Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “modulation classification”

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.

25 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Chemical reaction enhanced graph learning for molecule representation

Abstract Motivation Molecular representation learning (MRL) models molecules with low-dimensional vectors to support biological and chemical applications. Current methods primarily rely on intrinsic molecular information to learn molecular representations, but they often overlook effectively integrating domain knowledge into MRL. Results In this article, we develop a reaction-enhanced graph learning (RXGL) framework for MRL, utilizing chemical reactions as domain knowledge. RXGL introduces dual graph learning modules to model molecule representation. One module employs graph convolutions on molecular graphs to capture molecule structures. The other module constructs a reaction-aware graph from chemical reactions and designs a novel graph attention network on this graph to integrate reaction-level relations into molecular modeling. To refine molecule representations, we design a reaction-based relation learning task, which considers the relations between the reactant and product sides in reactions. In addition, we introduce a cross-view contrastive task to strengthen the cooperative associations between molecular and reaction-aware graph learning. Experiment results show that our RXGL achieves strong performance in various downstream tasks, including product prediction, reaction classification, and molecular property prediction. Availability and implementation The code is publicly available at https://github.com/coder-ACAC/RLM.

Biochemistry & Molecular Biology↗
DOE OSTI2025

United States multi-sector land use and land cover base maps to support human and Earth system models

Abstract Earth System Models (ESMs) require current and future projections of land use and landcover change (LULC) to simulate land-atmospheric interactions and global biogeochemical cycles. Among the most utilized land systems in ESMs are the Community Land Model (CLM) and the Land-Use Harmonization 2 (LUH2) products. Regional studies also use these products by extending coarse projections to finer resolutions via downscaling or by using multisector dynamic (MSD) models. One such MSD model is the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), which has its own independent land module, but often relies on CLM or LUH2 as spatial inputs for its base years. However, this requires harmonization of thematically incongruent land systems at multiple spatial resolutions, leading to uncertainty and error propagation. To resolve these issues, we develop a thematically consistent LULC system for the conterminous United States adaptable to multiple MSD frameworks to support research at a regional level. Using empirically derived spatial products, we developed a series of base maps for multiple contemporary years of observation at a 30-m resolution that support flexibility and interchangeability amongst LUH2, CLM, and GCAM classification systems.

Oliver, Jay↗
DOE OSTI2025

Unrolled Video Super-Resolution Network with Autoregressive Prior for the Case of Known Motion

Real-time detection and classification of distant objects is necessary for many national security applications. However, when objects are far from the sensor, they occupy only a small number of pixels in the captured video, limiting the amount of visual detail available for recognition. State-of-the-art classification methods typically rely on high-resolution (HR) video streams to capture characteristic object features, but obtaining such detail is challenging for distant objects that occupy only a few pixels. This motivates the development of video super-resolution (VSR) methods that enhance object classification by recovering fine details from low-pixel representations. Current VSR methods rely either on model-based optimization, which is interpretable but computationally expensive, or on learning-based approaches, which are efficient and high-performing but often lack flexibility and interpretability. In this report, we propose an end-to-end trainable unrolled VSR network, UVSRNet, which super-resolves each frame in a video by exploiting sub-pixel motion between neighboring low-resolution (LR) frames as well as incorporating high-frequency detail from previously super-resolved frames. In particular, by unrolling a plug-and-play (PnP) half-quadratic splitting (HQS) algorithm, we leverage a model-based data-fitting module alongside a learning-based autoregressive prior module. This combination yields a method that maintains the flexibility and interpretability of model-based methods while achieving the performance advantages of learning-based methods.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2026

Maximizing dynamic range and performance of anatase TiO 2 ECRAM through structure and programming

Here, in this study, we investigate the structure-dependent modulation characteristics of all-solid-state three-terminal electrochemical random-access memory (ECRAM) based on an anatase Li x TiO 2 channel. By directly comparing “asymmetric” and “symmetric” ECRAM device architectures, we reveal significant insight into the impact of a non-zero gate-drain open-circuit voltage and its influence on voltage vs. current-controlled gating. We also explore the impact of potentiation/depression write parameters on the symmetry, linearity, and dynamic range of the device response. Together, initial results from optimizing structure and programming approaches yielded unprecedented G max /G min ratios of >1,000 for ECRAM and hundreds of tunable memory states with excellent linearity and symmetry. Simulations based on these ECRAM devices further illustrate the promise of this analog memory technology, achieving near 2% classification error in the MNIST digit recognition benchmark for a range of training parameters compared to a theoretical best of 1.66% and outperforming other device models extracted from the literature.

AIHWKit↗
DOE OSTI2026

A curated benchmark for cofolding models on kinase conformational states

Abstract Protein kinases are critical drug targets, requiring therapeutics that can modulate their active and inactive conformational states. While cofolding models can generate global folds directly from kinase sequences and ligand SMILES strings, these models have not yet been tested on their ability to recover ligand-induced-fit conformational states of the kinase proteins. Here, we introduce KinConfBench, a curated benchmark of 2225 high-quality human kinase chains to evaluate the ability of four state-of-the-art cofolding models—Boltz-2, Chai-1, Protenix, and RoseTTAFold-All-Atom—to recover both canonical and rare conformational states. We show that geometric success metrics of a ligand pose in the active site do not correlate strongly with the correct kinase conformational state, motivating a new set of dynamical benchmarks for assessing cofolding models. While all four cofolding models achieve ~60–80% prediction accuracy for kinase conformational classification, they exhibit severe mode collapse when performing multiple inferences, show negligible structural diversity in sampling induced-fit motions, and display a prevalent “apo-drift” in which most cofolding models predominantly predict the kinase to be in its ligand-free state. Our results highlight that capturing ligand-induced protein conformational diversity, not just geometric fit, is critical for next-generation structure-based drug discovery.

Sun, Kunyang↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

PV Reliability and Resilience in Challenging Climates

Challenging climates for Photovoltaics are usually based on climate classification. However, extreme weather events such as high wind, flooding, large hail, extreme snow etc. have become more ubiquitous globally. To study the impact of extraordinary weather events on PV reliability we used two of the largest databases in the USA. First, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) database on extreme weather and secondly, the PV Fleet Data Initiative where we have collected high-resolution PV performance data of more than 8 gigawatts or about 6-7% of all commercial and utility systems in the USA. We analyzed almost 200 systems between 2008-20022 that were immediately impacted by these weather events. The immediate impact (outages) was determined to be about 1% of or a median of approximately 3 days of annual lost production. However, the risk these events pose is exemplified by a long tail where 0.4 % of all systems lost more than 2 weeks annual production. We also found a threshold for high wind (90 km/hr) and hail (25mm), above which we observed significantly higher degradation implying long-term damage to the systems. In addition, we are using satellite imagery to quantify visible damage to PV plants. Finally, we share module, design and installation lessons from some observed case studies to improve extreme weather resilience for PV power systems.

degradation↗