Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Function Allocation”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

222 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

FIRE: A Failure-Adaptive RL Framework for Edge Computing Migrations

In edge computing, users' service profiles are migrated between edge servers due to user mobility. Reinforcement Learning (RL) frameworks have been proposed to do so, often trained on simulated data. However, existing RL frameworks overlook occasional server failures, which although rare, impact latency-sensitive applications like AR/VR and real- time obstacle detection. These rare failures, being not adequately represented in historical training data, pose a challenge for data-driven RL algorithms. We introduce FIRE, a framework that adapts to rare events by training a RL policy in an edge computing digital twin environment. We propose FIRE-ImRE, an importance sampling-based Q-learning algorithm, which samples rare events proportionally to their impact on the value function. FIRE considers delay, migration, failure, and backup placement costs across individual and shared service profiles. We prove FIRE-ImRE's boundedness and convergence to optimality. Next, we introduce novel deep Q-learning (FIRE-ImDQL) and actor critic (FIRE-ImACRE) versions of our algorithm to enhance scalability. Here, we extend our framework to accommodate users with varying risk tolerances of rare failure events. Through trace-driven experiments, we show that FIRE reduces edge computing costs compared to vanilla RL and the greedy baseline in the event of failures.

Edge computing↗
DOE OSTI2024

Model code and data: biomass allocation adjustments induced by elevated CO2 and warming in a C3 brackish marsh, 2017-2022, Maryland

This dataset and R script accompany the published paper Bruns et al. (2024) in Geophysical Research Letters. The data are from the first six years of a field manipulation of whole-ecosystem warming and elevated CO2 experiment (Salt Marsh Accretion Response to Temperature eXperiment, or SMARTX) in the Smithsonian's Global Change Research Wetland (GCReW), a brackish, microtidal wetland site on a subestuary of the Chesapeake Bay. These data were generated to understand how warming and elevated CO2 interact to structure ecosystem-level responses to global change, particularly in terms of carbon sequestration. The dataset covers 2017-2022 and includes peak annual above ground biomass, annual belowground fine root productivity, and porewater NH4 for each experimental plot. The overall experiment is replicated in two locations on the marsh, a lower elevation zone dominated the C3 sedge S. Americanus and a higher elevation plot dominated by the C4 species. This paper and its data release is only for the C3 plot. Variable descriptions for data file is available in variable_descriptions.pdf. The R script Bruns_et_al_2024_GRL_make_figures.Rmd contains model code and other scripts used to generate all paper figures.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Enhancing Cloud Cybersecurity: Prescriptive Controls for Operational Technology

This whitepaper provides strategic insights and recommendations into security cloud-based solutions for electric utilities, encompassing operational technology (OT), virtual power plants (VPP), distributed energy resources (DERs), applications, networks, and data storage as they transition to and leverage cloud infrastructure through managed service providers (MSPs) and cloud service providers (CSPs). Principles derived from established frameworks serve as a foundation for best practices across cybersecurity projects and remove the constraints of settling on a single framework. For organizations that prefer not to integrate a specific framework altogether, elements of the proposed approach could be adopted or tailored to best fit defined requirements and expected functionalities. The Cirrus assessment, a utility cloud feasibility tool, and the roadmap it provides serve as a precursor to this paper, which seeks to be a valuable resource for defining next steps following cloud technology integration feasibility appraisal. With its comprehensive approach to adoption, the Cirrus framework offers strategic guidance on responsibly preparing for or deploying a utility cloud solution. The previously published whitepaper, “Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration,” details the guiding strategy, research, and deployment of cloud solutions within electric and interconnected grid systems. Before implementing the controls suggested in this document, it is recommended that stakeholders complete Cirrus's cloud integration assessment and pair the results with their unique cybersecurity controls to form a comprehensive cloud-based utility cybersecurity plan. The Cirrus outcome will consider a series of future architectures for the grid before and after the energy transition and evaluate the arguments for and against cloud applications for each electric and interconnected grid layer. This document is a companion to the original whitepaper, "Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration" to further identify and recommend security controls based on Cirrus’s cloud integration assessment output. The following whitepaper outlines the cybersecurity controls that secure cloud-service models pertinent to the electric sector using the predefined categories identify, protect, detect, and respond and recover. The objective is to outline prescriptive security controls based on the type of architecture and data stored in the cloud. The focus includes dissecting the shared responsibility model and elucidating what on-premises Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) entail. A pivotal consideration in this context is allocating responsibility for foundational cybersecurity aspects—having used Cirrus for the cloud integration assessment. The ensuing controls detailed herein also represent a checklist of controls necessary for a secure cloud transition, equipping utilities with the knowledge to navigate this digital transformation with confidence and strategic foresight in a safe and responsible manner.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a collection of objects stored within an RDate file, stateWaterRightsHarmonized.RData. Each object either describes how one should interact with the other objects, or contains the harmonized water rights data. Here is each object described in detail: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. The column headers for each data frame are: waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. allocatedFlow - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. rightsByState_surface: A list of the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, these lists are the merging of rightsByState_ground and rightsByState_surface by state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2020

Radiological Recovery Logistics Tool - 20161

Argonne is building and testing a tool, the Radiological Recovery Logistics Tool (RRLT), that can be used during the response and recovery from a radiological or nuclear incident to effectively allocate appropriate commercial and public works equipment to mitigate, remove, and contain radiological contamination. The requirements for this tool - as well as development of the resulting software - is overseen by a steering committee of stakeholders from DHS's National Urban Security Technology Laboratory (NUSTL), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). One essential requirement is for RRLT to support the efficient and appropriate allocation of resources for a radiological response. Subsequent discussions between ANL and stakeholders have solidified the nature of this support to include identification of the types of resources to be allocated. The study reported in this paper has both factored fundamental concepts and connections out of this identification process and created a Knowledge Base detailing support goals, response scenarios, and efficacy information on dozens of equipment types. In short, RRLT will dynamically apply these findings to situational conditions surrounding contamination incidents. RRLT's Domain, the model of elements, ideas and relationships with which the tool will work, draws concepts from technical reports and stakeholder vocabularies to connect response goals and scenarios to types of equipment that offer utility towards those goals in those scenarios. RRLT's Knowledge Base will contain details on dozens of equipment types and facilitate the operator's discovery and consumption of these details most pertinent to a dynamically selected subset of goals. The core of its Domain Model is based on a report authored by this team. This report [1] contains a comprehensive list of proposed equipment to accomplish various missions or scenarios that might arise after a large-scale radiological contamination incident in an urban environment or critical infrastructure. The report divides potential response and recovery efforts into five support goals: Survey and monitoring of the contaminated area; Mitigation of received dose to first responders: Decontamination (gross and final) of buildings, vehicles, roadways, parks, and other surfaces: Waste management of solid waste generated during recovery operations: and Containment of wastewater and other waste generated during the response and recovery phases. RRLT's development is driven by use cases. A use case is an intention with which a user approaches the software. Use cases are grouped into delivery increments to schedule development, testing, and presentation to stakeholders. This model partitions the system into seven increments: User Arrival and Authentication, Search and Navigation, Equipment Recommendation, Plan Management, Content Management, and Expanded Access. Once a user 15 authenticated, RRLT will present the user with a dashboard that allows them to explore or search RRLT's content. The dashboard will also include a 'Plan' panel for collecting decisions and relevant observations about an incident at hand to facilitate development of an equipment list. RRLT will offer three general modes of access to items in the knowledge base: - Keyword search for direct discovery of items, - Navigation along predetermined paths from recovery goal towards equipment types, and - Interactive guidance towards equipment types by an autonomous software agent: the Equipment Recommendation Wizard. This presentation will detail progress in the development of the RRLT and also discuss opportunities for those interested in providing feedback on its content and functionality. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗