in an age where generative AI can produce everything from essays to legal arguments, there are two lessons to take away from this episode. First, AI is a powerful assistant, but only that. The final judgment must always rest with us. No matter how seamless the output seems, cross-checking and verifying information remain essential. Second, as AI becomes integral to academic and professional life, institutions must equip students and employees with the skills to use it responsibly. Training and mentorship are no longer optional; they’re the foundation for using AI to enhance, not undermine, human work.
Because in this age of intelligent machines, staying relevant isn’t about replacing human judgment with AI, it’s about learning how to work alongside it.