1 / 3

IDPS Splinter Algorithm Verification

IDPS Splinter Algorithm Verification. Neal Baker and Shawn Miller April 5, 2011. Issue Summary. Algorithm management process has been described by both Raytheon and the JPSS Project, and the descriptions are almost entirely consistent

dutch
Download Presentation

IDPS Splinter Algorithm Verification

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IDPS SplinterAlgorithm Verification Neal Baker and Shawn Miller April 5, 2011

  2. Issue Summary • Algorithm management process has been described by both Raytheon and the JPSS Project, and the descriptions are almost entirely consistent • Only one discrepancy remained as of the last IDPS Splinter: who does the verification of a new algorithm or algorithm change? • Study report has Raytheon performing this activity, under IPAC-like groundrules, but leveraging NPP lessons learned • Baker presentation indicated the science algorithm vendor would do the verification (but this adds significant schedule risk for Raytheon)

  3. Proposed Solution • New algorithm or algorithm change reaches the AERB as an A-ECR • A-ECR includes proposed criteria for verification, tuned to whatever makes the most sense for the type and timing of the change • This could include IPAC-like criteria, if test inputs and outputs are supplied (the preferred method) • It could also include something more like our “bubble testing”, where internal consistency of IDPS is verified • Could be a combination of quantitative standalone and qualitative chain (as we are doing for closing out NPP requirements) • The bottom line here is, the algorithm vendor is able to help define the success criteria, but *before* implementation begins, so an unambiguous pass/fail is achievable on a set schedule • If, after successful implementation, broader testing by the algorithm vendor identifies a new issue, that can trigger an ADR, and then it’s business as usual

More Related