How should false positives be managed in nuclear and other high-consequence OT?

Concise explanation

The answer belongs to the Cyber-Physical Mission Assurance knowledge domain. Its controlling distinction is that Cyber-physical mission assurance protects the functions that must continue when digital compromise can create physical damage, unsafe control, loss of power, or loss of cooling.

A defensible decision must name the subject, the purpose, the relevant jurisdiction or technical context, and the evidence property being tested. Integrity, authenticity, currentness, reliability, completeness, and legal authority should not be collapsed into a single result.

What this does not mean

The answer does not establish a universal scientific consensus, legal recognition, current operation, personhood, citizenship, sovereignty, or authority. It does not make a database row, credential, signing key, or website dispositive of a question that requires institutional judgment.

Current law or standard

Safety, reliability, nuclear, grid, occupational, environmental, and emergency obligations can impose different priorities and decision authorities on the same event.

Legal conclusions remain jurisdiction-specific and fact-specific. External sources using Artificial Intelligence or AI retain their own terminology.

Project doctrine

Project doctrine requires consequence-aware arbitration: safety boundaries cannot be overridden by mission software, while defensive actions must be tested against physical effects before deployment.

This position is labeled as project doctrine or proposal unless a separate public record demonstrates enacted law or verified implementation.

Evidence requirements

• A stable subject or system reference.
• Authorized sources and provenance.
• Current timestamps and review state.
• Separate findings for integrity, authenticity, relevance, reliability, completeness, and suitability.
• A competent decision authority and appeal route when legal or civic status is involved.

Related questions and terms

Questions

• What does Critical Function Assurance protect?
• What is a critical-datacenter assurance case?
• What does an open assurance defeater mean?
• What is a facility-adaptation workbook?
• Can the public workbook tool store protected topology or credentials?
• Does consensus scoring decide a procurement award?
• Why use a three-way facility-workbook merge?
• What is common-cause assurance analysis?

Terms

• High Consequence Event
• Consequence-driven Cyber-informed Engineering
• IT/OT Convergence
• Unidirectional Gateway
• Safety Envelope
• Assurance Case
• Assurance Defeater
• Safe-State Transition

Sources

• Consequence-driven Cyber-informed Engineering — Idaho National Laboratory; INL CCE program page; Official laboratory methodology description. Exact claim-support entries: 2. Revalidated 2026-08-15T16:00:00Z.
• NIST SP 800-82 Revision 3 — Guide to Operational Technology Security — National Institute of Standards and Technology; NIST SP 800-82 Rev. 3; NIST Final Publication. Exact claim-support entries: 1. Revalidated 2026-08-15T20:00:00Z.
• 10 CFR 73.54 — Protection of Digital Computer and Communication Systems and Networks — U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission / Electronic Code of Federal Regulations; 10 CFR 73.54, current eCFR; Federal regulation. Exact claim-support entries: 2. Revalidated 2026-08-15T16:00:00Z.

Direct-answer claim record

Each proposition has a stable ID, status, scope, owning route, evidence relationship, currentness qualification, correction state, and synchronized JSON record. Record completeness does not make the proposition true.