Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “uncertainties”

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 OSTI2023

Uncertainty Quantification of Metal Additive Manufacturing Processing Conditions Through the use of Exascale Computing

Metal additive manufacturing (AM) is a disruptive manufacturing technology that opens the design space for parts outside those possible from traditional manufacturing methods. In order to accelerate industry and R&D needs to certify AM parts, the Exascale Additive Manufacturing project (ExaAM) has developed a suite of exascale-ready computational tools to model the process-to-structure-to-properties (PSP) relationship for additively manufactured metal components. One such tool is an uncertainty quantification (UQ) pipeline to quantify the effect that uncertainty in processing conditions has on local mechanical responses. We present an overview of this pipeline and its required simulation and workflow codes. Using the Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) exascale computer, Frontier, we utilize this pipeline to cross multiple length and time scales to predict the local mechanical response of a location within a complex AM bridge part, AMB2018-01 produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) as part of their 2018 AM-Bench test series. Our results are then compared to experimental mechanical tests of parts from the NIST build to quantify the error in the ExaAM UQ workflow.

Carson, Robert↗
DOE OSTI2022

Uncertainty quantification in elastic constants of SiC f /SiC m tubular composites using global sensitivity analysis

Silicon carbide fiber and silicon carbide matrix (SiC f /SiC m ) tubes produced through the chemical vapor infiltration process have become a candidate cladding material in nuclear applications. The performance of this composite is influenced by many variables such as braiding angle, porosity, material properties, etc., which vary over a range of values due to the inherent fluctuations in the manufacturing process. In this study, the variability in elastic constants of SiC f /SiC m composite has been quantified through multiscale finite element (FE) simulations, variable screening, and high-fidelity surrogate modeling. The key variables dominantly affecting the elastic constants of SiC f /SiC m tubes were identified using global sensitivity analysis. A surrogate to the high-fidelity FE-based model was used in Monte Carlo simulations to generate a hundred thousand samples from which the uncertainty in elastic constants was assessed. It turned out that the coefficient of variation was less than 10%.

Materials Science↗
DOE OSTI2026

Temperature profiling at the American WAKE ExperimeNt (AWAKEN): methodology and uncertainty quantification

We quantify the accuracy of the temperature profiling from ground-based spectral infrared radiance observations at the American WAKE ExperimeNt (AWAKEN). Results from pre-campaign tests and comparisons with in-situ ground-based and airborne sensors at AWAKEN indicate that temperature profiles agree satisfactorily with traditional instruments for wind energy applications. The bias is within a fraction of a degree and appears to be related to atmospheric stability. Root-mean-square differences from the reference instruments are always smaller than a degree and are often well described by the online uncertainty estimation product. Height-to-height and site-to-site temperature differences are in excellent agreement with in-situ observations, which justifies the use of temperature profilers to characterize static stability and spatial gradients of temperature.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evidential Deep Learning: Enhancing Predictive Uncertainty Estimation for Earth System Science Applications

Abstract Robust quantification of predictive uncertainty is a critical addition needed for machine learning applied to weather and climate problems to improve the understanding of what is driving prediction sensitivity. Ensembles of machine learning models provide predictive uncertainty estimates in a conceptually simple way but require multiple models for training and prediction, increasing computational cost and latency. Parametric deep learning can estimate uncertainty with one model by predicting the parameters of a probability distribution but does not account for epistemic uncertainty. Evidential deep learning, a technique that extends parametric deep learning to higher-order distributions, can account for both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties with one model. This study compares the uncertainty derived from evidential neural networks to that obtained from ensembles. Through applications of the classification of winter precipitation type and regression of surface-layer fluxes, we show evidential deep learning models attaining predictive accuracy rivaling standard methods while robustly quantifying both sources of uncertainty. We evaluate the uncertainty in terms of how well the predictions are calibrated and how well the uncertainty correlates with prediction error. Analyses of uncertainty in the context of the inputs reveal sensitivities to underlying meteorological processes, facilitating interpretation of the models. The conceptual simplicity, interpretability, and computational efficiency of evidential neural networks make them highly extensible, offering a promising approach for reliable and practical uncertainty quantification in Earth system science modeling. To encourage broader adoption of evidential deep learning, we have developed a new Python package, Machine Integration and Learning for Earth Systems (MILES) group Generalized Uncertainty for Earth System Science (GUESS) (MILES-GUESS) ( https://github.com/ai2es/miles-guess ), that enables users to train and evaluate both evidential and ensemble deep learning. Significance Statement This study demonstrates a new technique, evidential deep learning, for robust and computationally efficient uncertainty quantification in modeling the Earth system. The method integrates probabilistic principles into deep neural networks, enabling the estimation of both aleatoric uncertainty from noisy data and epistemic uncertainty from model limitations using a single model. Our analyses reveal how decomposing these uncertainties provides valuable insights into reliability, accuracy, and model shortcomings. We show that the approach can rival standard methods in classification and regression tasks within atmospheric science while offering practical advantages such as computational efficiency. With further advances, evidential networks have the potential to enhance risk assessment and decision-making across meteorology by improving uncertainty quantification, a longstanding challenge. This work establishes a strong foundation and motivation for the broader adoption of evidential learning, where properly quantifying uncertainties is critical yet lacking.

Schreck, John S.↗
DOE OSTI2024

DeepUQ: Assessing the Aleatoric Uncertainties from two Deep Learning Methods

Assessing the quality of aleatoric uncertainty estimates from uncertainty quantification (UQ) deep learning methods is important in scientific contexts, where uncertainty is physically meaningful and important to characterize and interpret exactly. We systematically compare aleatoric uncertainty measured by two UQ techniques, Deep Ensembles (DE) and Deep Evidential Regression (DER). Our method focuses on both zero-dimensional (0D) and two-dimensional (2D) data, to explore how the UQ methods function for different data dimensionalities. We investigate uncertainty injected on the input and output variables and include a method to propagate uncertainty in the case of input uncertainty so that we can compare the predicted aleatoric uncertainty to the known values. We experiment with three levels of noise. The aleatoric uncertainty predicted across all models and experiments scales with the injected noise level. However, the predicted uncertainty is miscalibrated to $\rm{std}(\sigma_{\rm al})$ with the true uncertainty for half of the DE experiments and almost all of the DER experiments. The predicted uncertainty is the least accurate for both UQ methods for the 2D input uncertainty experiment and the high-noise level. While these results do not apply to more complex data, they highlight that further research on post-facto calibration for these methods would be beneficial, particularly for high-noise and high-dimensional settings.

Nevin, Rebecca↗
DOE OSTI2023

How does uncertainty of soil organic carbon stock affect the calculation of carbon budgets and soil carbon credits for croplands in the U.S. Midwest?

Cropland carbon budget depicts the amount of carbon flowing in and out of agroecosystems and the changes in carbon stocks of soil and living biomass during the same period. Soil carbon credit is the additional change in soil carbon stock under certain farming practices compared with the business-as-usual practices. Accurately calculating cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit is critical to assessing climate change mitigation potential in agroecosystems. The calculation of cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit is sensitive to local soil and climatic conditions, especially initial soil organic carbon (SOC) stock, which is determined by both SOC concentration (SOC%) and bulk density (Bulk_Density). SOC stock data are either from soil sampling or gridded public survey data. In agroecosystem models, SOC stock data are a key model input for quantifying cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit. However, various types and degrees of uncertainties exist in SOC stock datasets, which propagate to the quantification of SOC stock change. In particular, a large discrepancy is found in two widely used SOC stock datasets — Rapid Carbon Assessment dataset (RaCA) and Gridded Soil Survey Geographic Database (gSSURGO) — in the U.S. Midwest, with a relative difference (quantified using Normalized Root Mean Square Error, NRMSE) of 48.0% for 0–30 cm SOC stock between the two datasets. It remains largely unclear how uncertainty in SOC stocks affects the calculation of cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit. To address this question, we used a well-validated process-based agroecosystem model, ecosys, to assess the impacts of SOC stock uncertainty on carbon budget and soil carbon credit calculation in the U.S. Midwestern corn-soybean rotation systems. Our results reveal the following findings: (1) A sizable discrepancy exists in simulated cropland carbon budget between using gSSURGO and using RaCA for their SOC% and Bulk_Density as model inputs, with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of only 0.4 for simulated change of SOC stock (ΔSOC) using these two different soil datasets. (2) Simulated cropland carbon budget components were more sensitive to initial SOC% than to Bulk_Density. For example, the upper and lower quartiles of multi-year averaged ΔSOC were –29.8 and 4.8 gC/m 2 /year for the selected counties respectively, with an uncertainty of 13.7 and 0.7 gC/m 2 /year induced by uncertainties in initial SOC% and Bulk_Density, respectively. (3) Both simulated ΔSOC and its uncertainty were negatively correlated with initial SOC%, whereas ΔSOC was negatively correlated with air temperature, and ΔSOC uncertainty was positively correlated with air temperature. (4) The uncertainty of calculated soil carbon credits was much smaller compared with the uncertainty of calculated absolute carbon budgets assuming the same SOC stock uncertainty level in the inputs. Specifically, in our assessment comparing planting cover crops vs no cover crop, the uncertainty of calculated soil carbon credits induced by initial SOC% uncertainty was less than 4% (relative to the quantified value of the soil carbon credits) for 90% of the cases. Our analysis highlights that high accuracy measurement of SOC% as inputs is needed for the calculation of cropland carbon budgets; however, soil carbon credit quantification is much less sensitive to the initial SOC% inputs, and the current publicly available soil datasets (e.g., gSSURGO) are largely suitable for the calculation of soil

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Yes, No, Maybe So: Human Factors Considerations for Fostering Calibrated Trust in Foundation Models Under Uncertainty

High-stakes analytical environments require analysts to evaluate evidence and generate conclusions to inform critical decisions often under conditions of uncertainty. Probabilistic decision-making based on incomplete or inaccurate information can reduce productivity, compromise national interests, and endanger public safety. Researchers are developing expert systems built on foundation models (FMs) to support analysts’ decision-making processes by enabling human-artificial intelligence (AI) teaming, in part through the quantification and expression of uncertainty information. As FMs continue to mature, it is imperative to correspondingly consider analysts’ needs for appropriately interpreting and using uncertainty information. However, prior research indicates that it remains unclear how analysts engage with FM-generated uncertainty information and the extent to which these interactions influence trust in, and reliance on, expert systems. We plan to review the state of the science and conduct an exploratory, qualitative study to (a) understand how properly communicated uncertainty can foster calibrated trust and appropriate reliance and (b) identify approaches for effectively conveying FM-generated uncertainty information during analytical workflows. We will administer semi-structured interviews with analysts from a specific high-stakes analytical environment to collect their current experiences with job-related uncertainty and their impressions when viewing FM-generated uncertainty information. During the interview protocol, participants will be presented with several different FM outputs and invited to discuss their thoughts and beliefs about the uncertainty information displayed. Participants may provide insights into how trust and reliance may be influenced by uncertainty. The results of this study will help us to better understand how analysts currently interpret and use uncertainty information. Our findings may inform human factors recommendations for effectively conveying uncertainty information to foster calibrated trust in, and appropriate reliance on, expert systems. Interaction designers and FM developers can use this knowledge to enhance human-AI teaming and ensure the responsible deployment of FM-based expert systems in analytical workflows.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Influence of data uncertainty on cold season threshold-based climate indices

Climate indices are used to reduce the complex climate system and its changes to simple measures. The data basis – whether observational data or climate model data – to which the climate indices are applied, is usually subject to uncertainties. For threshold-based climate indices, the data uncertainty influences the threshold value, and, hence, the uncertainty can influence the values for the climate index. What the actual impacts of these uncertainties are on threshold-based climate indices is examined in this paper. The focus is not only on the climate model uncertainty, but also on the observational data uncertainty. The general sensitivity of each of the chosen climate indices to arbitrary changes in the threshold is studied. This shows a higher sensitivity of indices assessing extremes (ice days, heavy precipitation days) to changes in the threshold than indices that integrate a quantity over a given time interval (coldsum, consecutive days). For assessing an ensemble of climate model data with respect to their ability to reproduce the index values for current climate, the reference data uncertainty is applied to the chosen threshold-based climate indices by changing their threshold value by its corresponding uncertainty. It is shown that the climate model uncertainty can be within the range of the reference data uncertainty. When using threshold-based climate indices to assess changes in future climate periods, uncertainties should always be taken into account and ideally corrected in an appropriate way. This is especially important for indices that assess extremes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Impact of nuclear data covariance libraries on uncertainty quantification of sodium cooled fast reactor simulation

Uncertainty quantification in core modelling to assess reactor performance is a regular practice to identify design safety limits. Best-estimate plus uncertainty (BEPU) methods are commonly used to propagate uncertainties to core responses from input parameters, characterized by variance-covariance libraries. This study evaluates the impact of different covariance libraries on the uncertainty associated with core safety parameters and their propagation through reactor transient modelling for a metallic core (ABR-1000). The COMAC-1.0, COMMARA-2.0, and COMMARA-2.1 covariance libraries are used to propagate nuclear data uncertainties to neutron feedback coefficients using the Generalized Perturbation Theory, then through transient safety analyses to establish the confidence interval for safety performance of the reactor using stochastic sampling. The considered transients include Unprotected Transient Over Power and Unprotected Loss Of Flow. Most influential nuclide and reaction pairs in different variance-covariance libraries are identified and their impact on the uncertainty of safety parameters are evaluated. Significant differences were observed between uncertainties from COMAC compared to COMMARA libraries. Uncertainties from COMMARA libraries were consistently larger than COMAC for all cases. For structure, coolant density feedback coefficients and control rod worth, total nuclear data uncertainties were approximately 50% larger for COMMARA than COMAC. Differences were also observed in identification of top contributors of uncertainty in terms of reaction-cross sections. For instance, largest contribution to total uncertainty of radial expansion coefficient from COMMARA-2.0 and 2.1 originates from Na{sup 23} P1 Elastic cross section (0.81%) but from Pu{sup 239} Fission (0.53%) with COM C-1.0. Such differences are evaluated in this research for all quantities of interest. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Learning thermodynamically constrained equations of state with uncertainty

Numerical simulations of high energy-density experiments require equation of state (EOS) models that relate a material’s thermodynamic state variables—specifically pressure, volume/density, energy, and temperature. EOS models are typically constructed using a semi-empirical parametric methodology, which assumes a physics-informed functional form with many tunable parameters calibrated using experimental/simulation data. Since there are inherent uncertainties in the calibration data (parametric uncertainty) and the assumed functional EOS form (model uncertainty), it is essential to perform uncertainty quantification (UQ) to improve confidence in EOS predictions. Model uncertainty is challenging for UQ studies since it requires exploring the space of all possible physically consistent functional forms. Thus, it is often neglected in favor of parametric uncertainty, which is easier to quantify without violating thermodynamic laws. This work presents a data-driven machine learning approach to constructing EOS models that naturally captures model uncertainty while satisfying the necessary thermodynamic consistency and stability constraints. We propose a novel framework based on physics-informed Gaussian process regression (GPR) that automatically captures total uncertainty in the EOS and can be jointly trained on both simulation and experimental data sources. A GPR model for the shock Hugoniot is derived, and its uncertainties are quantified using the proposed framework. We apply the proposed model to learn the EOS for the diamond solid state of carbon using both density functional theory data and experimental shock Hugoniot data to train the model and show that the prediction uncertainty is reduced by considering thermodynamic constraints.

Sharma, Himanshu (ORCID:000900050235718X)↗
DOE OSTI2023

Quantifying Uncertainty in Ice Particle Velocity–Dimension Relationships Using MC3E Observations

Abstract Ice particle terminal fall velocity ( V t ) is fundamental for determining microphysical processes, yet remains extremely challenging to measure. Current theoretical best estimates of V t are functions of Reynolds number. The Reynolds number is related to the Best number, which is a function of ice particle mass, area ratio ( A r ), and maximum dimension ( D max ). These estimates are not conducive for use in most models since model parameterizations often take the form , where ( α , β ) depend on habit and D max . A previously developed framework is used to determine surfaces of equally plausible ( α , β ) coefficients whereby ice particle size/shape distributions are combined with V t best estimates to determine mass- ( V M ) or reflectivity-weighted ( V Z ) velocities that closely match parameterized V M ,SD or V Z ,SD calculated using the ( α , β ) coefficients using two approaches. The first uses surfaces of equally plausible ( a , b ) coefficients describing mass ( M )–dimension relationships (i.e., ) to calculate mass- or reflectivity-weighted velocity from size/shape distributions that are then used to determine ( α , β ) coefficients. The second investigates how uncertainties in A r , D max , and size distribution N ( D ) affect V M or V Z . For seven of nine flight legs flown on 20 and 23 May 2011 during the Mesoscale Continental Convective Clouds Experiment (MC3E), uncertainty from natural parameter variability—namely, the variability in ice particle parameters in similar meteorological conditions—exceeds uncertainties arising from different A r assumptions or D max estimates. The combined uncertainty between A r , D max , and N ( D ) produced smaller variability in ( α , β ) compared to varying M ( D ), demonstrating M ( D ) must be accurately quantified for model fall velocities. Primary sources of uncertainty vary considerably depending on environmental conditions. Significance Statement Ice particle fall velocity is fundamental for numerous processes within clouds, and hence is a critical property that must be accurately represented in weather and climate models. Using aircraft observations of ice particle shapes and sizes obtained in clouds behind midlatitude thunderstorms, this work develops a new framework for estimating ice particle fall velocities and their uncertainty, including quantifying the importance of different uncertainty sources from cloud microphysics measurements. Natural parameter variability contributes the most uncertainty in ice particle fall velocity estimates, although other sources can also be important contributors to uncertainty in certain conditions. Additional work examining ice particle data is needed to further understand how dependent uncertainty in certain ice particle properties are to local environmental conditions.

Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences↗
DOE OSTI2023

Insights into the vulnerability of Antarctic glaciers from the ISMIP6 ice sheet model ensemble and associated uncertainty

Abstract. The Antarctic Ice Sheet represents the largest source of uncertainty in future sea level rise projections, with a contribution to sea level by 2100 ranging from −5 to 43 cm of sea level equivalent under high carbon emission scenarios estimated by the recent Ice Sheet Model Intercomparison for CMIP6 (ISMIP6). ISMIP6 highlighted the different behaviors of the East and West Antarctic ice sheets, as well as the possible role of increased surface mass balance in offsetting the dynamic ice loss in response to changing oceanic conditions in ice shelf cavities. However, the detailed contribution of individual glaciers, as well as the partitioning of uncertainty associated with this ensemble, have not yet been investigated. Here, we analyze the ISMIP6 results for high carbon emission scenarios, focusing on key glaciers around the Antarctic Ice Sheet, and we quantify their projected dynamic mass loss, defined here as mass loss through increased ice discharge into the ocean in response to changing oceanic conditions. We highlight glaciers contributing the most to sea level rise, as well as their vulnerability to changes in oceanic conditions. We then investigate the different sources of uncertainty and their relative role in projections, for the entire continent and for key individual glaciers. We show that, in addition to Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica, Totten and Moscow University glaciers in East Antarctica present comparable future dynamic mass loss and high sensitivity to ice shelf basal melt. The overall uncertainty in additional dynamic mass loss in response to changing oceanic conditions, compared to a scenario with constant oceanic conditions, is dominated by the choice of ice sheet model, accounting for 52 % of the total uncertainty of the Antarctic dynamic mass loss in 2100. Its relative role for the most dynamic glaciers varies between 14 % for MacAyeal and Whillans ice streams and 56 % for Pine Island Glacier at the end of the century. The uncertainty associated with the choice of climate model increases over time and reaches 13 % of the uncertainty by 2100 for the Antarctic Ice Sheet but varies between 4 % for Thwaites Glacier and 53 % for Whillans Ice Stream. The uncertainty associated with the ice–climate interaction, which captures different treatments of oceanic forcings such as the choice of melt parameterization, its calibration, and simulated ice shelf geometries, accounts for 22 % of the uncertainty at the ice sheet scale but reaches 36 % and 39 % for Institute Ice Stream and Thwaites Glacier, respectively, by 2100. Overall, this study helps inform future research by highlighting the sectors of the ice sheet most vulnerable to oceanic warming over the 21st century and by quantifying the main sources of uncertainty.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗