Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “uncertainty Quantification”

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

The Fluid Dynamics Uncertainty Quantification Challenge Problem: XFOIL vs. MFOIL

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) has become more critical in aerospace engineering due to the growing dependence on computational tools for design optimization and performance analyses of aerospace vehicles. Even though the significance of UQ in assessing the credibility of computational analyses is well recognized, its costs and complexity impede its integration into standard practices, particularly in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and other fluid analyses. This paper presents a UQ study for low-fidelity computational aerodynamics analyses with XFOIL and mfoil (i.e., the MATLAB version of XFOIL with several implementation modifications); these tools are utilized widely in both research and education. The main contributions of this paper are as follows: 1) improved precision in quantifying the uncertainty of the baseline Monte Carlo results used to benchmark surrogate modeling techniques for UQ, 2) quantification of the effect of the implementation differences between XFOIL and mfoil on solution quantities of interest (QoIs), such as lift and pitching moment coefficients, and 3) development of an open-source UQ library for use with XFOIL and mfoil, which has educational values and helps promote UQ for fluid analyses with aerospace applications. Results and discussions revolve around cases 1-4 of the challenge problem posed by the AIAA Fluid Dynamics Technical Committee’s Uncertainty Quantification Discussion Group (UQDG). In case 3, this work employs CFDverify, an open-source solution verification software, to quantify the discretization error and evaluate the extrapolated QoIs based on the grid convergence index (GCI). This UQ study differentiates itself from previous studies in the rigor of handling baseline Monte Carlo uncertainty and in including mfoil, which is a more accessible alternative to XFOIL. Finally, despite the growing computing power, low-fidelity computational tools remain valuable, such as for aerodynamic shape optimization at Mach numbers below 0.65 and low-to-mid Reynolds numbers.

Lay, Aidan S [University of Tennessee, Knoxville (↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multifidelity Monte Carlo estimation for efficient uncertainty quantification in climate-related modeling

Abstract. Uncertainties in an output of interest that depends on the solution of a complex system (e.g., of partial differential equations with random inputs) are often, if not nearly ubiquitously, determined in practice using Monte Carlo (MC) estimation. While simple to implement, MC estimation fails to provide reliable information about statistical quantities (such as the expected value of the output of interest) in application settings such as climate modeling, for which obtaining a single realization of the output of interest is a costly endeavor. Specifically, the dilemma encountered is that many samples of the output of interest have to be collected in order to obtain an MC estimator that has sufficient accuracy – so many, in fact, that the available computational budget is not large enough to effect the number of samples needed. To circumvent this dilemma, we consider using multifidelity Monte Carlo (MFMC) estimation which leverages the use of less costly and less accurate surrogate models (such as coarser grids, reduced-order models, simplified physics, and/or interpolants) to achieve, for the same computational budget, higher accuracy compared to that obtained by an MC estimator – or, looking at it another way, an MFMC estimator obtains the same accuracy as the MC estimator at lower computational cost. The key to the efficacy of MFMC estimation is the fact that most of the required computational budget is loaded onto the less costly surrogate models so that very few samples are taken of the more expensive model of interest. We first provide a more detailed discussion about the need to consider an alternative to MC estimation for uncertainty quantification. Subsequently, we present a review, in an abstract setting, of the MFMC approach along with its application to three climate-related benchmark problems as a proof-of-concept exercise.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Economic Parameter Uncertainty Quantification Demonstration

HERON has recently added uncertainty quantification capabilities for economic parameters. Users may now associate a distribution with certain cash flow parameters to simulate uncertainty in cost or other economic inputs. For example, a user may want to capture the uncertainty of capital expenditures of an advanced nuclear power plant because public data is hard to find or is not available yet. This new addition allows users to account for that uncertainty.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

GenAI4UQ: A software for forward and inverse uncertainty quantification using conditional generative AI

We introduce GenAI4UQ, a software package for forward and inverse uncertainty quantification in model calibration, parameter estimation, and ensemble forecasting. GenAI4UQ leverages a generative AI-based conditional modeling framework to address limitations of traditional inverse modeling techniques, such as Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods. By replacing computationally intensive iterative processes with a direct, learned mapping, GenAI4UQ enables efficient calibration of input parameters and generation of predictions directly from observations. The software supports rapid ensemble forecasting with robust uncertainty quantification while maintaining computational and storage efficiency. Built-in auto-tuning of hyperparameters simplifies model training, ensuring accessibility for users with varying expertise. Its versatile conditional generative framework is applicable across diverse scientific domains. While GenAI4UQ offers significant advantages in flexibility and efficiency, users should interpret its uncertainty estimates with caution in data-sparse scenarios, as the model may overestimate uncertainty—an effect common to all surrogate-based approaches including MCMC with surrogate models. Despite this, GenAI4UQ transforms inverse modeling by providing a fast, reliable, and user-friendly solution. It empowers researchers and practitioners to quickly estimate parameter distributions and generate model predictions for new observations, facilitating efficient decision-making and advancing the state of uncertainty quantification in computational modeling.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

On the Need to Align Intent and Implementation in Uncertainty Quantification for Machine Learning

Quantifying uncertainties for machine learning (ML) models is a foundational challenge in modern data analysis. This challenge is compounded by at least two key aspects of the field: (a) inconsistent terminology surrounding uncertainty and estimation across disciplines, and (b) the varying technical requirements for establishing trustworthy uncertainties in diverse problem contexts. In this position paper, we aim to clarify the depth of these challenges by identifying these inconsistencies and articulating how different contexts impose distinct epistemic demands. We examine the current landscape of estimation targets (e.g., prediction, inference, simulation-based inference), uncertainty constructs (e.g., frequentist, Bayesian, fiducial), and the approaches used to map between them. Drawing on the literature, we highlight and explain examples of problematic mappings. To help address these issues, we advocate for standards that promote alignment between the \textit{intent} and \textit{implementation} of uncertainty quantification (UQ) approaches. We discuss several axes of trustworthiness that are necessary (if not sufficient) for reliable UQ in ML models, and show how these axes can inform the design and evaluation of uncertainty-aware ML systems. Our practical recommendations focus on scientific ML, offering illustrative cases and use scenarios, particularly in the context of simulation-based inference (SBI).

Trivedi, Shubhendu [MIT] (ORCID:0000000312374301)↗
NASA NTRS2018

Aeroelastic Uncertainty Quantification of a Low-Boom Aircraft Configuration

As the state of the art in uncertainty quantification for low-boom aircraft advances, the underlying assumption of a rigid airframe must be revisited. The goal of this research is to investigate the impact of uncertainties in aeroelastic deformation of a low-boom aircraft on ground noise. Variations in structural properties and uncertainties in loading, derived from flight conditions, both factor into the overall aeroelastic deformation and subsequently the ground noise. Incorporation of these aeroelastic uncertainties in the prediction of ground noise during the design phase can lead to improved robustness. In this paper, a review of methodologies and techniques employed in low-boom uncertainty quantification will be given. In addition, methods for aeroelastic uncertainty quantification are integrated into the previous work and a generalized set of procedures is established. In a case study implementing the analysis procedures, ground noise generated from a static aeroelastic deformed low-boom aircraft increased slightly over that from the undeformed geometry for both undertrack and offtrack angles. Ground noise sensitivities to uncertainties in near field conditions and structural parameters varied significantly with atmospheric profiles. Shifts in confidence interval width in addition to shifts in deterministic values of ground noise were observed while varying atmospheric conditions.

Phillips, Benjamin D.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Dataset for "Machine Learning Ensembles Can Enhance Hydrologic Predictions and Uncertainty Quantification" Willard et al. (2025).

This data release provides all data and code used in the paper " "Machine Learning Ensembles Can Enhance Hydrologic Predictions and Uncertainty Quantifications" Willard et al. (2025)" to model stream temperature, evaluate, and assess results. The associated manuscript explores the effect of different ensemble construction techniques across different common machine learning (ML) architectures for predictions in unmonitored basins. Modeling was done using long short-term memory (LSTM), gated recurrent unit (GRU), temporal convolution network (TCN), and extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) models, and stream site coverage spans 1362 locations across the conterminous United States. The ensemble construction techniques investigated include ensemble by random weight initialization, differing hyperparameters, different random subsets of training data, different subselections of input features, different architectures, and Monte Carlo Dropout. The data is organized into these items items:Code repository and data for the paper " "Machine Learning Ensembles Can Enhance Hydrologic Predictions and Uncertainty Quantifications" Willard et al. (2025).Code: stream_temp_ml_regionalization.zip contains the code repositoryData to run the code:- data_dir.zip -- contains all files that should be moved to the "DATA_DIR" variable defined in the "set_env_vars.sh" script in the code repository- metadata_dir.zip -- contains all files that should be moved to the "METADATA_DIR" variable defined in the "set_env_vars.sh" script in the code repositoryData produced by the code and used in the paper:- outputs_dir.zip - contains model output and results (outputs_dir/results), model weights (outputs_dir/models), and all other outputs used for the paper including feature importances.To cite this code, please use the following BibTeX or MLA entries:bibtex:@misc{willard2025streamensembles,author = {Jared Willard and Charuleka Varadharajan},title = {Dataset for "Machine Learning Ensembles Can Enhance Hydrologic Predictions and Uncertainty Quantification"},year = {2024},doi = {10.15485/2527393},publisher = {ESS-DIVE Repository},url = {https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/2527393}}MLA: Willard, Jared, et al. Dataset for "Machine Learning Ensembles Can Enhance Hydrologic Predictions and Uncertainty Quantification". 2025. ESS-DIVE Repository, doi:10.15485/2448016.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Role of the likelihood for elastic scattering uncertainty quantification

In the last decade, uncertainty quantification (UQ) for optical model potentials (OMPs) has become a focal point for nuclear reaction theory, and several competing approaches for OMP UQ have recently been developed. Here, we clarify recent efforts to compare frequentist and Bayesian approaches in the context of OMP UQ [G. B. King et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 232502 (2019)]. We replicate a portion of that OMP UQ study but use independent statistical tools. Specifically, we compare two methods for OMP parameter inference from elastic scattering data: the Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm for χ 2 minimization on one hand and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling on the other. Separately, we assess the common practice of using a renormalized likelihood (χ 2 /N), N being the number of data points, instead of the canonical weighted-least-squares likelihood (χ 2 ), as a way of accounting for unknown data correlations. Here, we show that for a generic linear model and for a five-parameter OMP analysis, frequentist and uniform-prior Bayesian approaches recover the same optimum and uncertainty estimates—not systematically larger uncertainties for the Bayesian approach, as was concluded in G. B. King et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 232502 (2019). Further, we show that if an additional, near-degenerate parameter is introduced into the same OMP analysis such that the parameter posterior becomes non-Gaussian, then covariance-based estimates of uncertainty become unreliable. Finally, we show that regardless of optimization approach, if χ 2 /N is used for the likelihood, the resulting parametric uncertainties increase by $\sqrt{N}$, and that this is responsible for the conclusions drawn in the revisited study. Based on our replication results, we find that a fortuitous cancellation of unreported errors and the renormalization factor can lead to improvement in empirical coverages, as was the case in the original comparative study. We emphasize that developing and applying a realistic likelihood function is an essential task in a UQ analysis, and that several recent UQ studies that employed a renormalized likelihood (i.e., including a 1/N factor) may have yielded unrealistically large uncertainties for elastic-scattering observables. If the parameter posterior deviates from multivariate-normal, a sampling-based approach like MCMC has a clear advantage over methods that assume the Laplace approximation holds. We note that empirical coverage can serve as an important internal check for the analyst whose model or data may have additional, unaccounted-for uncertainties.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
NASA NTRS2022

Uncertainty Models for the Hybrid Parametric Variation Method of Uncertainty Quantification; Analysis

There is some level of uncertainty in every finite element model (FEM), which flows to a level of uncertainty in predicted results. The purpose of uncertainty quantification (UQ) is to provide statistical bounds on prediction accuracy based on model uncertainty. This is distinct from model updating, which attempts to modify models to improve their accuracy. UQ does not improve the accuracy of models, but accepts that the models are inherently inaccurate and attempts to quantify the impact of that inaccuracy on predicted results. Previously, an alternate method for UQ, called the Hybrid Parametric Variation (HPV) method, was applied to Space Launch System (SLS) Hurty/Craig-Bampton (HCB) components to predict system-level statistics for launch vehicle attitude control transfer functions and core stage section loads due to buffet. The HPV method combines a parametric variation of the HCB fixed-interface (FI) modal frequencies with a nonparametric variation (NPV) method that randomly varies the HCB mass and stiffness matrices as Wishart random matrix distributions using random matrix theory (RMT). Alternatively, the most common method for modeling uncertainty in the structural dynamics community is a parametric approach, which varies physical parameters in the model. However, there are several disadvantages associated with the parametric method. Determining a reduced set of parameters that have a significant impact on the system response can be time consuming, and the selected parameter probability distributions are rarely reliably known. Therefore, in practice, the parameters are surrogates for the actual errors, and the link to parameter uncertainty is unknown. Another major drawback is that the uncertainty that can be represented is limited to the form of the nominal FEM. It is the experience of the authors that based on numerous aerospace programs, almost all FEM errors are in form rather than parameter values. This hypothesis is supported by the observation of the authors that it is almost never possible to ‘tune’ a FEM to match modal test results by only modifying model parameters. Model-form uncertainty cannot be directly represented by FEM input parameters nor included in a parametric approach. However, model-form uncertainty can be modeled using RMT, where a probability distribution is developed for the matrix ensemble of interest. The major advantage of the NPV method is that it covers errors in model form. The HPV method anchors uncertainty at the HCB component level to component modal test results by matching the HCB and test modes based on mode descriptions or other methods, and then applying differing levels of frequency variation. The specific variations depend on the confidence to which a component FEM has been validated through modal testing. The NPV method is layered on the frequency variation to match modal test self-orthogonality and cross-orthogonality (XO) results. Once the component uncertainty models are identified, they are assembled, and the uncertainty is propagated to the system level using a Monte Carlo (MC) analysis approach that generates statistics for system-level predictions This provides a UQ method that can be traced to test data, which can be updated as additional data and improved correlated models become available. The purpose of this paper is to collect and present all of the theory for HPV that has been previously published in reports and papers and to present examples of its application. Specifically, component uncertainty models based on the dispersion of corresponding mass and stiffness matrices using proposed test/analysis correlation metrics are investigated. The first example is purely academic so that the true answers are known, and the validity of the HPV method and the corresponding uncertainty models can be determined. The purpose of this paper is to collect and present all of the theory for HPV that has been previously published in reports and papers and to present examples of its application. Specifically, component uncertainty models based on the dispersion of corresponding mass and stiffness matrices using proposed test/analysis correlation metrics are investigated. The first example is purely academic so that the true answers are known, and the validity of the HPV method and the corresponding uncertainty models can be determined. The second example is an application to a component that is design specific to the SLS. Based on this work and other assessments, the HPV method provides another tool to the toolset used for complex system UQ analysis. From experience gathered to date using the HPV method, additional design specific applications must be investigated to provide further confidence in the validity of the HPV method of UQ analysis.

Uncertainty quantification↗
NASA NTRS2022

NASA Engineering and Safety Center Technical Bulletin No. 22-04: Uncertainty Quantification of Reduced Order Structural Dynamic Models

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) provides statistical bounds on prediction accuracy based on finite element model (FEM) uncertainty. An alternate method for UQ, called the Hybrid Parametric Variation (HPV) combines a parametric variation of the Hurty/Craig-Bampton (HCB) fixed-interface (FI) modal frequencies with a nonparametric variation (NPV) method. This provides a UQ method that can be traced to test data, which can be updated as additional data and improved correlated models become available.

Uncertainty Quantification↗
DOE OSTI2024

Radiation image reconstruction and uncertainty quantification using a Gaussian process prior

We propose a complete framework for Bayesian image reconstruction and uncertainty quantification based on a Gaussian process prior (GPP) to overcome limitations of maximum likelihood expectation maximization (ML-EM) image reconstruction algorithm. The prior distribution is constructed with a zero-mean Gaussian process (GP) with a choice of a covariance function, and a link function is used to map the Gaussian process to an image. Unlike many other maximum a posteriori approaches, our method offers highly interpretable hyperparamters that are selected automatically with the empirical Bayes method. Furthermore, the GP covariance function can be modified to incorporate a priori structural priors, enabling multi-modality imaging or contextual data fusion. Lastly, we illustrate that our approach lends itself to Bayesian uncertainty quantification techniques, such as the preconditioned Crank–Nicolson method and the Laplace approximation. The proposed framework is general and can be employed in most radiation image reconstruction problems, and we demonstrate it with simulated free-moving single detector radiation source imaging scenarios. We compare the reconstruction results from GPP and ML-EM, and show that the proposed method can significantly improve the image quality over ML-EM, all the while providing greater understanding of the source distribution via the uncertainty quantification capability. Furthermore, significant improvement of the image quality by incorporating a structural prior is illustrated.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
NASA NTRS2019

Uncertainty Quantification for JPL Retrievals

We define the notions of verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification (VVUQ), and place them in the context of retrievals of Earth science data. Uncertainty quantification (UQ) is the process of characterizing the uncertainty of a measurement system relative to the true, physical quantity it measures. UQ is needed when measurements are used for scientific inference, assimilated into models with other data, and used for decision-making and risk analysis. Many measurements come with measures of standard error and bias, but these uncertainty measures are often inaccurate, due to the operational need to assume crisp values for parameters which are in fact uncertain, as well as the failure of technical assumptions needed by operational error-estimation approaches. UQ provides a way to study which assumptions fail to hold, and a tool to improve the measurement. We describe a particular, broadly-applicable UQ setup that has been successful for JPL retrievals including OCO-2, and provide recommendations for furthering the UQ state of the practice at JPL.

Turmon, Michael↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multi-fidelity microstructure-induced uncertainty quantification by advanced Monte Carlo methods

Quantifying uncertainty associated with the microstructure variation of a material can be a computationally daunting task, especially when dealing with advanced constitutive models and fine mesh resolutions in the crystal plasticity finite element method (CPFEM). Numerous studies have been conducted regarding the sensitivity of material properties and performance to the mesh resolution and choice of constitutive model. However, a unified approach that accounts for various fidelity parameters, such as mesh resolutions, integration time-steps and constitutive models simultaneously is currently lacking. Further, this paper proposes a novel uncertainty quantification (UQ) approach for computing the properties and performance of homogenized materials using CPFEM, that exploits a hierarchy of approximations with different levels of fidelity. In particular, we illustrate how multi-level sampling methods, such as multi-level Monte Carlo (MLMC) and multi-index Monte Carlo (MIMC), can be applied to assess the impact of variations in the microstructure of polycrystalline materials on the predictions of homogenized materials properties. We show that by adaptively exploiting the fidelity hierarchy, we can significantly reduce the number of microstructures required to reach a certain prescribed accuracy. Finally, we show how our approach can be extended to a multi-fidelity framework, where we allow the underlying constitutive model to be chosen from either a phenomenological plasticity model or a dislocation-density-based model.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Fuel performance uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis in the presence of epistemic and aleatoric sources of uncertainties

Fuel performance modeling and simulation includes many uncertain parameters from models to boundary conditions, manufacturing parameters and material properties. These parameters exhibit large uncertainties and can have an epistemic or aleatoric nature, something that renders fuel performance code-to-code and code-to-measurements comparisons for complex phenomena such as the pellet cladding mechanical interaction (PCMI) very challenging. Additionally, PCMI and other complex phenomena found in fuel performance modeling and simulation induce strong discontinuities and non-linearities that can render difficult to extract meaningful conclusions form uncertainty quantification (UQ) and sensitivity analysis (SA) studies. In this work, we develop and apply a consistent treatment of epistemic and aleatoric uncertainties for both UQ and SA in fuel performance calculations and use historical benchmark-quality measurement data to demonstrate it. More specifically, the developed methodology is applied to the OECD/NEA Multi-physics Pellet Cladding Mechanical Interaction Validation benchmark. A cold ramp test leading to PCMI is modeled. Two measured quantities of interest are considered: the cladding axial elongation during the irradiations and the cladding outer diameter after the cold ramp. The fuel performance code used to perform the simulation is FAST. The developed methodology involves various steps including a Morris screening to decrease the number of uncertain inputs, a nested loop approach for propagating the epistemic and aleatoric sources of uncertainties, and a global SA using Sobol indices. The obtained results indicate that the fuel and cladding thermal conductivities as well as the cladding outer diameter uncertainties are the three inputs having the largest impact on the measured quantities. More importantly, it was found that the epistemic uncertainties can have a significant impact on the measured quantities and can affect the outcome of the global sensitivity analysis.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Structured Covariance Gaussian Networks for Orion Crew Module Aerodynamic Uncertainty Quantification

In this paper we propose a new approach for nonlinear regression and uncertainty quantification. The method is based on a pair of neural networks which parameterize mean and dense covariance functions of a multivariate Gaussian process, trained together to maximize the log-likelihood of observing the given data. The covariance matrix is made positive definite at every input by construction. We also propose a sampling approach that produces viable surrogate function realizations from the Gaussian process. We call the proposed model a Structured Covariance Gaussian Network (SCGN). We illustrate the use of SCGNs for learning an aerodynamic response surface with built-in uncertainty for the Orion crew module. We find that SCGN provides an efficient and systematic way to learn nonlinear functional relationships and dense covariances. We compare results to a baseline Gaussian process regressor and observe that the SCGN provides comparable uncertainty descriptions with improved scalability to dataset size. The sample functions generated by SCGN are fast to evaluate online and are therefore convenient for use in trajectory simulations. These results suggest that SCGN may be a viable computational method for aerodynamic uncertainty quantification.

machine learning↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Structured Covariance Gaussian Networks for Orion Crew Module Aerodynamic Uncertainty Quantification

In this paper we propose a new approach for nonlinear regression and uncertainty quantification. The method is based on a pair of neural networks which parameterize mean and dense covariance functions of a multivariate Gaussian process, trained together to maximize the log-likelihood of observing the given data. The covariance matrix is made positive definite at every input by construction. We also propose a sampling approach that produces viable surrogate function realizations from the Gaussian process. We call the proposed model a Structured Covariance Gaussian Network (SCGN). We illustrate the use of SCGNs for learning an aerodynamic response surface with built-in uncertainty for the Orion crew module. We find that SCGN provides an efficient and systematic way to learn nonlinear functional relationships and dense covariances. We compare results to a baseline Gaussian process regressor and observe that the SCGN provides comparable uncertainty descriptions with improved scalability to dataset size. The sample functions generated by SCGN are fast to evaluate online and are therefore convenient for use in trajectory simulations. These results suggest that SCGN may be a viable computational method for aerodynamic uncertainty quantification.

machine learning↗
DOE OSTI2026

MULTI-FIDELITY MODELING AND UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION OF INVERTER BASED RESOURCES IN INTEGRATED T&D SYSTEMS

Uncertainty quantification plays a pivotal role in improving the accuracy and reliability of inverter operation within modern power systems that are increasingly dominated by inverter-based resources (IBRs). IBRs, especially those operating under grid forming (GFM) control, rely heavily on a complex set of control parameters and system measurements to maintain voltage, frequency, and power balance. Traditional deterministic modeling approaches often fail to capture these parameter deviations, potentially resulting in suboptimal control actions, reduced system stability, or even instability under high penetration of IBRs. In this paper, we demonstrate the application of model calibration and uncertainty quantification (UQ) principles to an integrated transmission and distribution (T&D) model involving a GFM converter and provide a framework for prioritizing control improvements, guiding robust design, and informing adaptive strategies that can accommodate real-time variability in system conditions. The proposed approach could be valuable in enhancing the robustness of current and future power systems under increased IBR penetrations.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗