Verification vs Validation

Verification asks whether the code solves the equations right; validation asks whether the equations describe the machine. The breeder is verified in places and awaits hardware validation everywhere.

Two different questions

'V and V' names two distinct checks that are easy to blur. Verification: does the code correctly solve the mathematical model it claims to? Validation: does that model correctly describe physical reality? The breeder (Hyperion) record keeps them separate because the honest status differs sharply between them.

Verification: partly done, and doable now

Verification does not need a machine. It uses techniques like the method of manufactured solutions, convergence studies, and conservation checks. The breeder record includes such checks for its solvers and reports them as one of the things reproduction can confirm today.

Validation: awaits FOAK

Validation requires comparing model output to measurement from the actual system. Because the breeder is not built, its models are not yet validated against hardware. Benchmarking against other machines' data provides partial, indirect validation for shared physics, but the specific integrated breeder design is validated only when FOAK measures it near 2030.

The clean statement: verification is in progress and reproducible; validation is pending, and no page claims otherwise. See solver verification.

The words are worth guarding because the field routinely blurs them. A press statement that a code is 'validated' when it has only been verified overstates what is known by a wide margin, and a reader cannot recover the difference from the word alone. The breeder record uses 'validated' only for a comparison against hardware, which means today it uses the word for nothing, and says so.

This page describes a design-and-simulation study, not a built machine. Construction of the breeder (Hyperion) begins Q2 2027; first-of-a-kind first tritium is targeted near 2030. No hardware net-gain claim is made before FOAK.