Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “model types”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Workforce planning: a review of methodologies

Workforce planning deals with determining the number of employees and associated skills necessary to meet the future operational needs of an organization. A workforce system consists of six elements: recruitment, attrition, promotion, training, retention, and scheduling. Historically, several workforce modeling and analysis methodologies have been developed to capture these elements. This paper reviews the results of workforce and manpower models published within peer-reviewed literature between 1959 and 2021 to provide an in-depth analysis of current models. The focus of this review is on analytical, simulation, and empirical models found in literature that were collected based on a citation requirement and keyword search criteria. Results demonstrate the trends in workforce modeling research and discuss the common uses of each model type and the advantages/disadvantages related to each model. Based on the common attributes of workforce systems, the discussion focuses on the most frequently used model type for each element and the best use for each model. Lastly, recommendations are made for the development of workforce models that allow the most comprehensive view of the workforce systems of the future.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Detection of Diversion in a Realistic Heat Pipe Microreactor Using Supervised Machine Learning

Microreactors (MRs) pose new challenges for international safeguards. Here, their small size and mass reproducibility make them ideal for deployment in greater numbers and in remote locations, making the job of safeguards inspectors more challenging. Machine learning (ML) is currently being applied to many fields to augment human performance and increase automation; in particular, ML could be used to provide insight for international inspectors to help detect the diversion of nuclear fuel from MR cores. Four ML model types (k-nearest neighbors, decision tree, random forest, and histogram-based gradient boosted ensemble) were trained on integrated flux and critical control drum angle data generated with Serpent 2 for a realistic heat pipe MR design, achieving nearly 100% binary classification accuracy of nominal and diversion core configurations by the end of 1 full power year for three of the four model types. Regression model variants were also trained, using the same input data, for predicting the number of fuel pins diverted. Root-mean-square errors below 5% of the total number of fuel pins were achieved by the 1 full power year mark for all models.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

SALT3: An Improved Type Ia Supernova Model for Measuring Cosmic Distances

Abstract A spectral-energy distribution (SED) model for Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) is a critical tool for measuring precise and accurate distances across a large redshift range and constraining cosmological parameters. We present an improved model framework, SALT3, which has several advantages over current models—including the leading SALT2 model (SALT2.4). While SALT3 has a similar philosophy, it differs from SALT2 by having improved estimation of uncertainties, better separation of color and light-curve stretch, and a publicly available training code. We present the application of our training method on a cross-calibrated compilation of 1083 SNe with 1207 spectra. Our compilation is 2.5× larger than the SALT2 training sample and has greatly reduced calibration uncertainties. The resulting trained SALT3.K21 model has an extended wavelength range 2000–11,000 Å (1800 Å redder) and reduced uncertainties compared to SALT2, enabling accurate use of low- z I and iz photometric bands. Including these previously discarded bands, SALT3.K21 reduces the Hubble scatter of the low- z Foundation and CfA3 samples by 15% and 10%, respectively. To check for potential systematic uncertainties, we compare distances of low (0.01 < z < 0.2) and high (0.4 < z < 0.6) redshift SNe in the training compilation, finding an insignificant 3 ± 14 mmag shift between SALT2.4 and SALT3.K21. While the SALT3.K21 model was trained on optical data, our method can be used to build a model for rest-frame NIR samples from the Roman Space Telescope. Our open-source training code, public training data, model, and documentation are available at https://saltshaker.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ , and the model is integrated into the sncosmo and SNANA software packages.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
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 OSTI2022

Data used for Figure 3 of the Nature Reviews Earth and Environment (NREE) paper: "A low-to-no snow future and its impacts on water resources in the western United States

In order to synthesize western United States snowpack projections, this dataset contains the results of 18 peer-review journal articles over three periods of interest (2025-2049, 2050-2074, and 2075-2099) and over 4 mountain ranges (Cascades, Sierra Nevada, Rockies, Wasatch/Uinta) in addition to western-US wide projections. Distinction is made by model type (Earth System Models, bias-corrected statistically downscaled Earth System Models, and regional climate models). RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 emission scenarios are considered. Percent snow water equivalent (SWE) loss considers 1 April, peak SWE and/or seasonal SWE. Heterogeneity in projected snowpack changes exists across mountain ranges and for different modeling approaches, but generally indicate agreement in decreases by the end of the century.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Keras2c: A library for converting Keras neural networks to real-time compatible C

With the growth of machine learning models and neural networks in measurement and control systems comes the need to deploy these models in a way that is compatible with existing systems. Existing options for deploying neural networks either introduce very high latency, require expensive and time consuming work to integrate into existing code bases, or only support a very limited subset of model types. We have therefore developed a new method called Keras2c, which is a simple library for converting Keras/TensorFlow neural network models into real-time compatible C code. It supports a wide range of Keras layers and model types including multidimensional convolutions, recurrent layers, multi-input/output models, and shared layers. Keras2c re-implements the core components of Keras/TensorFlow required for predictive forward passes through neural networks in pure C, relying only on standard library functions considered safe for real-time use. The core functionality consists of ~ 1500 lines of code, making it lightweight and easy to integrate into existing codebases. Keras2c has been successfully tested in experiments and is currently in use on the plasma control system at the DIII-D National Fusion Facility at General Atomics in San Diego.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Towards a Deeper Fundamental Understanding of (Al,Sc)N Ferroelectric Nitrides

Density functional theory (DFT) calculations, within the virtual crystal alloy approximation, are performed, along with the development of a Landau-type model employing a symmetry-allowed analytical expression of the internal energy and having parameters determined from first principles, to investigate properties and energetics of Al1-xScxN ferroelectric nitrides in their hexagonal forms. These DFT computations and this model predict the existence of two different types of minima, namely, the fourfold-coordinated wurtzite (WZ) polar structure and a five-fold coordinated paraelectric hexagonal phase (denoted as H5), for any Sc composition up to 40%. The H5 minimum progressively becomes the lowest-energy state within hexagonal symmetry as the Sc concentration increases from 0 to 0.4. Furthermore, the model points to several key findings. Examples include the crucial role of the coupling between polarization and strains to create the WZ minimum, in addition to polar and elastic energies, and that the origin of the H5 state overcoming the WZ phase as the global minimum within hexagonal symmetry when increasing the Sc composition mostly lies in the compositional dependency of only two parameters-one linked to the polarization and another one being purely elastic in nature. Other examples are that forcing Al1-xScxN systems to have no or a weak change in lattice parameters when heating them allows us to reproduce their finite-temperature polar properties well and that a value of the axial ratio close to that of the ideal WZ structure implies a large polarization at low temperatures but not necessarily at high temperatures because of the ordered-disordered character of the temperature-induced formation of the WZ state. Such findings should allow for a better fundamental understanding of (Al,Sc)N ferroelectric nitrides, which may be used to design efficient devices having, e.g., low operating voltages.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

A machine learning approach targeting parameter estimation for plant functional type coexistence modeling using ELM-FATES (v2.0)

Tropical forest dynamics play a crucial role in the global carbon, water, and energy cycles. However, realistically simulating the dynamics of competition and coexistence between different plant functional types (PFTs) in tropical forests remains a significant challenge. This study aims to improve the modeling of PFT coexistence in the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES), a vegetation demography model implemented in the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) land model (ELM), ELM-FATES. Specifically, we explore (1) whether plant trait relationships established from field measurements can constrain ELM-FATES simulations and (2) whether machine learning (ML)-based surrogate models can emulate the complex ELM-FATES model and optimize parameter selections to improve PFT coexistence modeling. We conducted three ensembles of ELM-FATES experiments at a tropical forest site near Manaus, Brazil. By comparing the ensemble experiments without (Exp-CTR) and with (Exp-OBS) consideration of observed trait relationships, we found that accounting for these relationships slightly improves the simulations of water, energy, and carbon variables when compared to observations but degrades the simulation of PFT coexistence. Using ML-based surrogate models trained on Exp-CTR, we optimized the trait parameters in ELM-FATES and conducted another ensemble of experiments (Exp-ML) with these optimized parameters. The proportion of PFT coexistence experiments significantly increased from 21 % in Exp-CTR to 73 % in Exp-ML. After filtering the experiments that allow for PFT coexistence to agree with observations (within 15 % tolerance), 33 % of the Exp-ML experiments were retained, which is a significant improvement compared to the 1.4 % in Exp-CTR. Exp-ML also accurately reproduces the annual means and seasonal variations in water, energy, and carbon fluxes and the field inventory of aboveground biomass. This study represents a reproducible method that utilizes machine learning to identify parameter values that improve model fidelity against observations and PFT coexistence in vegetation demography models for diverse ecosystems. Our study also suggests the need for new mechanisms to enhance the robust simulation of coexisting plants in ELM-FATES and has significant implications for modeling the response and feedbacks of ecosystem dynamics to climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Sparsity dependence of Krylov state complexity in the SYK model

We study the Krylov state complexity of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model for 𝑁 ≤28 Majorana fermions with 𝑞-body fermion interaction with 𝑞 =4, 6, 8 for a range of sparse parameter 𝑘 that controls the number of remaining terms in the original SYK model after sparsification. The critical value of 𝑘 below which the model ceases to be holographic, denoted 𝑘 𝑐 , has been subject of several recent investigations. Using Krylov complexity as a probe, we find that the peak value of complexity does not change as we increase 𝑘 beyond 𝑘 ≥ 𝑘 min at large temperatures. We argue that this behavior is related to the change in the holographic nature of the Hamiltonian in the sparse SYK-type models such that the model is holographic for all 𝑘 ≥ 𝑘 min ≈ 𝑘 𝑐 . Our results provide a novel way to determine 𝑘 𝑐 in SYK-type models.

gauge-gravity dualitites↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development and Evaluation of Occupancy-Aware Model Predictive Control for Residential Building Energy Efficiency and Occupant Comfort

The residential sector accounts for 25% of global primary energy consumption. Two methods have previously been proposed to reduce residential energy use associated with the provision of occupant thermal comfort: 1. Occupancy-based HVAC control, operating systems only during confirmed occupancy, and 2. model predictive control (MPC), harnessing a mathematical model and forecasts to find optimal operating strategies. Previous studies estimate the average energy savings of the two methods individually in the range of 21% and 16%, respectively. The research presented herein was carried out to evaluate the energy savings potential in residential buildings by combining both approaches across different climates, house vintages, and occupancy patterns. Occupancy and eight different physical modalities (e.g. CO2 and VOC) data were collected from five homes for time periods of 4–9 weeks. Collected data sets were used to train occupancy prediction models suggested by an extensive literature survey of occupancy model types. The trained prediction models were combined with MPC and detailed EnergyPlus building simulation models to evaluate residential building performance in terms of annual energy savings and thermal comfort, along with discomfort exceedance metrics. Multiple home types and regions were analyzed to understand regional and climate-dependent potential. Based on actual field data, the occupancy models had a prediction inaccuracy between 8% and 35% across the investigated homes. Average occupancy for the collected data ranged from 56% to 86%, a typical range reported in the literature. Building simulations were conducted for three control scenarios: conventional thermostatic control, occupancy-based, and occupancy-based MPC. The results indicate that all advanced strategies improve upon the conventional control, with some scenarios cutting energy use in half with only occasional incurrence of discomfort. The findings indicate that occupancy-aware model predictive residential building control has the potential to drastically reduce energy use and associated emissions while maintaining occupant comfort for both new and existing buildings.

ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION↗
DOE OSTI2022

The Impact of Resolution on Double-detonation Models for Type Ia Supernovae

Abstract Thermonuclear supernovae are the result of the violent unbinding of a white dwarf (WD), but the precise nature of the explosion mechanism(s) is a matter of active debate. To this end, several specific scenarios have been proposed to explain the observable traits of Type Ia supernovae. A promising pathway is the double-detonation scenario, where a WD accretes a shell of helium-rich material from a companion and a detonation in the resulting helium shell is the primary cause of the explosion. Through a set of two-dimensional grid-based simulations of this scenario we clearly distinguish three phases of evolution: external helium-rich detonation, core compressive heating, and a final core carbon burn. Though final disruption of the whole system is achieved at all resolutions, only models with minimum resolutions of 4 km and better exhibit all three phases. Particularly, core compression detonation is only observed for higher resolutions, producing qualitatively different nucleosynthetic outcomes. We identify the effect of finer spatial resolution on the mixing of hot silicon at the interface between the detonating helium layer and the underlying C/O WD as a primary driver of these dynamic differences.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

A galaxy-driven model of type Ia supernova luminosity variations

ABSTRACT Type Ia supernovae (SNe Ia) are used as standardizable candles to measure cosmological distances, but differences remain in their corrected luminosities which display a magnitude step as a function of host galaxy properties such as stellar mass and rest-frame U−R colour. Identifying the cause of these steps is key to cosmological analyses and provides insight into SN physics. Here we investigate the effects of SN progenitor ages on their light-curve properties using a galaxy-based forward model that we compare to the Dark Energy Survey 5-yr SN Ia sample. We trace SN Ia progenitors through time and draw their light-curve width parameters from a bimodal distribution according to their age. We find that an intrinsic luminosity difference between SNe of different ages cannot explain the observed trend between step size and SN colour. The data split by stellar mass are better reproduced by following recent work implementing a step in total-to-selective dust extinction ratio (RV) between low- and high-mass hosts, although an additional intrinsic luminosity step is still required to explain the data split by host galaxy U−R. Modelling the RV step as a function of galaxy age provides a better match overall. Additional age versus luminosity steps marginally improve the match to the data, although most of the step is absorbed by the width versus luminosity coefficient α. Furthermore, we find no evidence that α varies with SN age.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Dynamical attractors in contracting spacetimes dominated by kinetically coupled scalar fields

We present non-perturbative numerical relativity simulations of slowly contracting spacetimes in which the scalar field driving slow contraction is coupled to a second scalar field through an exponential non-linear σ model-type kinetic interaction. These models are important because they can generate a nearly scale-invariant spectrum of super-Hubble density fluctuations fully consistent with cosmic microwave background observations. We show that the non-linear evolution rapidly approaches a homogeneous, isotropic and flat Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) geometry for a wide range of inhomogeneous and anisotropic initial conditions. Ultimately, we find, the kinetic coupling causes the evolution to deflect away from flat FRW and towards a novel Kasner-like stationary point, but in general this occurs on time scales that are too long to be observationally relevant.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Renewable Energy and Efficiency Technologies in Scenarios of U.S. Decarbonization in Two Types of Models: Comparison of GCAM Modeling and Sector-Specific Modeling

Energy system projections from quantitative models inform actions ranging from short-term and local decisions, such as those about technology and infrastructure deployment, and global and long-term negotiations and targets. Computational limits require model designers to balance coverage and resolution (i.e., breadth versus depth). Some models, such as the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), represent all energy sources and uses with less resolution than models that focus on a single sector's energy use. GCAM balances global supply and demand of all energy carriers projecting prices using internal calculations for energy sources and costs of greenhouse gas mitigation while capturing interlinkages between the energy system, water, agriculture and land use, the economy, and the climate. This globally comprehensive model was used to frame the Long-Term Strategy of the United States: Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050, which the White House released in 2021 and has been used to inform national and global economy-wide climate change mitigation discussions and strategy development for decades. Unlike GCAM, sectoral models focus on a portion of the energy sector and with greater detail and resolution. The Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electricity-sector model, for example, projects electricity system capacity expansion and operation with high-fidelity representation of emerging technologies for deep decarbonization, such as variable renewable energy and energy storage, and integration of these technologies into the electric grid. The Transportation Energy and Mobility Pathway Options (TEMPO) transportation-sector model enables analysis of household choices, with a focus on adoption, charging, and use of electric vehicles. The Scout buildings-sector model supports detailed consideration of the policies and markets that can accelerate the adoption of electrification and energy conservation measures in buildings. Such sector-specific models are instrumental in informing technology research, sectoral planning strategies, and sector-specific aspects of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies in the United States. The integrated multisector and sector-specific modeling approaches represented by GCAM and these sectoral models are complementary. The integrated multisector approach calculates energy pricing and resource allocation within the model, which is important for consistency when future conditions substantially diverge from current conditions in transformative scenarios. The sector-specific approach facilitates representation of granular details across spatial, temporal, technological, and market dimensions that enable exploration of particular interactions and trade-offs. This report presents the results of recent work to explore the differences and trade-offs between these approaches by comparing GCAM with the sector-specific ReEDS, TEMPO, and Scout models. The report compares both model structures and results, and it addresses their potential relevance and applications.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Complete development of LAROMance-type surrogate models for Zircaloy, as well as initial integration and testing in MOOSE, which addresses industry needs for licensing advanced LWR fuels

This milestone report details the progress in the constitutive surrogate modeling framework for Zircaloy’s mechanical behavior under extreme conditions, within the NEAMS program throughout the U.S. fiscal year 2024 (FY24). The presented work expands on the spectral based mechanical solver and the mechanistic material model for Zircaloy, which were introduced in the NEAMS program during FY22 and detailed in the previous fiscal year (FY23). As part of the NEAMS program, the current effort described in this report focused on the development of a novel viscplastic (creep) surrogate for the mechanistic, polycrystal-based model. To this end, the work was subdivided into two interdependent components related to the necessary improvements to the LApx constitutive model and algorithm and, to the development and use of a surrogate model.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Renewable Energy and Efficiency Technologies in Scenarios of U.S. Decarbonization in Two Types of Models: Comparison of GCAM Modeling and Sector-Specific Modeling

Energy system projections from analytic models inform actions ranging from short-term and local decisions, such as technology and infrastructure deployment, to global and long-term negotiations and targets. Computational limits require the designers of these models to trade off between coverage and resolution. Some models, such as the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), represent all energy sources and uses but at a relatively coarse level of resolution. GCAM balances global supply and demand of all energy carriers by endogenously projecting prices for energy sources and costs of greenhouse gas mitigation while capturing interlinkages between the energy system, water, agriculture and land use, the economy, and the climate. This global model was used to frame the Long-Term Strategy released by the White House in 2021 and has been used to inform national and global economy-wide decarbonization discussions and strategy development for decades. Other models instead focus on a portion of the energy sector with greater detail and resolution. The Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electricity-sector model, for example, projects capacity expansion with an emphasis on integration of variable renewable energy into the grid of the future. The Transportation Energy and Mobility Pathway Options (TEMPO) transportation-sector model enables analysis of household choices in adoption, charging, and use of electric vehicles. The Scout buildings-sector model supports detailed consideration of the policies and markets that can accelerate the adoption of energy conservation measures in buildings. Such sector-specific models are instrumental in informing technology research, sectoral planning strategies, and sector-specific aspects of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategies in the United States. These global and sector-specific modeling approaches can complement each other. The global approach ensures consistent, endogenous energy pricing and resource allocation, which can substantially diverge from current conditions in transformative scenarios, while the sector-specific approach facilitates representation of granular details across spatial, temporal, technological, and market dimensions that enable exploration of particular interactions and trade-offs. This report presents the results of recent work to explore the differences and tradeoffs between these approaches by comparing GCAM with the sector-specific ReEDS, TEMPO, and Scout models. The report compares both model structures and results, and discusses their potential relevance and applications.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗