Abstract
Human-factor event diagnosis is essential for learning from operational events in nuclear power plants, yet its quality depends strongly on expert interpretation of narrative reports and guideline-based reasoning. Existing data-driven or one-shot large language model approaches often lack structured reasoning, have limited alignment with formal diagnostic guidelines, and may generate logically inconsistent conclusions. To address this issue, this study proposes G-SHARE, a guideline-based structured reasoning framework that operationalizes the CNNP nine-step human-factor event diagnosis guideline into a multi-stage diagnostic pipeline.
The framework consists of evidence extraction, stepwise diagnostic reasoning, and post-hoc consistency repair, enabling explicit use of report evidence, intermediate rationale generation, and logical validation of diagnostic outputs. A dataset of real human-factor event reports was constructed from Chinese nuclear industry sources, and a gold-standard subset annotated by domain experts was used for evaluation. Results show that G-SHARE substantially outperforms one-shot prompting and traditional machine learning baselines, with the strongest version achieving the best overall accuracy and macro-F1. Ablation results further indicate that structured reasoning and consistency enforcement are critical to robust diagnosis, especially under weak prompting conditions. The findings demonstrate the value of transforming expert diagnostic guidelines into auditable reasoning workflows, providing a practical pathway for intelligent human-factor analysis in safety-critical industries.
Blogger's Review: G-SHARE combines traditional expert knowledge with modern reasoning frameworks, opening new avenues for human-factor event diagnosis. It not only enhances diagnostic accuracy but also ensures safety in the nuclear sector, making it a model for broader application in other fields.