Towards Data Democracy Beyond Fukushima - Principia Designae: Pre-Design, Design, and Post-Design - page 106

longer term climate changes, on diversities of humanities even with some
apparently cyclic patters as a planet in the solar system.
Lessons for the artifactual design from the Accident are
• Design mistakes by setting the emergency help diesel generator and power
switches in the basement causing SBO at the single loop
• Missing inheritance of design knowledge about the blow-out panel from
designers to maintenance technicians at the single loop and the double loop
• Missing of discussions on how to modify established regulations in accordance
with the realistic evaluation on the accident cite at the triple loop
By using template of the above three loops for example, we nuclear experts need
to explain our learned lessons explicitly to articulate the engineering, social,
economical, environmental and human health issues that the Accident has evoked
to present and future generations. It is crucial to recognize all the impacts are
associated each other in complex manners and to see each fact in a holistic way,
describing the fact by associated and relevant data and their explanations.
It is important for all to recognize that we were suddenly put into the triple loop
learning and there are different observers, instruments, sampling methods and time
of observations and time when observations are made. The reported raw data will
have scatters and spikes and sometimes errors due to the ongoing complex event, so
that it is important to evaluate the reported data independently and scientifically on
the way of the single loop if possible with other scientists, and if possible by digital
logic filters prepared by experts before. In our information society, various volun-
tary experts of different disciplines in the world can carry out evaluations of
reported data, so that exaggerating biased reports and mistakes will be phased out
gradually but its takes time without a set of standard reference data. An important
prerequisite to make it happen is that we scientists need to communicate with each
other by a common language beyond each scientific domain without using special-
ized technical terms Shibboleth, hopefully, through facts/objects and accessible
scientific data in the beginning.
In case of calculated data, we need to know at least functionality and correctness
of the program, valid range and domain, input data, computational parameters,
accuracy and uncertainty of calculated data, and objectives of estimation, for
example, best estimate or conservative estimate, phenomenological or first princi-
ples, deterministic or probabilistic, etc. So we need to be very careful in using
calculated data without reference data and/or reference programs. Just a collection
of calculated data without explicit explanations has brought confusions to the
society also in this occasion. One lesson we have learned is we need to prepare
reporting views for calculated data of importance.
It is not easy to control “Information Tsunami” after something happened as it
passed rapidly through different mass medias and the Internet together with the
strong images of hydrogen explosions as the consequences of severe core damages.
It requires data commons to support the society at the level of the triple loop
learning, and it needs to be prepared and maintained in a feasible way. Risk
evaluation data are to be prepared in the way our society can use to protect before.