A Theoretical Review
Paper title: ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY-CRITICAL SOFTWARE IN NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
Authors: Parnas, D.L., Asmis, G.J.K. and Madey, J.
My summary of the content of the paper:
This paper details a strategy to be followed for design, documentation and evaluation of engineering systems or plant computers at nuclear power plants. The paper covers all the conservative aspects of the industry and aims to answer those with the experience of a plant as a case study where this has been implemented.
- Quality of research
| Item | Comments |
| Is the research question or objective clearly stated? | No. |
| Is the research question interesting and important? | No. It is not explicitly defined. |
| Is the work original? | Yes. |
| Is the background research clear and relevant? | No. There is very little academic references in the paper. Mostly since some areas are not covered by any study. |
| Are there any ethical problems? | No. |
- The Research Methodology
| Item | Comments |
| Summarize the research method? | Case study. |
| Does the research method seem appropriate for the research question? | Yes although they only refer to one plant. To be representative there should be more plants included as well as different types of reactors considered. Today if we want to be representative and focused we also have to include plants from different parts of the world. |
| Are the methods adequately described? | Yes, although very specific and covers Darlington Station as well as the Ontario Power Generation utility. |
| Were the analyses done correctly? | The analyses of the current situation at Darlington were not adequately explained to understand context. Another aspect of the analyses or lack thereof is the absence or real data. We see four equations that essentially make up conditions within a software program and any of the four could be used but, there is no link made between the Darlington station and the complex condition equations. |
| Are the conclusions supported by the data? | No. |
- Findings and Discussions
| Item | Comments |
| Is the paper logically presented? | No. The paper assumes that all readers have the same information and experience level of the authors. Many common concepts are not adequately addressed. Two examples are Software Quality Assurance and Testing. Many modern plants today have gaps in these two areas and the authors failed to address these common gaps that were supposed to provide a guideline to managing complex plant control software. |
| Does the data adequately support the research question? | No. |
| Does the discussion link back to the RQ and key literature? | No. |
- Additional Notes
| Additional notes on the paper | There is a list of references added but, I personally find it very difficult to link any of them to the paper in a meaningful way. This paper had several very good elements in it but, overall, I was actually very disappointed in it. |
| Identify any links to other work discussed in IS sessions. | Information Systems and Digital Transformation, Innovative Problem Solving as well as Project Management. |
| Where can this paper be found? | https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Parnas/publication/242413466_Assessment_of_safety-critical_software_in_nuclear_power_plants/links/55956a6508ae99aa62c72619/Assessment-of-safety-critical-software-in-nuclear-power-plants.pdf |