Publications

Peercy, David E.

Abstract not provided.

Peercy, David E.

Abstract not provided.

Peercy, David E.

Abstract not provided.

Matzen, Laura E.; Haass, Michael J.; Silva, Austin R.; Peercy, David E.

Abstract not provided.

Peercy, David E.

Cognitive science research investigates the advancement of human cognition and neuroscience capabilities. Addressing risks associated with these advancements can counter potential program failures, legal and ethical issues, constraints to scientific research, and product vulnerabilities. Survey results, focus group discussions, cognitive science experts, and surety researchers concur technical risks exist that could impact cognitive science research in areas such as medicine, privacy, human enhancement, law and policy, military applications, and national security (SAND2006-6895). This SAND report documents a surety engineering framework and a process for identifying cognitive system technical, ethical, legal and societal risks and applying appropriate surety methods to reduce such risks. The framework consists of several models: Specification, Design, Evaluation, Risk, and Maturity. Two detailed case studies are included to illustrate the use of the process and framework. Several Appendices provide detailed information on existing cognitive system architectures; ethical, legal, and societal risk research; surety methods and technologies; and educing information research with a case study vignette. The process and framework provide a model for how cognitive systems research and full-scale product development can apply surety engineering to reduce perceived and actual risks.

Peercy, David E.

Advances in cognitive science provide a foundation for new tools that promise to advance human capabilities with significant positive impacts. As with any new technology breakthrough, associated technical and non-technical risks are involved. Sandia has mitigated both technical and non-technical risks by applying advanced surety methodologies in such areas as nuclear weapons, nuclear reactor safety, nuclear materials transport, and energy systems. In order to apply surety to the development of cognitive systems, we must understand the concepts and principles that characterize the certainty of a system's operation as well as the risk areas of cognitive sciences. This SAND report documents a preliminary spectrum of risks involved with cognitive sciences, and identifies some surety methodologies that can be applied to potentially mitigate such risks. Some potential areas for further study are recommended. In particular, a recommendation is made to develop a cognitive systems epistemology framework for more detailed study of these risk areas and applications of surety methods and techniques.

Pilch, Martin P.; Froehlich, G.K.; Hodges, Ann L.; Peercy, David E.; Trucano, Timothy G.; Moya, Jaime L.; Peercy, David E.

This report describes the results of the FY01 Level 1 Peer Reviews for the Verification and Validation (V&V) Program at Sandia National Laboratories. V&V peer review at Sandia is intended to assess the ASCI (Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative) code team V&V planning process and execution. The Level 1 Peer Review process is conducted in accordance with the process defined in SAND2000-3099. V&V Plans are developed in accordance with the guidelines defined in SAND2000-3 101. The peer review process and process for improving the Guidelines are necessarily synchronized and form parts of a larger quality improvement process supporting the ASCI V&V program at Sandia. During FY00 a prototype of the process was conducted for two code teams and their V&V Plans and the process and guidelines updated based on the prototype. In FY01, Level 1 Peer Reviews were conducted on an additional eleven code teams and their respective V&V Plans. This report summarizes the results from those peer reviews, including recommendations from the panels that conducted the reviews.

Hodges, Ann L.; Froehlich, G.K.; Pilch, Martin P.; Peercy, David E.

This document describes a proactive plan for assessing and controlling sources of risk for the ASCI (Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative) V&V program at Sandia National Laboratories. It offers a graded approach for identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, responding to, and monitoring risks.

Pilch, Martin P.; Trucano, Timothy G.; Peercy, David E.; Hodges, Ann L.; Young, Eunice R.; Moya, Jaime L.; Trucano, Timothy G.

This report describes the initial definition of the Verification and Validation (V and V) Plan Peer Review Process at Sandia National Laboratories. V and V peer review at Sandia is intended to assess the ASCI code team V and V planning process and execution. Our peer review definition is designed to assess the V and V planning process in terms of the content specified by the Sandia Guidelines for V and V plans. Therefore, the peer review process and process for improving the Guidelines are necessarily synchronized, and form parts of a larger quality improvement process supporting the ASCI V and V program at Sandia.