Skip to content

Report 4: Operational Scenarios — Summary

Report 4 presents nine conceptual design scenarios grounding the architectural concepts from Reports 1-3 in specific nuclear control room situations. It also covers tool architecture, HSI architecture, procedure-AI interaction, and human/organisational factors.

The Nine Scenarios

# Scenario Reactor Pattern Primary Concept
1 scenario-shift-handover SMR Pattern 7 Heartbeat, SA continuity, memory
2 scenario-rcs-temperature PWR 0 vs 9 epistemic-independence
3 scenario-concurrent-alarms PWR 9 (5 agents) Flooding, delivery-modes, context divergence
4 scenario-safety-verification PWR 9 + diversity common-cause-failure, KG guardrails
5 scenario-loca PWR 9 (7 agents) Full role deployment, LOCA response
6 scenario-fuel-monitoring SMR 9 + KG KG grounding, simulator coupling
7 scenario-instrument-failure PWR 9 (3 agents) Threading, attentional tunnelling
8 scenario-multi-unit-smr SMR 9 (9 agents) Multi-unit SA scaling
9 scenario-compound-event PWR 9 + diversity AI failure under compound event, operator override

Key Design Elements

Tool Architecture (Section 11): Defines the tool interfaces agents use to query plant data, retrieve procedures, invoke simulations, and access operating experience databases.

HSI Architecture (Section 12): AI advisory displays must be visually distinct from qualified instrumentation. Typed artefacts provide structured output. The SA Bridge translates agent communication for operator displays.

Procedure-AI Interaction (Section 13): How AI systems interact with EOPs, AOPs, and Tech Specs — procedure as knowledge graph, AI as interpretation layer.

Significance

The scenarios are thought experiments, not deployment proposals. They demonstrate why the architectural distinctions between patterns carry practical consequences. Scenario 2 directly compares Pattern 0 vs Pattern 9, showing where single-agent simulation fails and multi-agent operation is required.