Data Quality Monitoring Considerations for Implementation in High Performance Raw Signal Processing Real-time Systems with Use in Tokamak Facilities
Andrzej Wojeński , Krzysztof Poźniak , Paweł Linczuk , M. Chernyshova , Grzegorz Henryk Kasprowicz , Dider Mazon , Tomasz Czarski , Rafał Krawczyk , Michał Gąska , Philippe Malard
AbstractData 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.
|Journal series||Journal of Fusion Energy, ISSN 0164-0313, e-ISSN 1572-9591|
|Publication size in sheets||0.5|
|Keywords in English||Data quality monitoring; Soft X-ray diagnostics; GEM detector; FPGA; Tokamak|
|Score||= 70.0, 15-06-2020, ArticleFromJournal|
|Publication indicators||: 2018 = 0.599; : 2018 = 0.644 (2) - 2018=0.583 (5)|
* presented citation count is obtained through Internet information analysis and it is close to the number calculated by the Publish or Perish system.