Incident: Software Failure in Brain Scanner Programs Invalidates 15 Years of Research

Published Date: 2016-07-07

Postmortem Analysis
Timeline 1. The software failure incident happened around 15 years before the article was published in 2016 [46348]. Therefore, the software failure incident likely occurred around the year 2001.
System 1. Software programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI used for interpreting brain scanner images failed [46348].
Responsible Organization 1. The software programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI were responsible for causing the software failure incident [46348].
Impacted Organization 1. Researchers in the field of neuroscience who have relied on the software programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI for interpreting brain scan images were impacted by the software failure incident [46348].
Software Causes 1. The software causes of the failure incident were errors in the three most commonly used software programs for interpreting brain scanner images - SPM, FSL, and AFNI, which led to false positives of up to 70% in brain activity detection [46348].
Non-software Causes 1. Lack of availability of research data for validation purposes [46348] 2. Cost constraints in conducting large-scale studies with MRI scans [46348]
Impacts 1. The software failure incident in the programs used to interpret brain scans raised doubts about the validity of around 40,000 neuroscience research studies conducted over 15 years [46348]. 2. The study revealed errors in the software used for interpreting brain scans, with false positive rates reaching up to 70%, leading to incorrect results in studies [46348]. 3. The incident highlighted the challenge of validating methodology in scientific literature, as errors in one study can propagate through citations in subsequent research, potentially impacting a wide range of studies [46348].
Preventions 1. Regular software testing and quality assurance procedures could have helped prevent the software failure incident by identifying and addressing the errors in the programs used for interpreting brain scans [46348]. 2. Implementing proper validation processes for software used in critical research areas like neuroscience could have ensured the accuracy and reliability of the results [46348]. 3. Making research data more accessible for validation purposes could have facilitated the identification of errors in the software and prevented the propagation of incorrect results in scientific literature [46348].
Fixes 1. Implementing rigorous testing procedures to identify and rectify errors in the software [46348]. 2. Ensuring regular software updates and maintenance to address any potential flaws or bugs [46348]. 3. Providing access to data for validation purposes to allow for independent verification of results [46348].
References 1. Interviews with researcher Anders Eklund from Linköping University, Sweden [46348] 2. Study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [46348]

Software Taxonomy of Faults

Category Option Rationale
Recurring one_organization, multiple_organization (a) The software failure incident related to the interpretation of brain scans by faulty software had occurred before within the same organization or with its products and services. The incident involved errors in the software programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI used for interpreting brain scan images, leading to false results in neuroscience research. The issue was discovered by the team of researcher Anders Eklund from the University of Linköping, Sweden, who found significant errors in the software, impacting the validity of around 40,000 studies in neuroscience [46348]. (b) The software failure incident regarding the misinterpretation of brain scan images due to faulty software has implications beyond one organization. The study conducted by Anders Eklund's team raised concerns about the validity of approximately 40,000 studies in the field of neuroscience that relied on the flawed software programs. This indicates that similar incidents may have occurred at other organizations or in other research studies utilizing the same software for brain imaging analysis [46348].
Phase (Design/Operation) design (a) The software failure incident in the articles is related to the design phase. The incident was caused by a flaw in the software programs used to interpret brain scanner images, which led to errors in the results of neuroscience research studies. The study conducted by researcher Anders Eklund found errors in the three most commonly used software programs (SPM, FSL, and AFNI) used for interpreting brain scanner images, with false positive rates of up to 70%. The researchers noted that this flaw in the software had been present for around 15 years before being discovered and fixed [46348]. (b) The articles do not provide information on a software failure incident related to the operation phase or misuse of the system.
Boundary (Internal/External) within_system The software failure incident reported in the articles can be categorized as within_system. The incident was related to errors found in the software programs (SPM, FSL, and AFNI) used to interpret brain scanner images, which led to false results in neuroscience research [46348]. The study conducted by Anders Eklund's team revealed significant errors within the software programs themselves, impacting the validity of around 40,000 studies in the field of neuroscience. The issue was specifically identified as a software failure within the programs that had been present for approximately 15 years before being corrected [46348].
Nature (Human/Non-human) non-human_actions (a) The software failure incident occurring due to non-human actions: The software failure incident in this case was due to a fault in the programs used to interpret brain scanner images. The study conducted by researcher Anders Eklund and his team found errors in the three most commonly used software programs - SPM, FSL, and AFNI. These errors led to false positives in brain activity detection, with rates as high as 70%. The researchers discovered a software flaw that had been present for 15 years before it was fixed [46348]. (b) The software failure incident occurring due to human actions: The article does not provide specific information about the software failure incident being directly caused by human actions.
Dimension (Hardware/Software) software (a) The software failure incident reported in the articles is related to software contributing factors rather than hardware. The incident involved errors in software programs used to interpret brain scan images, specifically the programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI. The study conducted by researcher Anders Eklund found significant errors in the software, leading to false positives in brain activity detection. The article mentions that the software flaw had been present for around 15 years before being fixed [46348].
Objective (Malicious/Non-malicious) non-malicious (a) The software failure incident reported in Article 46348 was non-malicious. The incident was related to errors found in the software programs used to interpret brain scanner images, specifically in the programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI. The errors led to false positives in brain activity detection, casting doubt on the validity of around 40,000 studies in neuroscience that relied on these programs for interpreting functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. The errors were not intentional but were due to flaws in the software that had been present for around 15 years before being discovered and fixed [46348].
Intent (Poor/Accidental Decisions) poor_decisions (a) The software failure incident described in Article 46348 was primarily due to poor_decisions. The incident involved errors in the software programs used to interpret brain scans, which led to significant inaccuracies in the results of neuroscience research. The study conducted by researcher Anders Eklund found that the software programs commonly used in the field had high error rates, with false positive rates reaching up to 70%. This issue had been present for around 15 years before being discovered and addressed. The impact of these software errors called into question the validity of around 40,000 studies in the field of neuroscience [46348].
Capability (Incompetence/Accidental) development_incompetence, accidental (a) The software failure incident in the articles can be attributed to development incompetence. The incident was caused by errors in the software programs used to interpret brain scan images, specifically the programs SPM, FSL, and AFNI. The study conducted by researcher Anders Eklund found significant errors in these widely used software programs, with false positive rates reaching up to 70%. The researchers highlighted that these errors had been present in the software for around 15 years, indicating a lack of professional competence in ensuring the accuracy of the programs [46348]. (b) The software failure incident can also be categorized as accidental. The researchers discovered a software flaw in the programs that had been present for 15 years, indicating that the errors were not intentional but rather accidental in nature. The study aimed to rigorously test the software programs with real data to uncover the inaccuracies, suggesting that the flaws were not deliberately introduced but had gone unnoticed for a significant period of time [46348].
Duration temporary The software failure incident discussed in the article was temporary. The article mentions that the software failure was due to a fault in the programs used to interpret brain scans, which had been present for 15 years but was fixed by the time the article was written in 2015 [46348].
Behaviour value (a) crash: The software failure incident described in the article is not related to a crash where the system loses state and does not perform any of its intended functions. Instead, the issue highlighted in the article is about errors in the software used for interpreting brain scans, leading to inaccuracies in the results of neuroscience studies [46348]. (b) omission: The software failure incident is not attributed to the system omitting to perform its intended functions at an instance(s). The focus is on errors in the software used for analyzing brain scan images, which resulted in false positives and inaccuracies in interpreting brain activity [46348]. (c) timing: The software failure incident does not involve the system performing its intended functions correctly but too late or too early. The issue discussed in the article pertains to errors in the software used for processing and interpreting brain scan data, leading to incorrect results in neuroscience studies [46348]. (d) value: The software failure incident is related to the system performing its intended functions incorrectly. The study found errors in the software programs commonly used for analyzing brain scans, which resulted in false positives and inaccuracies in interpreting brain activity, potentially impacting the validity of thousands of neuroscience studies [46348]. (e) byzantine: The software failure incident is not characterized by the system behaving erroneously with inconsistent responses and interactions. The primary issue highlighted in the article is the presence of errors in the software used for interpreting brain scan images, leading to inaccuracies in neuroscience research findings [46348]. (f) other: The software failure incident described in the article does not fall under the categories of crash, omission, timing, or byzantine behavior. The specific behavior of the software failure incident is related to errors in the software programs used for analyzing brain scans, resulting in false positives and inaccuracies in interpreting brain activity, potentially impacting the validity of numerous neuroscience studies [46348].

IoT System Layer

Layer Option Rationale
Perception None None
Communication None None
Application None None

Other Details

Category Option Rationale
Consequence theoretical_consequence The consequence of the software failure incident discussed in the article is related to potential theoretical consequences rather than real observed consequences. The software failure in the programs used to interpret brain scans raised doubts about the validity of around 40,000 studies in neuroscience. The impact of the software failure was on the interpretation of results from neural images, potentially leading to erroneous conclusions in scientific research [46348]. The article does not mention any real observed consequences such as death, harm, basic needs impact, property loss, delays, or non-human entities being affected.
Domain knowledge, health The software failure incident reported in Article 46348 is related to the health industry. The incident involved the failure of programs used to interpret brain scans, specifically functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scans, which are crucial for neuroscience research and medical diagnostics [46348]. The study conducted by researcher Anders Eklund highlighted errors in the software programs (SPM, FSL, and AFNI) commonly used for analyzing brain scan images, leading to significant inaccuracies in the results obtained from these scans [46348]. The implications of this software failure are substantial, as it calls into question the validity of around 40,000 studies in the field of neuroscience that relied on these software programs for data interpretation [46348].

Sources

Back to List