Computational Result Review Process: Difference between revisions
From SCECpedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
== Define Data Set == | == Define Data Set == | ||
Define which data set under consideration. For example, a hazard curve that is part of a study, might be considered complete, even if the full study is not complete. | |||
== Preliminary == | == Preliminary == | ||
| Line 7: | Line 8: | ||
== Reviewed == | == Reviewed == | ||
Data-set specific, standardized, defined, checks ready for use internal researchers. For example, for a hazard curve, review checks might include: | |||
* no Nan | |||
* No amplitudes beyond 10g | |||
* all rupture variations have amplitudes for all components | |||
* non-zero entries | |||
== Publishable == | == Publishable == | ||
Revision as of 18:12, 20 May 2015
We define three states through which large scale computational results increasing in confidence.
Define Data Set
Define which data set under consideration. For example, a hazard curve that is part of a study, might be considered complete, even if the full study is not complete.
Preliminary
Just created but complete
Reviewed
Data-set specific, standardized, defined, checks ready for use internal researchers. For example, for a hazard curve, review checks might include:
- no Nan
- No amplitudes beyond 10g
- all rupture variations have amplitudes for all components
- non-zero entries
Publishable
Ready for use by external researchers.
