Suggested Check: number of calves < group size

[neil-ices-dk]

From Lucy

Additional comments:

Validation rules:

Number of calves cannot be greater than the group size If you did employ species being flagged if recorded in certain reasons, how would the region be defined? Outside of known range; outside of known range but with a large buffer area; even more broad than that? SightingAngle - I know it is limited to 3 digits, and ignore me if aerial surveys record this differently, but this should only be between 0 - 359 RadialDistance - maybe consider flagging sightings past a certain distance PerpendicularDistance - maybe consider flagging sightings past a certain distance

[NikiClear]

Submitted during SG meeting:

• Maybe sighting ranges that seem ridiculously large from Peter Evans)
• flag up any very rare species (e.g. North Atlantic right whale) from Peter Evans)
• Check for records against known OBIS distribution? from Graeme Duncan
• Maybe a warning if the previous Lat or Lon is vastly different from the present Lat or Lon? from Charles Paxton

@NikkiTaylorJNCC @neil-ices-dk @cmspinto @pcrjoana

[neil-ices-dk]

Approve now:

1. Number of calves cannot be greater than the group size;

For WGJCDP

1. If you did employ species being flagged if recorded in certain reasons, how would the region be defined?
2. Species not in the database should be flagged as a warning;

[pcrjoana]

@pcrjoana to implement the check 1.

[neil-ices-dk]

suggested by NikiC: The screening should check for duplication in the ID fields of each table within a survey

[neil-ices-dk]

@pcrjoana to implement 'duplication in the ID fields' also to check the previous check on species in a specific region has been implemented

[pcrjoana]

@NikiClear I need a refresh here. What do you mean by "duplication in the ID fields"?

[NikiClear]

@NikiClear I need a refresh here. What do you mean by "duplication in the ID fields"?

Hi @pcrjoana - I believe the SurveyID EffortID and SightingID fields should be unique with no duplication within the same survey dataset

[neil-ices-dk]

@cmspinto to pick this up - thank you

[cmspinto]

All three checks have been added to the format: SightingID must be unique within a file: http://[datsu.ices.dk/web/chkDetails.aspx?DatasetID=149&RecordID=110&groupFilterID=1951](http://datsu.ices.dk/web/chkDetails.aspx?DatasetID=149&RecordID=110&groupFilterID=1951)

SurveyID must be unique within a file: http://[datsu.ices.dk/web/chkDetails.aspx?DatasetID=149&RecordID=108&groupFilterID=1949](http://datsu.ices.dk/web/chkDetails.aspx?DatasetID=149&RecordID=108&groupFilterID=1949)

EffortID must be unique within a file: http://[datsu.ices.dk/web/chkDetails.aspx?DatasetID=149&RecordID=108&groupFilterID=1950](http://datsu.ices.dk/web/chkDetails.aspx?DatasetID=149&RecordID=108&groupFilterID=1950)

Could this be checked by putting a file where one of them is repeated?

[neil-ices-dk]

Could this be checked by putting a file where one of them is repeated?

assume you'd like @NikiClear to check that?

[NikiClear]

Duplication and number of animals checks have been tested and it seems to be working as it should - https://cetaceans.ices.dk/manage/ScreenResult/1607

Tested the same dataset without any duplication or problems, but I got an error suggesting duplication in the SurveyID where it shouldn't be - there is only one record in the upload file. https://cetaceans.ices.dk/manage/ScreenResult/1609 SCANS_BlockP_TestingNoDup.zip

[Osanna123]

SurveyID check edited. Should work now

[NikiClear]

SurveyID check edited. Should work now Checked and it's working now, thanks!

[pcrjoana]

All the checks seem to be in place. Can we close this issue?

[NikkiTaylorJNCC]

All the checks seem to be in place. Can we close this issue?

Hi @pcrjoana !! If you're happy they are covered then absolutely, we can close it.