Data Quality Monitoring Considerations for Implementation in High Performance Raw Signal Processing Real-time Systems with Use in Tokamak Facilities
Journal of Fusion Energy, ISSN: 1572-9591, Vol: 39, Issue: 5, Page: 221-229
2020
- 7Citations
- 12Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Review Description
Data quality of the tokamaks diagnostics is often a neglected topic. In literature it is rather rare to find considerations regarding the data quality received from the diagnostic systems’ sensors. The scope of the paper is to provide a discussion regarding systems’ construction and analysis in scope of implementation of data quality monitoring methods for a new generation of diagnostics. Mainly considerations are performed regarding the necessity of DQM (Data Quality Monitoring) implementation, functionality, performance and required system resources. The covered topics are related to basics of system construction including: system layout and construction blocks, data processing stages, signal processing modes, system construction with resource estimation in scope of DQM implementation. Based on the covered points, it is possible to plan the extra resources or specific construction, to provide reliable design with data quality monitoring features. The data quality monitoring aspect is especially important in the modern diagnostics working with a real-time feedback loop. Such approach could be especially interesting for the ITER-like projects, since the quality of the data may directly influence the behavior of the control systems during plasma phenomena. The work is based on experience in design work of various high performance diagnostic systems for plasma physics and high energy physics.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85086372850&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10894-020-00243-8; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10894-020-00243-8; https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10894-020-00243-8.pdf; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10894-020-00243-8/fulltext.html; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10894-020-00243-8; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10894-020-00243-8
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know