Recommendations for in-situ data Near Real Time Quality Control

With the construction of operational oceanography systems, the need for real-time has become more and more important. A lot of work had been done in the past, within National Data Centres (NODC) and International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange (IODE) to standardise delayed mode quality control procedures. Concerning such quality control procedures applicable in real-time (within hours to a maximum of a week from acquisition), which means automatically, some recommendations were set up for physical parameters but mainly within projects without consolidation with other initiatives. During the past ten years the EuroGOOS community has been working on such procedures within international programs such as Argo, OceanSites or GOSUD, or within EC projects such as Mersea, MFSTEP, FerryBox, ECOOP, and MyOcean. In collaboration with the FP7 SeaDataNet project that is standardizing the delayed mode quality control procedures in NODCs, and MyOcean GMES FP7 project that is standardizing near real time quality control procedures for operational oceanography purposes, the DATA-MEQ working group decided to put together this document to summarize the recommendations for near real-time QC procedures that they judged mature enough to be advertised and recommended to EuroGOOS.

Description of the Argo GDAC File Checks: Data Format and Consistency Checks

Every Argo data file submitted by a DAC for distribution on the GDAC has its format and data consistency checked by the Argo FileChecker. Two types of checks are applied: 1. Format checks. Ensures the file formats match the Argo standards precisely. 2. Data consistency checks. Additional data consistency checks are performed on a file after it passes the format checks. These checks do not duplicate any of the quality control checks performed elsewhere. These checks can be thought of as “sanity checks” to ensure that the data are consistent with each other. The data consistency checks enforce data standards and ensure that certain data values are reasonable and/or consistent with other information in the files. Examples of the “data standard” checks are the “mandatory parameters” defined for meta-data files and the technical parameter names in technical data files. Files with format or consistency errors are rejected by the GDAC and are not distributed. Less serious problems will generate warnings and the file will still be distributed on the GDAC. Reference Tables and Data Standards: Many of the consistency checks involve comparing the data to the published reference tables and data standards. These tables are documented in the User’s Manual. (The FileChecker implements “text versions” of these tables.)