Disruption prediction using a full convolutional neural network on EAST
<|begin_of_text|><|start_header_id|>system<|end_header_id|> You are a research archivist expert in dataset metadata. Answer the question truthfully.  <|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>user<|end_header_id|> Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'In this study, a long short-term memory (LSTM) model is trained on a large disruption warning database to predict the disruption on EAST tokomak. To compare the performance of the proposed model with the previously reported full convolutional neural network (CNN) (Guo et al 2020 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 63 025008), the same data set and diagnostic signals are used. Based on the test set, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, i.e. the AUC value of the LSTM model is obtained as 0.87, and the true positive rate (TPR) is sim87.5%, while the false positive rate (FPR) is sim15.1%. Since the LSTM model is more sensitive to radiation fluctuations than CNN, the prediction performance of LSTM model is inferior to that of CNN model (for CNN, AUC sim 0.92, TPR sim 87.5%, FPR sim 6.1%). However, the advance warning time of ' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.<|eot_id|><|start_header_id|>assistant<|end_header_id|> {"Answer" : ["convolutional neural network","deep learning","disruption","disruption predictions","EAST","false positive rates","memory modeling","performance","test sets","true positive rates"]} <|eot_id|>
 Here is the Description of a dataset. Description:'In this study, a long short-term memory (LSTM) model is trained on a large disruption warning database to predict the disruption on EAST tokomak. To compare the performance of the proposed model with the previously reported full convolutional neural network (CNN) (Guo et al 2020 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 63 025008), the same data set and diagnostic signals are used. Based on the test set, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, i.e. the AUC value of the LSTM model is obtained as 0.87, and the true positive rate (TPR) is sim87.5%, while the false positive rate (FPR) is sim15.1%. Since the LSTM model is more sensitive to radiation fluctuations than CNN, the prediction performance of LSTM model is inferior to that of CNN model (for CNN, AUC sim 0.92, TPR sim 87.5%, FPR sim 6.1%). However, the advance warning time of ' . Please return only a json list of at most 3 Keywords corresponding to the Description:.
In this study, a long short-term memory (LSTM) model is trained on a large disruption warning database to predict the disruption on EAST tokomak. To compare the performance of the proposed model with the previously reported full convolutional neural network (CNN) (Guo et al 2020 Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 63 025008), the same data set and diagnostic signals are used. Based on the test set, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, i.e. the AUC value of the LSTM model is obtained as 0.87, and the true positive rate (TPR) is sim87.5%, while the false positive rate (FPR) is sim15.1%. Since the LSTM model is more sensitive to radiation fluctuations than CNN, the prediction performance of LSTM model is inferior to that of CNN model (for CNN, AUC sim 0.92, TPR sim 87.5%, FPR sim 6.1%). However, the advance warning time of 
convolutional neural network; deep learning; disruption; disruption predictions; EAST; false positive rates; memory modeling; performance; test sets; true positive rates