Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “fitting”

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.

At least 307 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Benefits of colorectal cancer screening using fecal immunochemical testing with varying positivity thresholds by age and sex

Background Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) performance for colorectal cancer screening varies by age and sex, yet most FIT-based screening programs use uniform positivity thresholds. This study assessed the potential benefits of stratifying FIT thresholds based on age and sex. Methods We conducted a meta-analysis of FIT sensitivity and specificity at various positivity thresholds by age and sex. We then used these estimates in 2 microsimulation models of colorectal cancer and projected lifetime clinical outcomes, incremental costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained from age- and sex-stratified FIT strategies. FIT thresholds ranged from 10 to 50 µg hemoglobin per gram of feces. Results For current uniform FIT screening (20 µg hemoglobin/gram of feces), models projected 85.67 to 122.15 QALYs gained at incremental costs of ‒$982 to $504 per 1000 individuals compared with no screening. At equivalent costs to current uniform screening, only 1 model found stratified FIT approaches cost-effective, yielding a marginal increase of 1.04 and 1.10 QALYs gained/1000 female and male individuals, respectively. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000/QALYs gained, both models found stratified FIT cutoffs to be the best strategy, with cutoffs being equal to or higher for males and lowest at older ages (70-75 years). Uniform strategies showed comparable effectiveness, falling within 1 quality-adjusted life-day per person of efficient strategies at up to $112 more per person. Results were sensitive to FIT test performance characteristics and 1-time setup costs. Conclusion Stratifying FIT thresholds by age and sex may be cost-effective compared to current screening. The gain in expected health benefits with stratified FIT screening, however, is likely small.

Harlass, Matthias↗
DOE OSTI2022

Diffuse X-ray scattering from polished silicon: application of the distorted wave Born approximation

Measured diffuse X-ray scattering data for a `smooth' as well as for a `rough' silicon sample were fit to theoretical expressions within the distorted wave Born approximation (DWBA). Data for the power spectral density (PSD) for both samples were also obtained by means of atomic force microscopy and optical interferometry. The Fourier transforms of trial correlation functions were fit to the PSD data and then applied to the DWBA formalism. The net correlation functions needed to fit the PSD data for each sample comprised the sum of two terms with different cutoff lengths and different self-affine fractal exponents. At zero distance these correlation functions added up to yield net values of σ 2 = (2) 2 and (71) 2 Å 2 for the smooth and rough samples, respectively. X-ray scattering data were obtained at beamline 1-BM of the Advanced Photon Source. Data and fits at values of q z = 0.05 and 0.10 Å −1 for the smooth sample are reported. Good fits for the smooth sample were obtained at both q z values simultaneously, that is, identical fitting parameters were applied at both values of q z . The smooth sample also exhibited weak Yoneda wings and a clear distinction between the strong specular scattering and the weak diffuse scattering. Data for the rough sample were qualitatively different and exhibited very weak scattering at the specular condition in contrast to extremely large Yoneda wings. Fits for the rough sample are reported for q z = 0.04, 0.05, and 0.06 Å −1 . Although the large Yoneda wings could be fit quite well in both position and amplitude, scattering near the specular condition could not be equally well fit by applying the same fitting parameters at all values of q z . Albeit imperfect, best-fitting results at the specular condition were obtained by invoking only diffuse scattering, that is, without including a separate theoretical expression for specular scattering.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Quantitative analysis of Raman spectral parameters for carbon fibers: practical considerations and connection to mechanical properties

Although the literature on the Raman spectra of carbon fibers is vast, no consistent, robust predictive relationship between mechanical properties of carbon fibers and spectral parameters exists. This shortcoming is due to the use of numerous fitting functions to evaluate Raman spectra of carbon fibers and the inconsistencies in establishing the best fitting models in a statistically robust fashion. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive work on the Raman spectra of carbon fibers that combines a vast library of experimental data with a robust numerical analysis and a statistical evaluation of a wide range of suggested fitting models. This manuscript begins with a brief review of the commonly applied fitting models. Then, the Raman spectra of 32 commercially available polyacrylonitrile-based carbon fibers collected at excitation wavelengths 532, 633, and 785 nm are presented and the best fit for all fibers is evaluated based on several statistical criteria in conjunction with numerical calculations and physical arguments. The results suggest that high-performance fibers must be fit with at least five peaks, whereas high-tensile modulus fibers are best fit with at least six distinct peaks. Finally, we employ simultaneous fitting of the Raman spectra of specific fibers and wavelengths and demonstrate that strong correlations exist between mechanical properties and the D1 peak position and shape across the range of evaluated mechanical properties. Finally, we suggest straightforward improvements in fitting analysis procedures that can be implemented to increase coherency in the understanding of the underlying carbon fiber microstructure intuited from Raman spectroscopy.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Generating mock galaxy catalogues for flux-limited samples like the DESI Bright Galaxy Survey

ABSTRACT Accurate mock galaxy catalogues are crucial to validate analysis pipelines used to constrain dark energy models. We present a fast HOD-fitting method which we apply to the AbacusSummit simulations to create a set of mock catalogues for the DESI Bright Galaxy Survey, which contain r-band magnitudes and $(g-r)$ colours. The halo tabulation method fits HODs for different absolute magnitude threshold samples simultaneously, preventing unphysical HOD crossing between samples. We validate the HOD fitting procedure by fitting to real-space clustering measurements and galaxy number densities from the MXXL BGS mock, which was tuned to the SDSS and GAMA surveys. The best-fitting clustering measurements and number densities are mostly within the assumed errors, but the clustering for the faint samples is low on large scales. The best-fitting HOD parameters are robust when fitting to simulations with different realizations of the initial conditions. When varying the cosmology, trends are seen as a function of each cosmological parameter. We use the best-fitting HOD parameters to create cubic box and cut sky mocks from the AbacusSummit simulations, in a range of cosmologies. As an illustration, we compare the ${}^{0.1}M_r\lt -20$ sample of galaxies in the mock with BGS measurements from the DESI one-percent survey. We find good agreement in the number densities, and the projected correlation function is reasonable, with differences that can be improved in the future by fitting directly to BGS clustering measurements. The cubic box and cut-sky mocks in different cosmologies are made publicly available.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Consistent and reproducible computation of the glass transition temperature from molecular dynamics simulations

In many fields, from semiconductors for opto-electronic applications to ionic liquids (ILs) for separations, the glass transition temperature (Tg) of a material is a useful gauge for its potential use in practical settings. As a result, there is a great deal of interest in predicting Tg using molecular simulations. However, the uncertainty and variation in the trend shift method, a common approach in simulations to predict Tg, can be high. This is due to the need for human intervention in defining a fitting range for linear fits of density with temperature assumed for the liquid and glass phases across the simulated cooling. The definition of such fitting ranges then defines the estimate for the Tg as the intersection of linear fits. We eliminate this need for human intervention by leveraging the Shapiro–Wilk normality test and proposing an algorithm to define the fitting ranges and, consequently, Tg. Through this integration, we incorporate into our automated methodology that residuals must be normally distributed around zero for any fit, a requirement that must be met for any regression problem. Consequently, fitting ranges for realizing linear fits for each phase are statistically defined rather than visually inferred, obtaining an estimate for Tg without any human intervention. The method is also capable of finding multiple linear regimes across density vs temperature curves. We compare the predictions of our proposed method across multiple IL and semiconductor molecular dynamics simulation results from the literature and compare other proposed methods for automatically detecting Tg from density–temperature data. We believe that our proposed method would allow for more consistent predictions of Tg. We make this methodology available and open source through GitHub.

Chemistry↗
DOE OSTI2020

Auto-BLAST (AutoBLAST) [SWR-20-93]

Battery life modeling often involves a lot of manual parameter fitting and is not easy for users to adopt the model and use it. To reduce the difficulties for users to adopt battery lifetime models, an automatic battery lifetime modeling analysis and simulation tool suite, Auto-BLAST, has been developed. Auto-BLAST includes a lithium-loss-base life model, a battery electric model, and an algorithm which automatically fits all key parameters in the electric and life models using user provided data. The models and algorithm are packaged into two user-friendly GUIs, Auto-LifeMod, for easy battery life prognostic model fitting and Auto-LifeSim, for easy battery lifetime simulation. The lithium-loss-based life model adopts a similar model framework that models degradations using aging rate models, using battery cycling data to predict battery degradation and expected lifetime. The electric model is an equivalent circuit model which simulates battery voltage responses based on current/power demand profiles. The auto-fitting algorithm uses the user-input data to generate custom battery life model(s). Two GUIs, wrapping around the life model and the auto-fitting algorithm, provide friendly interfaces for users to generate a life model and use it for case study. One GUI requires summary data from accelerated battery life degradation tests as an input and produces battery life models predicting (a) capacity degradation, and (b) resistance growth of the battery. The GUI displays the electrical model response and the input experimental data against the life model predictions with fitted model parameters and fitting error. The GUI also generates an output file to save the fitted model parameters. The second GUI uses the life model from the first GUI and a user-defined battery cycling profile to predict battery lifetime degradation and expected lifetime. Predicted capacity and resistance vs. time are plotted in the GUI and saved to output file. There is a user guide for both GUIs

Mishra, Partha↗
DOE OSTI2023

Evolving efforts to maintain and improve XPS analysis quality in an era of increasingly diverse uses and users

Based on literature analysis, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) use continues to increase exponentially. This increased use is accompanied by anecdotal reports and systematic analyses indicating a growing presence of significantly flawed data analyses. Recognition of this problem within the surface analysis community has increased with an understanding that both inexperienced users and increased use of XPS outside the surface analysis community contribute to the problem. The XPS community has initiated several efforts to help address the problem, which is not unique to XPS. This paper describes some of the specific problems identified and some of the community efforts intended to address them. Here, we describe activities focused on three specific issues: (i) requests for detailed guides and protocols and bite-sized versions of information for non-experts, (ii) incomplete data and analysis reporting, and (iii) the high rate of peak fitting problems. A 2019 survey identified the need for guides, protocols, and standards to assist XPS users. One set of such guides has been published, and another is being assembled. Providing incremental bites of useful information is the goal of a series of papers on specific challenges to surface analysis with example solutions has been initiated as Notes and Insights papers in Surface and Interface Analysis. Examination of XPS-containing papers finds that information to establish the credibility and reproducibility of XPS results is often very incomplete. Unfortunately, ISO and ASTM standards require an amount of parameter reporting that seems excessive and unrealistic for many research publications. Initial approaches to develop and distribute a graded approach to parameter reporting are briefly described. Multiple efforts are underway to address the high rate of problems associated with photoelectron peak fitting. These include guides to peak fitting, guides to peak identification and fitting for specific elements, and the development of a peak fitting social network. The fitting social network is designed to facilitate interactions between new and experienced XPS users; analysts trying to fit XPS data (for publication or other reasons) can ask questions and establish dynamic conversations. Encouraging and enabling high-quality XPS analysis and reporting requires several different types of effort from all members of the surface and interface analysis community.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2022

Artificial intelligence based analysis of nanoindentation load–displacement data using a genetic algorithm

In this work, we developed an automated tool, Nanoindentation Neo package for the analysis of nanoindentation load–displacement curves using a Genetic Algorithm (GA) applied to the Oliver-Pharr method (Oliver et al.,1992). For some materials, such as polycrystalline isotropic graphites, Least Squares Fitting (LSF) of the unload curve can produce unrealistic fit parameters. These graphites exhibit sharply peaked unloading curves not easily fit using the LSF, which tends to overestimate the indenter tip geometry parameter. To tackle this problem, we extended our general materials characterization tool Neo for EXAFS analysis (Terry et al., 2021) to fit nanoindentation data. Nanoindentation Neo automatically processes and analyzes nanoindentation data with minimal user input while producing meaningful fit parameters. GA, a robust metaheuristic method, begins with a population of temporary solutions using model parameters called chromosomes; from these we evaluate a fitness value for each solution, and select the best solutions to mix with random solutions producing the next generation. A mutation operator then modifies existing solutions by random perturbations, and the optimal solution is selected. We tested the GA method using Silica and Al reference standards. We fit samples of graphite and a high entropy alloy (HEA) consisting of BCC and FCC phases.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

SANS quantification of bound water in water-soluble polymers across multiple concentration regimes

Contrast-variation small-angle neutron scattering (CV-SANS) is a widely used technique for quantifying hydration water in soft matter systems, but it is predominantly applied in the dilute regime or for systems with a well-defined structure factor. Here, CV-SANS was used to quantify the number of hydration water molecules associating with three water-soluble polymers with different critical solution temperatures and types of water–solute interactions in dilute, semidilute, and concentrated solution through the exploration of novel methods of data fitting and analysis. Multiple SANS fitting workflows with varying levels of model assumptions were evaluated and compared to give insight into SANS model selection. These fitting pathways ranged from general, model-free algorithms to more standard form and structure factor fitting. In addition, Monte Carlo bootstrapping was evaluated as a method to estimate parameter uncertainty through simulation of technical replicates. The most robust fitting workflow for dilute solutions was found to be form factor fitting without CV-SANS ( i.e. polymer in 100% D 2 O). For semidilute and concentrated solutions, while the model-free approach can be mathematically defined for CV-SANS data, the addition of a structure factor imposes physical constraints on the optimization problem, suggesting that the optimal fitting pathway should include appropriate form and structure factor models. The measured hydration numbers were consistent with the number of tightly bound water molecules associated with each monomer unit, and the concentration dependence of the hydration number was largely governed by the chemistry-specific interactions between water and polymer. Polymers with weaker water–polymer interactions ( i.e. those with fewer hydration water molecules) were found to have more bound water at higher concentrations than those with stronger water–polymer interactions due to the increase in the number of forced water–polymer contacts in the concentrated system. This SANS-based method to count hydration water molecules can be applied to polymers in any concentration regime, which will lead to improved understanding of water–polymer interactions and their impact on materials design.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Cold neutron-deuteron capture and Wigner-SU(4) symmetry

We calculate the cold neutron-deuteron (nd) capture cross section,σ nd to next-to-next-to leading order (NNLO) using the model-independent approach of pionless effective-field theory [EFT(π)]. At leading order we find σ nd = 0.314 ± 0.217 mb, while the experimental result is 0.508(15) mb for a laboratory neutron velocity of 2200 m/s. At next-to-leading-order (NLO), we show that σnd is sensitive to the low-energy constant (LEC) $L$$^{(0)}_{1}$ of the two-nucleon isovector current appearing at NLO. A fit of $L$$^{(0)}_{1}$ at NLO to the triton magnetic moment yields a NLO prediction of σ nd = 0.393 ± 0.164 mb, where the error comes from propagating the error from the $L$$^{(0)}_{1}$ fit. At NNLO, we find that a new three-nucleon magnetic moment counterterm is required for renormalization-group invariance of both σnd and the triton magnetic moment. Fitting the NNLO correction to $L$$^{(0)}_{1}$ (denoted $L$$^{(1)}_{1}$) to cold neutron-proton capture (σnp) yields a NNLO prediction of σ nd = 0.447 ± 0.130 mb, where the error comes from propagating the error from the $L$$^{(1)}_{1}$ fit. We also study different fittings of $L$$^{(0)}_{1}$ and $L$$^{(1)}_{1}$ to σ np , σ nd , and/or the triton magnetic moment. For example, fitting $L$$^{(0)}_{1}$ simultaneously to σ np , σ nd , and the triton magnetic moment at NLO, and fitting $L$$^{(1)}_{1}$ simultaneously to σ np and σnd at NNLO, yields σ nd = 0.480 ± 0.114 mb and 0.511 ± 0.042 mb, respectively, where errors are naively estimated from EFT(π) power counting. Additionally, we discuss how Wigner SU(4) symmetry may alter the naive EFT(π) expansion of σ nd .

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Development of Digital Twin Predictive Model for PWR Components: Updates on Multi Times Series Temperature Prediction Using Recurrent Neural Network, DMW Fatigue Tests, System Level Thermal-Mechanical-Stress Analysis

The long-term operation (LTO) of nuclear power plant (NPP) beyond their original design life of 40 years, can lead to more material damage associated with cyclic fatigue under thermal-mechanical loading cycles and associated long-term exposure of reactor material to the deleterious reactor-coolant environments. However, under this LTO condition the reactor components can still safely operate but may require more frequent Nondestructive Evaluation (NDE) of reactor components. Frequent NDE requirement may lead to frequent shutdown of the NPP. This in turn can lead to power outage and additional NDE-inspection-cost related economic loss. The economic loss can be minimized by reducing uncertainty in life estimation of safety-critical pressure boundary components and by implementing more digital approach such as by using upcoming digital-twin (DT) technology for predicting the structural states (e.g., time and location dependent inside/outside thickness temperature, stress, strain, plastic deformation, etc.) and associated fatigue life of a component in real time. Towards this goal Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) with the sponsorship of DOE Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program is working on the development of a DT framework that can be used for real time environmental fatigue prediction of reactor components. The DT framework is based on limited experiment-data, Artificial-intelligence (AI) – Machine-Learning (ML) - Deep-Learning (DL) based techniques and Multiphysics-computational-mechanics such as finite element (FE) based modeling tools. Towards this overall goal, following are some of the major contributions made during the FY21: 1) Multiple 82/182 dissimilar metal weld (DMW) specimens (both solid-weld and joint-weld representing the actual reactor multi-metal nozzles) were fatigue tested. The resulting fatigue lives were compared to the NUREG-6909 based best-fit and design fatigue curves. Additionally, the results of 52/152 DMW fatigue specimens (which were recently tested at Republic of Korea under the sponsorship of International Nuclear Energy Research Initiative - INERI program) were compared to the NUREG-6909 based best-fit and design fatigue curves. From the comparison of 82/182 and 52/152 DMW test data with NUREG-6909 best-fit curve, most of the reported test data fall way away from the NUREG-6909 suggested best-fit or mean curve. The NUREG-6909 suggested best-fit curve is the best-fit curve of austenitic stainless steel and due to lack of enough data on Nickel-based welds, this is currently being used for predicting the life of Nickel-alloy-based welded components. However, the above observation may require higher scaling factor (e.g., ASME suggested factor of 20 on cycles rather than the current NUREG-6909 suggested factor of 12 on cycles) for scaling the austenitic-stainless-steel best-fit-curve for estimating the design or safe-life of a welded component. Accordingly, for example, if a DMW component experience a strain amplitude of 0.6% the PWR-water life of the component would be 52 cycles instead of 85 cycles. However, more DMW tests are required to further ascertain the above-mentioned observations. 2) A system level CAD and finite element model were developed which consists of reactor pressure vessel (RPV), part of steam generator (SG), part of pressurizer (PRZ), hot leg (HL), and surge line (SL). This is with detailed nozzle geometry and thermal-mechanical material properties of different metals to simulate realistic thermal-mechanical stress under connected system global thermal-mechanical boundary conditions. 3) Different system level heat transfer analyses were performed with estimation of relevant heat transfer coefficients. The resulting data were used in subsequent system level thermal-mechanical stress analysis and for generating spatial-temporal training and validation data for a system level digital-twin based temperature predictor. Transient heat transfer analyses were performed considering thermal boundary condition under design-basis (DB) loading and EDF (Électricité de France) data-based grid-load-following (EDF-GLF) loading cycles. 4) System level thermal-mechanical stress analysis was performed for identifying damage-prone hotspots and for future extension of the model for cyclic state prediction. From the system-level model simulation under DB loading cycle it is found that HL and the SL nozzle that connect to the HL can experience significant stress and strain and could be one of the weakest links in the overall reactor coolant system (RCS). 5) An AI/ML based DT model was developed for multi-time-series temperature prediction at any inside/outside thickness locations of PWR pressure boundary components. This is by using Recurrent-neural-network (RNN) and keras machine learning libraries. The RNN model was validated against two laboratory test-based data sets with one obtained through ANL’s in-air fatigue test system and other through PWR-water test loop. The experimentally validated DT model further validated against FE model results to predict thermal scarification related spatialtemporal temperatures at random locations of a component. The well validated DT model was then used for demonstrating spatial-temporal temperature prediction under 100+ years of reactor operation subjected to combined DB, EDF-GLF and randomized grid-load-following (RANDOMGLF) loading Cycles. The expert-elicitation DT model framework was developed assuming field/input/process measurements can be available from a few existing plant sensors and can readily be used by the NPP operators. The above temperature prediction model will feed to the next-step stress analysis model based on which the life of a component can be predicted in realtime, which is one of our future works.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Modeling of Radiolytic Hydrogen Generation of Irradiated Surrogate Aluminum Plates

The hydrogen generation from oxyhydroxide layers under irradiation is an important effect to understand for the long-term storage of aluminum-clad spent nuclear fuel. The original chemical model shows steady production of hydrogen from aluminum oxyhydroxide layers, with no roll-over effect in the curves of the hydrogen concentration until significant pressure has built up within the canister. This study uses a variety of kinetic fits to adjust the old chemical model to have roll-over effects that are consistent with new high-dose experiments. The data from aluminum 6061 coupon tests at high doses were used to fit several kinetic models. The 6061 aluminum samples are representative of the aluminum-clad fuel from the ATR. The fitted kinetic models were then used in a model of a mini-canister with much higher packing density to determine which kinetic rates would fit both sets of experimental tests. The rate constants for the kinetic mechanisms that were close were then tweaked such that the chemical models fit both the experimental data from the capsule tests and the data from the mini-canister tests. The kinetic models which fit the best are either inhibition by hydrogen, or a back reaction wherein H radical is reabsorbed onto the oxyhydroxide layer. The H back reaction rolls over quicker and may fit future collected data.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Measurement of neutrino oscillations using neutrino and antineutrino beams in the NOvA experiment

NOvA is a long-baseline accelerator neutrino oscillation experiment using the NuMIneutrino beam from Fermilab. Its main physics goals are to probe the 3-flavour oscillationparameters: neutrino mass hierarchy, CP-violating phase dcp and octant of .23 mixingangle by observing electron neutrino appearance and muon neutrino disappearance. Twofunctionally identical detectors are placed off-axis from the centre of the NuMI beam.The near detector at Fermilab is 100 m underground, and the far detector is locatedon the surface at Ash River, 810 km away from the beam source. The initial neutrinobeam spectra are measured using the near detector data and the oscillation parametersare extracted by fitting the observed data to the predicted neutrino spectrum in the fardetector.This thesis is centered around how to improve the sensitivity of |.m232| and .23 measurementsin the muon neutrino disappearance analysis. NOvA will take data for about12 years. The operation of the NOvA experiment for each year costs tens of millions ofdollars, thus it is valuable to maximise the sensitivity of the analysis. Three samples ofmuon neutrino events are studied in this thesis to improve the analysis sensitivities. First,higher energy muon neutrinos are investigated by extending the energy range in NOvA’scurrent standard analysis. Second, for the sample of events used in NOvA’s existing analysis,a new energy estimator which has been developed to improve the neutrino energy resolution is considered. Furthermore, in addition to binning the events as function ofenergy and hadronic energy fraction, three particle identifiers are introduced to separateneutrino events by signal purity to reduce the effects from backgrounds. Third, an additionallower purity sample of muon neutrino charged current (CC) events that look similarto neutral current events and have not been included in NOvA’s existing analyses havebeen studied.This thesis reanalyses NOvA’s data used in the 2020 analysis, corresponding to anexposure of 13.60×1020 protons on target (POT) in the neutrino beam mode recordedfrom February 6, 2014 to March 20, 2020, and 12.50×1020 protons on target in theantineutrino beam mode recorded between June 29, 2016 to February 26, 2019. Thisthesis has implemented a fit to Asimov fake data, generated where sin2 .23 = 0.59 and.m232 = 2.5 × 10-3 eV2. These sensitivity studies show that the uncertainty range of|.m232| at 1 s in the new analysis is reduced by 5.5% and the significance of maximaldisappearance rejection improves by 7.7%, compared to the standard analysis. This isequivalent to adding 11-16% more data. The best fit values of the oscillation parametersfrom fitting to the far detector (FD) data with the new analysis are found to besin2 .23 = 0.568+0.025-0.043 (sin2 .23 = 0.454+0.046-0.026) and .m232 = 2.399+0.055-0.070 × 10-3 eV2 (.m232= -2.427+0.055-0.067 × 10-3 eV2) for the normal (inverted) hierarchy. The difference in thebest fit for sin2 .23 (.m232) between the new analysis and NOvA’s 2020 analysis is around2% (1.4%). The uncertainty range at 1 s for .m232 decrease by 8% (4%) for the normalhierarchy (inverted hierarchy) compared to the standard analysis. The uncertainty rangefor sin2 .23 is close to the standard analysis. This thesis also implements the fit from combiningelectron neutrino appearance and muon neutrino disappearance. The combinedanalysis shows that the best fit values are very close to the standard analysis. However,the uncertainty range of .m232 at 1 s is reduced by 3.7% using the new analysis. The maximaldisappearance significance is not improved in the new analysis, but the new analysisslightly improves the rejection of the disfavoured octant.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimal Stopping Ages for Colorectal Cancer Screening

Importance Prior studies have shown that the benefits, harms, and costs of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at older ages are associated with a patient’s sex, health, and screening history. However, these studies were hypothetical exercises and not directly informed by data on CRC risk. Objective To identify the optimal stopping ages for CRC screening by sex, comorbidity, and screening history from a cost-effectiveness perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants This economic evaluation first validated the MISCAN-Colon (Microsimulation Screening Analysis–Colon) model against community-based CRC incidence and mortality rates for 2 subcohorts of the PRECISE (Optimizing Colorectal Cancer Screening Precision and Outcomes in Community-Based Populations) cohort. Subsequently, different CRC screening scenarios were simulated in older individuals. Cohorts of US adults aged 76 to 90 years varied by sex and comorbidity status (none, low, moderate, or severe). Statistical and sensitivity analyses were performed from March 2023 to May 2024. Exposures CRC screening histories including fecal immunochemical test (FIT) or colonoscopy, such as a negative colonoscopy result from 10, 15, 20, 25, or 30 years before the index age; 1 to 5 negative FIT results within 5 years of the index age, with different patterns of recency; or a combination of negative colonoscopy and negative FIT results. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcomes included estimated lifetime clinical outcomes, incremental costs, and quality-adjusted life-years gained (QALYG) associated with 1 additional FIT or colonoscopy. Optimal stopping age for screening, defined as the oldest age for which the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was still below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $\$$100 000 per QALYG, was evaluated. Results The first of the 2 PRECISE subcohorts used in validating the simulation model included 25 974 adults (15 060 females [58.0%]; 54.7% aged 76 to 80 years) with a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index date. The second subcohort consisted of 118 269 adults (67 058 females [56.7%]; 90.5% aged 76 to 80 years) with a negative FIT result 1 year before the index date. Older age, male sex, higher comorbidity levels, and recent CRC screenings were associated with reduced incremental benefit and cost-effectiveness of additional screening. For the reference cohort of 76-year-old females without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age, 1 additional colonoscopy cost $\$$38 226 per QALYG. For cohorts with otherwise equivalent characteristics, associated costs increased to $\$$1 689 945 per QALYG for females at age 90 years without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy results 10 years before the index age, $\$$51 604 per QALYG for males at age 76 years without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age, and $\$$108 480 per QALYG for females at age 76 years with severe comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 10 years before the index age and decreased to $\$$16 870 per QALYG for females without comorbidities and a negative colonoscopy result 30 years before the index age. The optimal stopping ages across different cohorts ranged from younger than 76 to 86 years for colonoscopy and younger than 76 to 88 years for FIT. Conclusions and Relevance In this economic evaluation, age, sex, screening history, comorbidity, and future screening modality were associated with the clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and optimal stopping age for CRC screening. These results can inform guideline development and patient-directed informed decision-making.

Harlass, Matthias [Erasmus Erasmus University Medi↗
DOE OSTI2023

Interactions of πK, ππK and KKπ systems at maximal isospin from lattice QCD

We study the interactions of systems of two and three nondegenerate mesons composed of pions and kaons at maximal isospin using lattice QCD, specifically $π^+K^+, π^+π^+K^+$ and $K^+K^+π^+$. Utilizing the stochastic LapH method, we determine the spectrum of these systems on two CLS $N_f$ = 2 + 1 ensembles with pion masses of 200 MeV and 340 MeV, and include many levels in different momentum frames. We constrain the K matrices describing two- and three-particle interactions by fitting the spectrum to the results predicted by the finite-volume formalism, including up to p waves. This requires also results for the $π^+π^+$ and $K^+K^+$ spectrum, which have been obtained previously on the same configurations. We explore different fitting strategies, comparing fits to energy shifts with fits to energies boosted to the rest frame, and also comparing simultaneous global fits to all relevant two- and three-particle channels to those where we first fit twoparticle channels and then add in the three-particle information. We provide the first determination of the three-particle K matrix in $π^+π^+K^+$ and $K^+K^+π^+$ systems, finding statistically significant nonzero results in most cases. We include s and $\textit{p}$ waves in the K matrix for $π^+K^+$ scattering, finding evidence for an attractive p-wave scattering length. We compare our results to Chiral Perturbation Theory, including an investigation of the impact of discretization errors, for which we provide the leading order predictions obtained using Wilson Chiral Perturbation Theory.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗