Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “data quality metrics”

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 469 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-00: Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG # 5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-01: Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-02: TPS Commissioning and QA: A Process Orientation and Application of Control Charts

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-03: TPS Commissioning and QA: Incorporating the Entire Planning Process

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-04: The Recommendations of MPPG #5 and Practical Implementation Strategies

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1998

PLUM: Parallel Load Balancing for Unstructured Adaptive Meshes

Dynamic mesh adaption on unstructured grids is a powerful tool for computing large-scale problems that require grid modifications to efficiently resolve solution features. Unfortunately, an efficient parallel implementation is difficult to achieve, primarily due to the load imbalance created by the dynamically-changing nonuniform grid. To address this problem, we have developed PLUM, an automatic portable framework for performing adaptive large-scale numerical computations in a message-passing environment. First, we present an efficient parallel implementation of a tetrahedral mesh adaption scheme. Extremely promising parallel performance is achieved for various refinement and coarsening strategies on a realistic-sized domain. Next we describe PLUM, a novel method for dynamically balancing the processor workloads in adaptive grid computations. This research includes interfacing the parallel mesh adaption procedure based on actual flow solutions to a data remapping module, and incorporating an efficient parallel mesh repartitioner. A significant runtime improvement is achieved by observing that data movement for a refinement step should be performed after the edge-marking phase but before the actual subdivision. We also present optimal and heuristic remapping cost metrics that can accurately predict the total overhead for data redistribution. Several experiments are performed to verify the effectiveness of PLUM on sequences of dynamically adapted unstructured grids. Portability is demonstrated by presenting results on the two vastly different architectures of the SP2 and the Origin2OOO. Additionally, we evaluate the performance of five state-of-the-art partitioning algorithms that can be used within PLUM. It is shown that for certain classes of unsteady adaption, globally repartitioning the computational mesh produces higher quality results than diffusive repartitioning schemes. We also demonstrate that a coarse starting mesh produces high quality load balancing, at a fraction of the cost required a fine initial mesh. Results indicate that our parallel load balancing strategy will remain viable on large numbers of processors.

Oliker, Leonid↗
NASA NTRS2009

An Anomaly Correlation Skill Score for the Evaluation of the Performance of Hyperspectral Infrared Sounders

With the availability of very accurate forecasts, the metric of accuracy alone for the evaluation of the performance of a retrieval system can produce misleading results. A useful characterization of the quality of a retrieval system and its potential to contribute to an improved weather forecast is its skill, which we define as the ability to make retrievals of geophysical parameters which are closer to the truth than the six hour forecast, when the truth differs significantly from the forecast. We illustrate retrieval skill using one day of AMSU and AIRS data with three different retrieval algorithms, which result in retrievals for more than 90% of the potential retrievals under clear and cloudy conditions. Two of the three algorithms have better than 1 K rms "RAOB quality" accuracy on the troposphere, but only one has skill between 900 and 100 mb. AIRS was launched on the EOS Aqua spacecraft in May 2002 into a 705 km polar sun-synchronous orbit with accurately maintained 1:30 PM ascending node. Essentially uninterrupted data are freely available since September 2002.

retrieval↗
DOE OSTI2015

Fast Detection of Material Deformation through Structural Dissimilarity

Designing materials that are resistant to extreme temperatures and brittleness relies on assessing structural dynamics of samples. Algorithms are critically important to characterize material deformation under stress conditions. Here, we report on our design of coarse-grain parallel algorithms for image quality assessment based on structural information and on crack detection of gigabyte-scale experimental datasets. We show how key steps can be decomposed into distinct processing flows, one based on structural similarity (SSIM) quality measure, and another on spectral content. These algorithms act upon image blocks that fit into memory, and can execute independently. We discuss the scientific relevance of the problem, key developments, and decomposition of complementary tasks into separate executions. We show how to apply SSIM to detect material degradation, and illustrate how this metric can be allied to spectral analysis for structure probing, while using tiled multi-resolution pyramids stored in HDF5 chunked multi-dimensional arrays. Results show that the proposed experimental data representation supports an average compression rate of 10X, and data compression scales linearly with the data size. We also illustrate how to correlate SSIM to crack formation, and how to use our numerical schemes to enable fast detection of deformation from 3D datasets evolving in time.

Ushizima, Daniela↗
DOE OSTI2021

Identifying schools at high-risk for elevated lead in drinking water using only publicly available data

Estimating the risk of lead contamination of schools' drinking water at the State level is a complex, important, and unexplored challenge. Variable water quality among water systems and changes in water chemistry during distribution affect lead dissolution rates from pipes and fittings. In addition, the locations of lead-bearing plumbing materials are uncertain. We tested the capability of six machine learning models to predict the likelihood of lead contamination of drinking water at the schools' taps using only publicly available datasets. The predictive features used in the models correspond to those with a proven correlation to the dominant, but commonly unavailable, factors that govern lead leaching: the presence of lead-bearing plumbing materials and water quality conducive to lead corrosion. By combining water chemistry data from public reports, socioeconomic information from the US census, and spatial features using Geographic Information Systems, we trained and tested models to estimate the likelihood of lead contaminated tap water in over 8,000 schools across California and Massachusetts. Our best-performing model was a Random Forest, with a 10-fold cross validation score of 0.88 for Massachusetts and 0.78 for California using the average Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (ROC AUC) metric. The model was then used to assign a lead leaching risk category to half of the schools across California (the other half was used for training). There was good agreement between the modeled risk categories and the actual lead leaching outcomes for every school; however, the model overestimated the lead leaching risk in up to 17% of the schools. This model is the first of its kind to offer a tool to predict the risk of lead leaching in schools at the State level. Further use of this model can help deploy limited resources more effectively to prevent childhood lead exposure from school drinking water.

63 RADIATION, THERMAL, AND OTHER ENVIRON. POLLUTAN↗
DOE OSTI2024

Sub-pilot-scale Production of High-Value Products from U.S. Coals

Investigators from the University of Utah, University of Wyoming and Marshall University pursued a program to study the conversion of raw coal to high-value products of carbon fiber and silicon carbide. Team members also developed an initial framework for a data portal that can incorporate laboratory data on coal processing and product quality, and also work with tools for machine learning for data analysis, data visualization and economic assessment. Experimental R&D efforts focused on the conversion of raw coal to coal tar and other byproducts, and the resulting tar intermediates were upgraded to form anisotropic and isotropic pitch materials. These pitch materials were produced from coal using both thermal (pyrolysis) and chemical (mild solvolysis liquefaction) decomposition of raw coal. Four different coals were studied: Utah bituminous coal (Sufco), Wyoming PRB coal (Black Thunder), Illinois bituminous coal (Illinois #6), and West Virginia bituminous coal (Flying Eagle). Both metallurgical-grade coking coals and lower-grade steam coals were investigated, and controlled secondary gas-phase reactions were used during a two-stage pyrolysis process to induce cracking and condensation reactions among the pyrolytic tar species. This approach successfully improved the performance of the lower grade coals for yielding pitch materials, with properties more consistent with a commercial-grade pitch that had previously demonstrated success for quality carbon fiber production. The use of waste plastic materials was also studied, to help improve physical and chemical characteristics of the intermediate tars and final pitch product; in particular, for lowering the pitch softening point to an acceptable level for melt spinning carbon fiber. Mild solvolysis liquefaction was also used as a method for producing pitch for carbon fiber production. As expected, significantly higher pitch yields were obtained using this approach, and waste plastic materials were also successfully used to reduce pitch softening point to an acceptable level. The plastic materials were also utilized to create a solvent for the mild solvolysis process, and this plastic-derived solvent was shown to provide results consistent with more expensive commercial chemical solvents, and could thus avoid the need for costly recovery and recycle of a liquefaction solvent. Additional experimental R&D focused on the production of silicon carbide (β-SiC) from the residual char byproduct from pitch production, and also on the production of carbon fiber from the anisotropic pitch. SiC was successfully synthesized using a mixture of residual char and sandstone at a ratio of 1:1. Reaction temperature and residence time were optimized and yielded a product purity of 81%. For carbon fiber production, the most successful pitch samples were obtained from the mild solvolysis liquefaction approach, combined with the use of a plastic (HDPE)-derived solvent. Fiber properties improved over time as laboratory fiber production methodologies improved, and final yields of carbon fiber were obtained with a diameter of 12.14 ± 1.10 um, Modulus of 173.73 ± 15.25 GPa, and Tensile Strength of 1.04 ± 0.10 GPa. A proof-of-concept Modern Community Research Data Portal (MCRDP) was developed and deployed for coal and coal-derived pitch characterization, with the full support of (i) remote web-based access, (ii) distributed analysis, (iii) interactive visualization and exploration, (iv) shared and long-term data access, (v) advanced query capabilities and (vi) real-time collaboration. The Coal to Products Data Portal “coaltoproducts.org” provides researchers with space to store and share data within a project, tools for analyzing and understanding data for scientific investigation, and the ability to publish data to the broader community for reproducibility. The portal leverages the Material Commons 2.0 (MC) platform developed by the Center for PRedictive Integrated Structural Materials Science (PRISMS) of the University of Michigan, to achieve long-term longevity of data collections and, more importantly, collaborative science. A number of data visualization tools were also assessed and implemented for interrogating the experimental and modeling data. The machine learning portion of this project analyzed datasets from two different coal conversion processes performed on a diverse set of coal samples from both the coal pyrolysis experiments and the solvent liquefaction experiments. The work was initiated by exploring standard regression models on the pyrolysis data, aiming to understand the impact of sample characteristics and processing conditions on key product metrics. Over the course of the project, the focus expanded to include a variety of machine learning tools, delving into both supervised and unsupervised learning methods. Models tested on the pyrolysis data included linear, ridge, lasso, elastic-net, Gaussian process, random forest regression, and AutoSklearn, and the approach was continually refined to enhance predictive accuracy and model interpretability. Similar techniques were applied to the liquefaction data with an additional focus on feature engineering. Along with mesophase content, additional outputs of interest were the pitch yield, softening point, and QI content. Insights derived from these analyses are crucial in determining the factors influencing the quality and yield of coal-derived products. As the work progressed, the research evolved from foundational model comparisons to analyses of random forests, decision paths, and feature importance scores. A thorough market analysis was performed to examine the prospects of coal-based carbon fibers. The best opportunities for coal come from its lower and more stable price relative to petroleum, particularly for subbituminous coals, which is the primary advantage that a coal refinery may have over a petroleum refinery. Before a commercial CTP production facility can be modeled, however, several things need to be understood regarding the nature of the would-be coal refinery. These include the technology to be deployed, the size of facility, the volume(s) of co-product(s), and the waste and emissions profile of the plant. The volume of co-products and waste may be substantial and will require separate market analysis to ensure viability. In the near-term, the importance of coal tar pitch, in the form of carbon pitch, to the aluminum and steel industries is likely to overshadow the alternative use of this material as an input for carbon fiber. The importance of steel and aluminum in building materials, and the need for carbon materials in their manufacturing, will ensure that demand for these products remains for the long run. In addition, carbon fiber may also be the best substitute for steel and aluminum well into the future. While society will eventually be able to shift production of much of its electricity needs to renewables, it will not be able to shift away from fossil fuels for production of high-strength construction and vehicular materials. Demand for carbon fiber is expected to increase quickly, but the volume of carbon fiber and the amount of coal that would be needed to produce even a sizeable share of this market may still be relatively small compared to current coal production. Thus, other coal-based products like graphene, graphite, carbon foams, resins, and carbon-based building products will play important roles in sustaining coal production as coal-fired power generation continues to decline.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-J-128: Two-Stage Atlas Selection in Multi-Atlas-Based Image Segmentation

Purpose: In the new era of big data, multi-atlas-based image segmentation is challenged by heterogeneous atlas quality and high computation burden from extensive atlas collection, demanding efficient identification of the most relevant atlases. This study aims to develop a two-stage atlas selection scheme to achieve computational economy with performance guarantee. Methods: We develop a low-cost fusion set selection scheme by introducing a preliminary selection to trim full atlas collection into an augmented subset, alleviating the need for extensive full-fledged registrations. More specifically, fusion set selection is performed in two successive steps: preliminary selection and refinement. An augmented subset is first roughly selected from the whole atlas collection with a simple registration scheme and the corresponding preliminary relevance metric; the augmented subset is further refined into the desired fusion set size, using full-fledged registration and the associated relevance metric. The main novelty of this work is the introduction of an inference model to relate the preliminary and refined relevance metrics, based on which the augmented subset size is rigorously derived to ensure the desired atlases survive the preliminary selection with high probability. Results: The performance and complexity of the proposed two-stage atlas selection method were assessed using a collection of 30 prostate MR images. It achieved comparable segmentation accuracy as the conventional one-stage method with full-fledged registration, but significantly reduced computation time to 1/3 (from 30.82 to 11.04 min per segmentation). Compared with alternative one-stage cost-saving approach, the proposed scheme yielded superior performance with mean and medium DSC of (0.83, 0.85) compared to (0.74, 0.78). Conclusion: This work has developed a model-guided two-stage atlas selection scheme to achieve significant cost reduction while guaranteeing high segmentation accuracy. The benefit in both complexity and performance is expected to be most pronounced with large-scale heterogeneous data.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Estimating carrying capacity for juvenile salmon using quantile random forest models

Abstract Establishing robust methods and metrics to evaluate habitat quality is critical for the recovery of endangered Pacific salmonids ( Oncorhynchus spp.). A variety of modeling approaches are used for status and trend monitoring of anadromous species throughout the Pacific Northwest, USA, but current methods may fail to capture the complex relationship between fish and habitat and are often limited in predictive power beyond specific watersheds. Further, the focus on species distribution and abundance is not easily manipulated to predict carrying capacity and traditional stock‐recruitment analyses are reliant on long‐term data which are not always available. In this study, we developed a quantile random forest model to provide estimates of habitat carrying capacity for Chinook salmon ( O. tshawytscha ) parr during the summer months, at both the site and watershed scale. Quantile random forest models allow for the consideration of noisy data, correlated variables, and non‐linear relationships: common features in fish–habitat datasets. We leveraged Columbia Habitat Monitoring Program data to select habitat co‐variates and predict capacity at those sites. We also identified a set of globally available attributes to extrapolate capacity estimate predictions throughout wadeable streams within the Columbia River basin. Total capacity estimates for watersheds closely matched estimates from alternative fish productivity models. Carrying capacity estimates based on quantile random forest models, like those presented here, provide managers a framework to guide the identification, prioritization, and development of habitat rehabilitation actions to recover salmon populations.

See, Kevin E.↗
DOE OSTI2026

The ABCs of On-Demand Transit (ODT)

On-demand mobility - also referred to as on-demand transit (ODT) - is a form of public mobility that is flexible with respect to where and when service is provided, and ODT deployments have increased significantly in recent years. Transit agencies are becoming increasingly interested in ODT, and due to differing definitions and various service design and business model options, it can be difficult to learn about the emerging industry. This work provides an overview of the definitions of ODT, recent trends internationally and in the U.S., ODT's benefits and challenges (particularly compared to fixed-route transit), three primary service design options, system costs and funding considerations, and a metrics framework for evaluating ODT systems to ensure continued successful performance. Identified benefits include increased service areas, short ride and wait times, increased user flexibility, potential to reduce energy consumption and emissions through shared trips and smaller, right-sized vehicles, increased safety and comfort through door-to-door service, and rich data streams including granular spatio-temporal data that can be analyzed to continuously improve the service. Challenges include scaling ODT service up as small increases in ridership require additional supply to keep service quality high, serving peak times including keeping low wait times, the lack of fixed schedule being challenging for commuters, integrating ODT services with nearby transit systems, and equity for riders without smartphones who cannot track the vehicle in a mobile app. Finally, an overview of seven ODT case studies (in Texas, Missouri, New York, and Ontario, Canada) performed by NREL and related analysis of travel time, energy and emissions, costs, and equity are presented. Initial key findings include: ODT can be cost- and energy-effective compared to fixed-route transit, ODT serves more people than other transit options, and ODT system deployments can be followed by rapid growth.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Fast and accurate simulations of calorimeter showers with normalizing flows

In this study, we introduce caloflow, a fast detector simulation framework based on normalizing flows. For the first time, we demonstrate that normalizing flows can reproduce many-channel calorimeter showers with extremely high fidelity, providing a fresh alternative to computationally expensive geant4 simulations, as well as other state-of-the-art fast simulation frameworks based on generative adversarial networks (GANs) or variational autoencoders (VAEs). In addition to the usual histograms of physical features and images of calorimeter showers, we introduce a new metric for judging the quality of generative modeling: the performance of a classifier trained to differentiate real from generated images. We show that GAN-generated images can be identified by the classifier with nearly 100% accuracy, while images generated from caloflow are better able to fool the classifier. More broadly, normalizing flows offer several advantages compared to other state-of-the-art approaches (GANs and VAEs), including tractable likelihoods, stable and convergent training, and principled model selection. Normalizing flows also provide a bijective mapping between data and the latent space, which could have other applications beyond simulation, for example, to detector unfolding.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Real-Time Health Monitoring for Gas Turbine Components Using Online Learning and High-Dimensional Data

Capital-intensive turbomachinery, such as gas turbines and combined cycle plants, are constantly being monitored for performance anomalies, faults, and physical degradation. Although these power-generating assets are equipped with hundreds of sensors, existing monitoring tools can only handle moderate-sized data. As a result, only a handful of aggregate metrics are used to monitor machine health. At the same time, developing advanced tools suitable for large datasets have been restricted by the lack of appropriate data. The objective of this proposal was to demonstrate a Big Data analytics framework for fault detection and diagnosis in gas turbine applications. We develop a predictive analytics framework methodology guided by these experimental data, industrial data from our collaborators, and physics-based models with engineering domain knowledge. Our analytics framework consists of four key components (1) a data curation process that addresses data storage, data quality assessments, and integrity checks, (2) a feature engineering component that utilizes statistical methods and transformation algorithms guided by physics-based models to extract high-fidelity fault features that can be leveraged for fault detection and classifying fault severities, (3) a Machine Learning-based fault detection and diagnostics algorithms for detecting operational and hardware faults in the combustion and the turbines section. We utilize two industry-class gas turbine component test rigs to generate first of its kind data for critical gas turbine faults with varying severity levels. Advanced gas turbine test facilities will be interrogated using state-of-the-art instrumentation techniques to build fault signatures and data trends for key combustor and turbine faults. Data generated from a combustor test rig (Georgia Tech) and a turbine test rig (Penn State) during both normal operation and with seeded faults serve as the basis for the Big Data sets. The test conditions in the two test facilities include common, critical events that occur in the operation. Utilizing the combustor test rig, we examine two common combustor faults: lean blowout and centerbody degradation. For the turbine section we develop analytic models for monitoring cooling faults in the gas turbine

03 NATURAL GAS↗
NASA NTRS2000

Comprehensive Design Reliability Activities for Aerospace Propulsion Systems

This technical publication describes the methodology, model, software tool, input data, and analysis result that support aerospace design reliability studies. The focus of these activities is on propulsion systems mechanical design reliability. The goal of these activities is to support design from a reliability perspective. Paralleling performance analyses in schedule and method, this requires the proper use of metrics in a validated reliability model useful for design, sensitivity, and trade studies. Design reliability analysis in this view is one of several critical design functions. A design reliability method is detailed and two example analyses are provided-one qualitative and the other quantitative. The use of aerospace and commercial data sources for quantification is discussed and sources listed. A tool that was developed to support both types of analyses is presented. Finally, special topics discussed include the development of design criteria, issues of reliability quantification, quality control, and reliability verification.

Christenson, R. L.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Real-Time Health Monitoring for Gas Turbine Components Using Online Learning and High-Dimensional Data (Final Report)

Capital-intensive turbomachinery, such as gas turbines and combined cycle plants, are constantly being monitored for performance anomalies, faults, and physical degradation. Although these power-generating assets are equipped with hundreds of sensors, existing monitoring tools can only handle moderate-sized data. As a result, only a handful of aggregate metrics are used to monitor machine health. At the same time, developing advanced tools suitable for large datasets have been restricted by the lack of appropriate data. The objective of this proposal was to demonstrate a Big Data analytics framework for fault detection and diagnosis in gas turbine applications. We develop a predictive analytics framework methodology guided by these experimental data, industrial data from our collaborators, and physics-based models with engineering domain knowledge. Our analytics framework consists of four key components: (1) a data curation process that addresses data storage, data quality assessments, and integrity checks, (2) a feature engineering component that utilizes statistical methods and transformation algorithms guided by physics-based models to extract high-fidelity fault features that can be leveraged for fault detection and classifying fault severities, (3) a Machine Learning-based fault detection and diagnostics algorithms for detecting operational and hardware faults in the combustion and the turbines section. We utilize two industry-class gas turbine component test rigs to generate first of its kind data for critical gas turbine faults with varying severity levels. Advanced gas turbine test facilities will be interrogated using state-of-the-art instrumentation techniques to build fault signatures and data trends for key combustor and turbine faults. Data generated from a combustor test rig (Georgia Tech) and a turbine test rig (Penn State) during both normal operation and with seeded faults serve as the basis for the Big Data sets. The test conditions in the two test facilities include common, critical events that occur in the operation. Utilizing the combustor test rig, we examine two common combustor faults: lean blowout and centerbody degradation. For the turbine section we develop analytic models for monitoring cooling faults in the gas turbine.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2013

Validation of mathematical models for the prediction of organs-at-risk dosimetric metrics in high-dose-rate gynecologic interstitial brachytherapy

Purpose: Given the complicated nature of an interstitial gynecologic brachytherapy treatment plan, the use of a quantitative tool to evaluate the quality of the achieved metrics compared to clinical practice would be advantageous. For this purpose, predictive mathematical models to predict the D{sub 2cc} of rectum and bladder in interstitial gynecologic brachytherapy are discussed and validated.Methods: Previous plans were used to establish the relationship between D2cc and the overlapping volume of the organ at risk with the targeted area (C0) or a 1-cm expansion of the target area (C1). Three mathematical models were evaluated: D{sub 2cc}=α*C{sub 1}+β (LIN); D{sub 2cc}=α– exp(–β*C{sub 0}) (EXP); and a mixed approach (MIX), where both C{sub 0} and C{sub 1} were inputs of the model. The parameters of the models were optimized on a training set of patient data, and the predictive error of each model (predicted D{sub 2cc}− real D{sub 2cc}) was calculated on a validation set of patient data. The data of 20 patients were used to perform a K-fold cross validation analysis, with K = 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 20.Results: MIX was associated with the smallest mean prediction error <6.4% for an 18-patient training set; LIN had an error <8.5%; EXP had an error <8.3%. Best case scenario analysis shows that an error ≤5% can be achieved for a ten-patient training set with MIX, an error ≤7.4% for LIN, and an error ≤6.9% for EXP. The error decreases with the increase in training set size, with the most marked decrease observed for MIX.Conclusions: The MIX model can predict the D{sub 2cc} of the organs at risk with an error lower than 5% with a training set of ten patients or greater. The model can be used in the development of quality assurance tools to identify treatment plans with suboptimal sparing of the organs at risk. It can also be used to improve preplanning and in the development of real-time intraoperative planning tools.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗