Results for “physical” — Page 26

NASA NTRS1990

Physics and astrophysics from a lunar base; Proceedings of the 1st NASA Workshop, Stanford, CA, May 19, 20, 1989

The present conference on physics and astrophysics from a lunar base encompasses space physics, cosmic ray physics, neutrino physics, experiments in gravitation and general relativity, gravitational radiation physics, cosmic background radiation, particle astrophysics, surface physics, and the physics of gamma rays and X-rays. Specific issues addressed include space-plasma physics research at a lunar base, prospects for neutral particle imaging, the atmosphere as particle detector, medium- and high-energy neutrino physics from a lunar base, muons on the moon, a search for relic supernovae antineutrinos, and the use of clocks in satellites orbiting the moon to test general relativity. Also addressed are large X-ray-detector arrays for physics experiments on the moon, and the measurement of proton decay, arcsec-source locations, halo dark matter and elemental abundances above 10 exp 15 eV at a lunar base.

Potter, A. E.↗

NASA NTRS2000

On the Computational Capabilities of Physical Systems: The Impossibility of Infallible Computation - Part 1

In this first of two papers, strong limits on the accuracy of physical computation are established. First it is proven that there cannot be a physical computer C to which one can pose any and all computational tasks concerning the physical universe. Next it is proven that no physical computer C can correctly carry out any computational task in the subset of such tasks that can be posed to C. This result holds whether the computational tasks concern a system that is physically isolated from C, or instead concern a system that is coupled to C. As a particular example, this result means that there cannot be a physical computer that can, for any physical system external to that computer, take the specification of that external system's state as input and then correctly predict its future state before that future state actually occurs; one cannot build a physical computer that can be assured of correctly 'processing information faster than the universe does'. The results also mean that there cannot exist an infallible, general-purpose observation apparatus, and that there cannot be an infallible, general-purpose control apparatus. These results do not rely on systems that are infinite, and/or non-classical, and/or obey chaotic dynamics. They also hold even if one uses an infinitely fast, infinitely dense computer, with computational powers greater than that of a Turing Machine. This generality is a direct consequence of the fact that a novel definition of computation - a definition of 'physical computation' - is needed to address the issues considered in these papers. While this definition does not fit into the traditional Chomsky hierarchy, the mathematical structure and impossibility results associated with it have parallels in the mathematics of the Chomsky hierarchy. The second in this pair of papers presents a preliminary exploration of some of this mathematical structure, including in particular that of prediction complexity, which is a 'physical computation analogue' of algorithmic information complexity. It is proven in that second paper that either the Hamiltonian of our universe proscribes a certain type of computation, or prediction complexity is unique (unlike algorithmic information complexity), in that there is one and only version of it that can be applicable throughout our universe.

Wolpert, David H.↗

DOE OSTI2013

Proceedings of RIKEN BNL Research Center Workshop: The Physics of p ↑ +A Collisions at RHIC

The RIKEN BNL Research Center (RBRC) was established in April 1997 at Brookhaven National Laboratory. It is funded by the "Rikagaku Kenkyusho" (RIKEN, The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research) of Japan. The Memorandum of Understanding between RIKEN and BNL, initiated in 1997, has been renewed in 2002, 2007 and again in 2012. The Center is dedicated to the study of strong interactions, including spin physics, lattice QCD, and RHIC physics through the nurturing of a new generation of young physicists. The RBRC has both a theory and experimental component. The RBRC Theory Group and the RBRC Experimental Group consists of a total of 25-30 researchers. Positions include the following: full time RBRC Fellow, half-time RHIC Physics Fellow, and full-time postdoctoral Research Associate. The RHIC Physics Fellows hold joint appointments with RBRC and other institutions and have tenure track positions at their respective universities or BNL. To date, RBRC has over 95 graduates (Fellows and Post- docs) of which approximately 40 theorists and 20 experimenters have already attained tenure positions at major institutions worldwide. Beginning in 2001 a new RIKEN Spin Program (RSP) category was implemented at RBRC. These appointments are joint positions of RBRC and RIKEN and include the following positions in theory and experiment: RSP Researchers, RSP Research Associates, and Young Researchers, who are mentored by senior RBRC Scientists. A number of RIKEN Jr. Research Associates and Visiting Scientists also contribute to the physics program at the Center. RBRC has an active workshop program on strong interaction physics with each workshop focused on a specific physics problem. In most cases all the talks are made available on the RBRC website. In addition, highlights to each speaker’s presentation are collected to form proceedings which can therefore be made available within a short time after the workshop. To date there are over one hundred proceeding volumes available. A 10 teraflops RBRC QCDOC computer funded by RIKEN, Japan, was unveiled at a dedication ceremony at BNL on May 26, 2005. This supercomputer was designed and built by individuals from Columbia University, IBM, BNL, RBRC, and the University of Edinburgh, with the U.S. D.O.E. Office of Science providing infrastructure support at BNL. Physics results were reported at the RBRC QCDOC Symposium following the dedication. QCDSP, a 0.6 teraflops parallel processor, dedicated to lattice QCD, was begun at the Center on February 19, 1998, was completed on August 28, 1998, and was decommissioned in 2006. It was awarded the Gordon Bell Prize for price performance in 1998. QCDOC was decommissioned in May 2012. The next generation computer in this sequence, QCDCQ (600 Teraflops), is currently operational and is expected to produce many more interesting discoveries in the future.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2015

2015 Final Reports from the Los Alamos National Laboratory Computational Physics Student Summer Workshop

The two primary purposes of LANL’s Computational Physics Student Summer Workshop are (1) To educate graduate and exceptional undergraduate students in the challenges and applications of computational physics of interest to LANL, and (2) Entice their interest toward those challenges. Computational physics is emerging as a discipline in its own right, combining expertise in mathematics, physics, and computer science. The mathematical aspects focus on numerical methods for solving equations on the computer as well as developing test problems with analytical solutions. The physics aspects are very broad, ranging from low-temperature material modeling to extremely high temperature plasma physics, radiation transport and neutron transport. The computer science issues are concerned with matching numerical algorithms to emerging architectures and maintaining the quality of extremely large codes built to perform multi-physics calculations. Although graduate programs associated with computational physics are emerging, it is apparent that the pool of U.S. citizens in this multi-disciplinary field is relatively small and is typically not focused on the aspects that are of primary interest to LANL. Furthermore, more structured foundations for LANL interaction with universities in computational physics is needed; historically interactions rely heavily on individuals’ personalities and personal contacts. Thus a tertiary purpose of the Summer Workshop is to build an educational network of LANL researchers, university professors, and emerging students to advance the field and LANL’s involvement in it. This report includes both the background for the program and the reports from the students.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2012

Neutrino Oscillation Physics

To complement the neutrino-physics lectures given at the 2011 International School on Astro Particle Physics devoted to Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics (ISAPP 2011; Varenna, Italy), at the 2011 European School of High Energy Physics (ESHEP 2011; Cheila Gradistei, Romania), and, in modified form, at other summer schools, we present here a written description of the physics of neutrino oscillation. This description is centered on a new way of deriving the oscillation probability. We also provide a brief guide to references relevant to topics other than neutrino oscillation that were covered in the lectures. Neutrinos and photons are by far the most abundant elementary particles in the universe. Thus, if we would like to comprehend the universe, we must understand the neutrinos. Of course, studying the neutrinos is challenging, since the only known forces through which these electrically-neutral leptons interact are the weak force and gravity. Consequently, interactions of neutrinos in a detector are very rare events, so that very large detectors and intense neutrino sources are needed to make experiments feasible. Nevertheless, we have confirmed that the weak interactions of neutrinos are correctly described by the Standard Model (SM) of elementary particle physics. Moreover, in the last 14 years, we have discovered that neutrinos have nonzero masses, and that leptons mix. These discoveries have been based on the observation that neutrinos can change from one 'flavor' to another - the phenomenon known as neutrino oscillation. We shall explain the physics of neutrino oscillation, deriving the probability of oscillation in a new way. We shall also provide a very brief guide to references that can be used to study some major neutrino-physics topics other than neutrino oscillation.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

DOE OSTI2017

Physics-Based Hazard Assessment for Critical Structures Near Large Earthquake Sources

We argue that for critical structures near large earthquake sources: (1) the ergodic assumption, recent history, and simplified descriptions of the hazard are not appropriate to rely on for earthquake ground motion prediction and can lead to a mis-estimation of the hazard and risk to structures; (2) a physics-based approach can address these issues; (3) a physics-based source model must be provided to generate realistic phasing effects from finite rupture and model near-source ground motion correctly; (4) wave propagations and site response should be site specific; (5) a much wider search of possible sources of ground motion can be achieved computationally with a physics-based approach; (6) unless one utilizes a physics-based approach, the hazard and risk to structures has unknown uncertainties; (7) uncertainties can be reduced with a physics-based approach, but not with an ergodic approach; (8) computational power and computer codes have advanced to the point that risk to structures can be calculated directly from source and site-specific ground motions. Spanning the variability of potential ground motion in a predictive situation is especially difficult for near-source areas, but that is the distance at which the hazard is the greatest. The basis of a “physical-based” approach is ground-motion syntheses derived from physics and an understanding of the earthquake process. This is an overview paper and results from previous studies are used to make the case for these conclusions. Our premise is that 50 years of strong motion records is insufficient to capture all possible ranges of site and propagation path conditions, rupture processes, and spatial geometric relationships between source and site. Predicting future earthquake scenarios is necessary; models that have little or no physical basis but have been tested and adjusted to fit available observations can only “predict” what happened in the past, which should be considered description as opposed to prediction. Finally, we have developed a methodology for synthesizing physics-based broadband ground motion that incorporates the effects of realistic earthquake rupture along specific faults and the actual geology between the source and site.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

Partnership for Edge Physics Simulation (EPSI)

We propose to develop advanced simulation codes, based upon an extreme parallelism, first principles kinetic approach, to address the challenges associated with the edge region of magnetically confined plasmas. This work is relevant to both existing magnetic fusion facilities and essential for next-generation burning plasma experiments, such as ITER where success is critically dependent upon H-mode operation achieving an edge pedestal of sufficient height for good core plasma performance without producing deleterious large scale edge localized instabilities. The plasma edge presents a well-known set of multi-physics, multi-scale problems involving complex 3D magnetic geometry. Perhaps the greatest computational challenge is the lack of scale separation – temporal scales for drift waves, Alfven waves, ELM dynamics for example have strong overlap. Similar overlap occurs on the spatial scales for the ion poloidal gyro-radius, drift wave and pedestal width. The traditional approach of separating fusion problems into weakly interacting spatial or temporal domains clearly breaks down in the edge. A full kinetic model (full-f model) must be solved to understand and predict the edge physics including non-equilibrium thermodynamic issues arising from the magnetic topology (the open field lines producing a spatially sensitive velocity hole), plasma wall interactions, neutral and atomic physics. The plan here is to model these phenomena within a comprehensive first principles set of equations without the need for the insurmountable multiple-codes coupling issues by building on the XGC1 code developed under the SciDAC Proto-FSP Center for Plasma Edge Simulation (CPES). This proposal includes the critical participants in the XGC1 development. We propose enhancing the capability of XGC1 by including all the important turbulence physics contained in kinetic ion and electron electromagnetic dynamics, by extending the PIC technology to incorporate several positive features found in the Eulerian grid technology, combining the coarse grained XGC0 code into it with a multiscale projective time integration technique to be developed in the project for experimental time scale simulation of the edge multi-physics, and by implementing modern computational technologies to move forward with the extreme scale heterogeneous hardware/software platform development. Ultra-fast edge localized instabilities, involving compressional Alven modes, will be studied using a proper MHD or two-fluid codes employing kinetic closure information from XGC. The proposed research integrates the most important physical processes on overlapping temporal and spatial scales, to study (i) transitions and thresholds for enhanced confinement regimes, (ii) the predictive understanding of the edge pedestal formation, structure and dynamics, (iii) the effect of the edge plasma on the core confinement, (iv) the physics of Edge Localized Modes and their suppression or mitigation via external control techniques, and (v) the heat load on the material wall. Our approach will implement physical models that are valid in their relevant collisionality regimes for current experiments and future burning plasma devices. Comparisons with experimental data will be made at multiple levels including characterization of turbulence dynamics, flux-gradient responses in the energy, particle and momentum channels, and observations of global phenomena such as L-H transitions, momentum generation, ELM dynamics, ELM-free regimes and the tokamak density limit. The proposal team has established strong connections, through joint membership, with other organizations that will be critical for success. These include FASTMath, SUPER and QUEST Institutes respectively for meshing tools and solvers; code performance tuning and uncertainty quantification as well as a proposed Data Management and Visualization Institute.. We will also be teaming with ongoing fusion SciDAC’s: CSWPI for RF-edge plasmas interactions; CEMM for the M3D MHD simulations and with PEPSC for incorporation of energetic particle physics. Finally, the team includes representatives from each of the major U.S. experimental facilities who will coordinate the validation program and the development of synthetic diagnostics.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Uncovering New Physics in the Cosmic Microwave Background: Developing Novel Theoretical Models and Machine-Learning-Powered Constraints

The search for evidence of new physics via its signatures in the cosmos is a cornerstone goal of the Office of High Energy Physics in the DOE Office of Science. Indeed, the current concordance cosmological model provides intriguing hints for beyond-the-standard-model (BSM) physics, such as dark matter and dark energy. Recently, a potential breakdown has appeared in this model, which could be initial evidence toward a further important revision in our fundamental theoretical understanding of cosmology. This breakdown is reflected in disagreements between inferences of the current expansion rate of the universe, H 0 (the Hubble constant), based on indirect, cosmological data (e.g., from the early universe) and based on direct, local measurements. Despite significant effort, a compelling new concordance cosmological model has yet to be found; achieving significant progress on this front was the first major focus of the project. Theoretical considerations indicate that if the observational discrepancies are not due to systematic errors, they strongly suggest new physics operating in the redshift range just prior to recombination, when cosmic microwave background (CMB) photons last scattered. Crucially, almost all such models produce unique signatures in the CMB temperature and polarization power spectra, which will be measured with unprecedented precision by ongoing and upcoming experiments, including the DOE-supported CMB-S4 project. However, these subtle hints of new physics must be uncovered from beneath a swath of Galactic and extragalactic foreground contamination. Current CMB analysis methods, although powerful, do not optimally infer the CMB power spectrum in the presence of non-Gaussian foregrounds. There is thus scope for theoretical improvement in this foundational challenge of cosmological inference, which formed the second major focus of the project. The primary objectives of the project were two-fold: (1) to develop new theoretical models in cosmology that can restore concordance amongst the full suite of cosmological data sets, thereby potentially providing evidence of novel BSM physics; (2) to develop new theoretical machinery to enable significant sensitivity improvements in searches for new physics in cosmology, particularly via the CMB power spectrum. The two objectives are intertwined, as the analysis methodology improvements in (2) will enable the tightest possible constraints on the signatures of new physics predicted by the novel scenarios in (1). The theoretical approaches to restore concordance focused on models involving novel scalar field dynamics in the pre-recombination universe (the “early dark energy” scenario and modifications thereof), as well as couplings between this field and other components in the standard cosmological model, such as dark matter. We also studied a model featuring a generalization of the decaying dark matter scenario, in which a sub-component of dark matter converts into dark radiation at late times in cosmic history. While these ideas are mostly driven by phenomenological considerations, this tactic has proven extremely successful in cosmology throughout the past few decades, including in the early history of evidence for dark matter and dark energy. The new theoretical machinery envisioned in (2) is undergirded by developments in signal processing and machine learning, which will enable improvements in CMB power spectrum estimation in the presence of non-Gaussian foreground contaminants. In turn, this will yield optimal sensitivity in searches for new physics in the CMB, by maximizing the cosmological information that is extracted from this observable. The most ambitious outcome of this work would be the construction of a new cosmological model that restores concordance amongst data sets. Although the individual models studied here did not fully achieve that goal, significant progress in narrowing down the model space was made, as described below. Moreover, the outcome of the methodological improvements in (2) will significantly impact a wide range of theoretical cosmology, by enabling the tightest possible constraints on any model that leaves novel signatures in the CMB temperature and polarization power spectra.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2017

High Energy Physics (Final Report)

The research at Yale funded by the DOE Office of High Energy Physics, with grant title Yale High Energy Physics Research is centered at all the frontier areas of elementary particle physics, both experimental and theoretical. Among the most compelling are the continued exciting study of the energy frontier at the LHC, the physics of neutrinos and neutrino mixing, and the properties of dark energy in the universe. These activities offer promise for providing the answers to some of the most fundamental questions in science, such as the origin of mass and the baryon asymmetry in the Universe, and the cause of its accelerated expansion. In neutrino physics Profs. Fleming and Heeger are leading several experiments using reactor and accelerator neutrinos and participate in research and development towards precision neutrino detection. In flavor physics, Prof. Demers contributes to the physics selection and design of the mu2e Experiment. In collider physics Profs. Baker, Demers, and Tipton’s efforts span searches and measurements for the Higgs, exotics, and planned upgrades. In astrophysics Profs. Baltay and Padmanabhan are exploring the Cosmic Frontier. Prof. Baltay plays a leading role in La Silla/QUEST and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Survey (DESI). Prof. Padmanabhan uses large galaxy surveys to constrain dark energy through critical participation in the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS) and in DESI. In theoretical research, Prof. Goldberger has made contributions to many fields including electroweak symmetry breaking, relativistic and non-relativistic conformal field theories, cosmology and inflation, and general relativity. At Yale, we enjoy a close collaboration and shared resources between different experimental groups, and between theory and experimental communities.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Report of the 2021 U.S. Community Study on the Future of Particle Physics (Snowmass 2021) Summary Chapter

The 2021-22 High-Energy Physics Community Planning Exercise (a.k.a. ``Snowmass 2021'') was organized by the Division of Particles and Fields of the American Physical Society. Snowmass 2021 was a scientific study that provided an opportunity for the entire U.S. particle physics community, along with its international partners, to identify the most important scientific questions in High Energy Physics for the following decade, with an eye to the decade after that, and the experiments, facilities, infrastructure, and R&D needed to pursue them. This Snowmass summary report synthesizes the lessons learned and the main conclusions of the Community Planning Exercise as a whole and presents a community-informed synopsis of U.S. particle physics at the beginning of 2023. This document, along with the Snowmass reports from the various subfields, will provide input to the 2023 Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (P5) subpanel of the U.S. High-Energy Physics Advisory Panel (HEPAP), and will help to guide and inform the activity of the U.S. particle physics community during the next decade and beyond.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

DOE OSTI2019

Discrete game-theoretic analysis of defense in correlated cyber-physical systems

A cyber-physical system (CPS) is composed of a discrete number of cyber and physical components and subject to internal failures and external disruptions. The functionality of CPS therefore is determined not only by cyber and physical components but the adversary’s attacker strategy. We characterize the effect of cyber-physical interdependency on the CPS survival probability using a product-form function with cyber and physical exponential correlation coefficients. We model simultaneous and sequential discrete games between the provider and attacker on a CPS infrastructure to analyze its survivability and reinforcement strategy at Nash equilibrium. Our results show that the cyber and physical correlation coefficients can significantly affect CPS survival probability. In general, the provider’s cyber- (or physical-) reinforcement level increases as the cyber- (or physical-) attack level increases. In each of cyber and physical domains, the reinforcement level first increases then decreases in its own correlation coefficient, probability of successful component attacks, and maximum level of available resources, but decreases in the correlation coefficient of the other domain. We apply this game-theoretic analysis to a cloud computing infrastructure, and show that its residual capacity is relatively high when the attacker has no information about the distribution of servers. Finally, a high level of survival probability does not necessarily lead to high utility.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2019

A hybrid point-particle force model that combines physical and data-driven approaches

Here this study improves upon the physics-based pairwise interaction extended point-particle (PIEP) model. The PIEP model leverages our physical understanding to predict fluid mediated interactions between solid particles. By considering the relative location of neighboring particles, the PIEP model is able to provide better predictions than existing drag models. While the current physical PIEP model is a powerful tool, its assumptions lead to increased error in flows with higher particle volume fractions. To reduce this error, a regression algorithm makes direct use of the results of direct numerical simulations (DNS) of an array of monodisperse solid particles subjected to uniform ambient flow at varying Reynolds numbers. The resulting statistical model and the physical PIEP model are superimposed to construct a hybrid, physics-based data-driven PIEP model. It must be noted that the performance of a pure data-driven approach without the model-form provided by the physical PIEP model is substantially inferior. The hybrid model's predictive capabilities are analyzed using additional DNS data that was not part of training the data-driven model. In every case tested, the hybrid models resulting from the regression were capable of (1) improving upon the physical PIEP model's prediction and (2) recovering underlying relevant physics from the DNS data. As the particle volume fraction increases, the physical PIEP model loses the ability to approximate the forces experienced by the particles, but the statistical model continues to produce accurate approximations.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2015

MO-DE-BRA-05: Developing Effective Medical Physics Knowledge Structures: Models and Methods

Purpose: Develop a method and supporting online resources to be used by medical physics educators for teaching medical imaging professionals and trainees so they develop highly-effective physics knowledge structures that can contribute to improved diagnostic image quality on a global basis. Methods: The different types of mental knowledge structures were analyzed and modeled with respect to both the learning and teaching process for their development and the functions or tasks that can be performed with the knowledge. While symbolic verbal and mathematical knowledge structures are very important in medical physics for many purposes, the tasks of applying physics in clinical imaging--especially to optimize image quality and diagnostic accuracy--requires a sensory conceptual knowledge structure, specifically, an interconnected network of visually based concepts. This type of knowledge supports tasks such as analysis, evaluation, problem solving, interacting, and creating solutions. Traditional educational methods including lectures, online modules, and many texts are serial procedures and limited with respect to developing interconnected conceptual networks. A method consisting of the synergistic combination of on-site medical physics teachers and the online resource, CONET (Concept network developer), has been developed and made available for the topic Radiographic Image Quality. This was selected as the inaugural topic, others to follow, because it can be used by medical physicists teaching the large population of medical imaging professionals, such as radiology residents, who can apply the knowledge. Results: Tutorials for medical physics educators on developing effective knowledge structures are being presented and published and CONET is available with open access for all to use. Conclusion: An adjunct to traditional medical physics educational methods with the added focus on sensory concept development provides opportunities for medical physics teachers to share their knowledge and experience at a higher cognitive level and produce medical professionals with the enhanced ability to apply physics to clinical procedures.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-04: Preparing for Parts 2 & 3 of the ABR Nuclear Medicine Physics Exam

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-00: Preparing for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medicine Physics Exams

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-01: Preparing for Part 1 of the ABR Diagnostic Physics Exam

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-02: Preparing for Part 2 of the ABR Diagnostic Physics Exam

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-213-03: Preparing for Part 3 of the ABR Diagnostic Physics Exam

Adequate, efficient preparation for the ABR Diagnostic and Nuclear Medical Physics exams is key to successfully obtain ABR professional certification. Each part of the ABR exam presents its own challenges: Part I: Determine the scope of basic medical physics study material, efficiently review this material, and solve related written questions/problems. Part II: Understand imaging principles, modalities, and systems, including image acquisition, processing, and display. Understand the relationship between imaging techniques, image quality, patient dose and safety, and solve related written questions/problems. Part III: Gain crucial, practical, clinical medical physics experience. Effectively communicate and explain the practice, performance, and significance of all aspects of clinical medical physics. All three parts of the ABR exam require specific skill sets and preparation: mastery of basic physics and imaging principles; written problem solving often involving rapid calculation; responding clearly and succinctly to oral questions about the practice, methods, and significance of clinical medical physics. This symposium focuses on the preparation and skill sets necessary for each part of the ABR exam. Although there is some overlap, the nuclear exam covers a different body of knowledge than the diagnostic exam. A separate speaker will address those aspects that are unique to the nuclear exam. Medical physicists who have recently completed each of part of the ABR exam will share their experiences, insights, and preparation methods to help attendees best prepare for the challenges of each part of the ABR exam. In accordance with ABR exam security policy, no recalls or exam questions will be discussed. Learning Objectives: How to prepare for Part 1 of the ABR exam by determining the scope of basic medical physics study material and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 2 of the ABR exam by understanding diagnostic and/or nuclear imaging physics, systems, dosimetry, safety and related problem solving/calculations How to Prepare for Part 3 of the ABR exam by effectively communicating the practice, methods, and significance of clinical diagnostic and/or nuclear medical physics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗