{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01693480101608806, 'fraction_numerical': 0.000846740050804403, 'mean_word_length': 4.939698492462312, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Monte-Carlo-based calculation of measurement quality for three variants of the damage frequency method

This paper quantifies the measurement quality, Q, of three test procedures by simulating a series of correlation experiments and employing a Monte Carlo technique. The three methods compared are the ISO standard damage frequency method (DFM), the DFM yielding the highest Q (optimal DFM) and a modified DFM. For each trial, two values of the normalized damage threshold and uncertainty are derived via a PC spreadsheet based Monte Carlo simulation. To simulate various sets of real optics, the normalized results are multiplied by a set of uniformly distributed random numbers which are unique to each trial. The slope of the correlation line for each test procedure is determined via a weighted linear regression, and recorded. The output of the model is a frequency distribution of the slopes of the correlation lines for each procedure. Comparing the distributions of the slopes of the correlations is a direct measure of Q2 for each test procedure. It is shown that a revised DFM results in a much higher likelihood of making an accurate measurement with a given precision.