Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Decision making”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Role of PHM in Autonomous Decision-Making: Aerospace applications

There is an increased need for onboard decision-making capabilities in cyber-physical systems be it in energy, automotive, aviation, space, or other industries as they aim for increased efficiency, resiliency, and mission assurance capabilities. Emerging next-gen technologies such as multi-rover planetary missions, distributed satellites, unmanned ground and aerial vehicle operations and smart grid systems rely on in-time risk assessment and autonomous decision-making. One critical piece of the autonomy puzzle is reliable prediction of system behavior under time-varying and potentially uncertain environmental conditions. Further, if agent states change during operation such as initiation of faults or degradation, reliable diagnostic tools need to be investigated. In this tutorial, we will revise approaches that integrates existing physics-based and data-driven models of agents interacting with probability models of the environment and component operation state. Role of existing PHM methodologies as they feed into decision-making under uncertainty will be studied. Balancing critical trade-offs between high-fidelity prognostic models, prediction time-horizons and the computational requirements for in-time cost-effective decision-making will be discussed through the implementation of surrogate models. Finally, the audience will be introduced to a real-time application of in-time trajectory planning of an unmanned aerial system (UAS) based on its PHM assessments under uncertain and varying wind conditions.

decision-making↗
DOE OSTI2021

System risk quantification and decision making support using functional modeling and dynamic Bayesian network

Risk-informed decision-making requires a probabilistic assessment of the likelihood of success of control action, given the system status. This paper presents a systematic state transition modeling approach integrating dynamic probabilistic risk assessment with a decision-making process using a dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) coupled with functional modeling. A functional model designed with multilevel flow modeling (MFM) technique was used to build a system state structure inferred by energy, mass, and information flow so that one can verify the developed model with respect to system functionality. The MFM model represents the causal relationship among the nodes, which captures the structure of process parameters and control units. Each node may have multiple possible states, and the DBN structured by the MFM model represents the time-domain transitions among the defined states. Furthermore, the MFM-DBN integrated state transition modeling is a white-box approach that allows one to draw the system's risk profile by updating the system states and supports the decisions probabilistically with physical inference. An example of a simple heating system has been used to illustrate this process, including decision-making support based on quantitative risk profile. For demonstrating its applicability to a complex system operational decision making, a case study of station blackout accident scenario leading to the seal loss of coolant accident in a nuclear power plant is presented. The proposed approach effectively provided the risk profile along time for each option so that the operators can make the best decision, which minimizes the plant risk.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS2009

Probabilistic Risk Assessment for Decision Making During Spacecraft Operations

Decisions made during the operational phase of a space mission often have significant and immediate consequences. Without the explicit consideration of the risks involved and their representation in a solid model, it is very likely that these risks are not considered systematically in trade studies. Wrong decisions during the operational phase of a space mission can lead to immediate system failure whereas correct decisions can help recover the system even from faulty conditions. A problem of special interest is the determination of the system fault protection strategies upon the occurrence of faults within the system. Decisions regarding the fault protection strategy also heavily rely on a correct understanding of the state of the system and an integrated risk model that represents the various possible scenarios and their respective likelihoods. Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) modeling is applicable to the full lifecycle of a space mission project, from concept development to preliminary design, detailed design, development and operations. The benefits and utilities of the model, however, depend on the phase of the mission for which it is used. This is because of the difference in the key strategic decisions that support each mission phase. The focus of this paper is on describing the particular methods used for PRA modeling during the operational phase of a spacecraft by gleaning insight from recently conducted case studies on two operational Mars orbiters. During operations, the key decisions relate to the commands sent to the spacecraft for any kind of diagnostics, anomaly resolution, trajectory changes, or planning. Often, faults and failures occur in the parts of the spacecraft but are contained or mitigated before they can cause serious damage. The failure behavior of the system during operations provides valuable data for updating and adjusting the related PRA models that are built primarily based on historical failure data. The PRA models, in turn, provide insight into the effect of various faults or failures on the risk and failure drivers of the system and the likelihood of possible end case scenarios, thereby facilitating the decision making process during operations. This paper describes the process of adjusting PRA models based on observed spacecraft data, on one hand, and utilizing the models for insight into the future system behavior on the other hand. While PRA models are typically used as a decision aid during the design phase of a space mission, we advocate adjusting them based on the observed behavior of the spacecraft and utilizing them for decision support during the operations phase.

dynamic fault trees↗
NASA NTRS1990

Acquisition and production of skilled behavior in dynamic decision-making tasks

Ongoing research investigating perceptual and contextual influences on skilled human performance in dynamic decision making environments is discussed. The research is motivated by two general classes of findings in recent decision making research. First, many studies suggest that the concrete context in which a task is presented has strong influences on the psychological processes used to perform the task and on subsequent performance. Second, studies of skilled behavior in a wide variety of task environments typically implicate the perceptual system as an important contributor to decision-making performance, either in its role as a mediator between the current decision context and stored knowledge, or as a mechanism capable of directly initiating activity through the development of a 'trained eye.' Both contextual and perceptual influences place limits on the ability of traditional utility-theoretic accounts of decision-making to guide display design, as variance in behavior due to contextual factors or the development of a perceptual skill is left unexplained. The author outlines a framework in which to view questions of perceptual and contextual influences on behavior and describe an experimental task and analysis technique which will be used to diagnose the possible role of perception in skilled decision making performance.

Kirlik, Alex↗
DOE OSTI2023

Method and apparatus for constructing informative outcomes to guide multi-policy decision making

In Multi-Policy Decision-Making (MPDM), many computationally-expensive forward simulations are performed in order to predict the performance of a set of candidate policies. In risk-aware formulations of MPDM, only the worst outcomes affect the decision making process, and efficiently finding these influential outcomes becomes the core challenge. Recently, stochastic gradient optimization algorithms, using a heuristic function, were shown to be significantly superior to random sampling. In this disclosure, it was shown that accurate gradients can be computed-even through a complex forward simulation—using approaches similar to those in dep networks. The proposed approach finds influential outcomes more reliably, and is faster than earlier methods, allowing one to evaluate more policies while simultaneously eliminating the need to design an easily-differentiable heuristic function.

Olson, Edwin↗
DOE OSTI2021

Harnessing Condorcet Methods to Improve Decision-making Based on Ranked Data

Decision-makers must often choose between multiple alternatives based on their relative merits across a variety of criteria. These multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems must be approached in an objective, measurable, and transparent fashion to obtain well-supported outcomes. The challenge of using sets of ranked data to identify the optimal choice is not unlike the challenge of using ranked ballots to identify the winner of an election in a preference voting system. As such, the methods of rank aggregation used in elections can be applied to help resolve MCDM problems. Previous research into the design of elections and ballots has yielded many algorithms with well-understood properties. A subset of these, called Condorcet methods, reliably identify the “Condorcet winner,” if it exists, giving the result that would defeat any other in a pairwise comparison. That, in addition to several other desirable qualities, makes Condorcet methods like the Schulze method, Ranked Pairs, and Copeland’s method, effective and scalable means for tackling MCDM problems. These rank aggregation methods have been implemented in JavaScript functions for incorporation into a web-based MCDM decision tool. These algorithms can be applied in a wide variety of contexts (for example, determining the “best” environmental remediation method or selecting a subcontractor) to facilitate effective decision-making. The performance of the JavaScript Condorcet prototype tool was compared across the implemented algorithms and with both a non-Condorcet rank aggregation method as well as an implementation of the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART) algorithm.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Analytical Framework for Homeowner-Focused Computational Cost-Benefit Mitigation Decision Making

As a result of increasing windstorm losses in the United States over the past 50 years, a variety of residential wind hazard mitigation strategies have been recommended. Wind hazard mitigation undoubtedly reduces windstorm losses; however, little customized information is available to support the economic decision-making process for individual stakeholders, especially at the consumer level. Therefore, there is a need for decision support tools to calculate, evaluate, and present the economic benefits of mitigation over variable decision-making time horizons for unique building characteristics in specific geographical locations. This paper presents a cost-benefit computational decision-making recommendation framework that evaluates and presents the cost effectiveness of mitigation, customized based on location, years of interest, and building characteristics. The decision-making framework consists of two cores. The user-independent core and user-dependent core which consists of eight steps, divided into four subprocesses: (1) data acquisition, (2) data evaluation, (3) cost-benefit calculation, and (4) results comparison and decision making. To demonstrate the framework, a wood-framed single-family home in light suburban terrain in Golden Meadow, Louisiana, is used as a case study, considering retrofit mitigation with a $15,000 budget and a decision-making time horizon of 30 years. The case study provides six mitigation options, with cost ranging between approximately $2,000 and $15,000 and net benefit/cost ratios ranging from 2.4 to 13. Once fully implemented in a decision making information tool, the developed mitigation recommendation framework will provide valuable information that can be used by home designers, builders, owners, and other stakeholders to better understand the economic facets of wind hazard mitigation, providing critical information as part of the overall decision-making process.

Orooji, Fatemeh↗
NASA NTRS2017

Prospective Architectures for Onboard vs Cloud-Based Decision Making for Unmanned Aerial Systems

This paper investigates propsective architectures for decision-making in unmanned aerial systems. When these unmanned vehicles operate in urban environments, there are several sources of uncertainty that affect their behavior, and decision-making algorithms need to be robust to account for these different sources of uncertainty. It is important to account for several risk-factors that affect the flight of these unmanned systems, and facilitate decision-making by taking into consideration these various risk-factors. In addition, there are several technical challenges related to autonomous flight of unmanned aerial systems; these challenges include sensing, obstacle detection, path planning and navigation, trajectory generation and selection, etc. Many of these activities require significant computational power and in many situations, all of these activities need to be performed in real-time. In order to efficiently integrate these activities, it is important to develop a systematic architecture that can facilitate real-time decision-making. Four prospective architectures are discussed in this paper; on one end of the spectrum, the first architecture considers all activities/computations being performed onboard the vehicle whereas on the other end of the spectrum, the fourth and final architecture considers all activities/computations being performed in the cloud, using a new service known as Prognostics as a Service that is being developed at NASA Ames Research Center. The four different architectures are compared, their advantages and disadvantages are explained and conclusions are presented.

Software engineering↗
DOE OSTI2026

Multi‐Model Ensembles in Ecosystem Modeling: Challenges and Best Practices for Decision‐Making

Ecosystem models are increasingly central to the decision-making for environmental policy, conservation planning, and climate-related investments. Yet, the growing reliance on Multi-Model Ensembles (MMEs) of ecosystem models by practitioners and policymakers, sometimes under tight timelines and imperfect information, has frequently outpaced the scientific rigor required to ensure ensemble reliability. Here, MMEs refer to approaches that combine targeted predictions from multiple models with the expectation of improving robustness and quantifying predictive uncertainty. Poorly designed MMEs may create a false sense of confidence and lead to suboptimal policy and market decisions. This perspective argues that robust decision-making-relevant MMEs must be grounded on two pillars: (1) rigorous Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs), which identify inter-model agreement and disagreement, characterize model uncertainties, and evaluate robustness with observationally based benchmarks—MIPs' diagnostic evaluation is so critical that it must be needed to drive MME's decision in model selection and weighting, especially when only a limited number of models available; and (2) co-design by both stakeholders and scientists to ensure that scenarios, metrics and uncertainty requirements provide decision-relevant information. Building upon the past success and lessons from the existing MIPs-MMEs efforts (e.g., climate/Earth system/crop), we derived the theoretical basis for MMEs, addressed their specific challenges in ecosystem modeling, and highlighted proper consideration of model numbers and diversity, risk of model inter-dependence, effective calibration of model parameters, possible overdue of some ecosystem model development, critical roles of open benchmark data across a wide range of conditions, and suggested use of Artificial Intelligence to support MIPs-MMEs. We highlighted the under-recognized opportunity for MIPs and MMEs to drive scientific progress and innovation through identifying better performing models, systematic benchmarking, feedback loops, and targeted model improvement. By following actionable best practice guidelines, MMEs can evolve from ad hoc aggregation of models into a trusted backbone of environmental policy and decision-making.

ecosystem modeling↗
NASA NTRS1982

A model of human decision making in multiple process monitoring situations

Human decision making in multiple process monitoring situations is considered. It is proposed that human decision making in many multiple process monitoring situations can be modeled in terms of the human's detection of process related events and his allocation of attention among processes once he feels event have occurred. A mathematical model of human event detection and attention allocation performance in multiple process monitoring situations is developed. An assumption made in developing the model is that, in attempting to detect events, the human generates estimates of the probabilities that events have occurred. An elementary pattern recognition technique, discriminant analysis, is used to model the human's generation of these probability estimates. The performance of the model is compared to that of four subjects in a multiple process monitoring situation requiring allocation of attention among processes.

Greenstein, J. S.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Risk-based analysis and decision making in multi-disciplinary environments

A risk-based decision-making process conceived of and developed at JPL and NASA, has been used to help plan and guide novel technology applications for use on spacecraft. These applications exemplify key challenges inherent in multi-disciplinary design of novel technologies deployed in mission-critical settings. 1) Cross-disciplinary concerns are numerous (e.g., spacecraft involve navigation, propulsion, telecommunications). These concems are cross-coupled and interact in multiple ways (e.g., electromagnetic interference, heat transfer). 2) Time and budget pressures constrain development, operational resources constrain the resulting system (e.g., mass, volume, power). 3) Spacecraft are critical systems that must operate correctly the first time in only partially understood environments, with no chance for repair. 4) Past experience provides only a partial guide: New mission concepts are enhanced and enabled by new technologies, for which past experience is lacking. The decision-making process rests on quantitative assessments of the relationships between three classes of information - objectives (the things the system is to accomplish and constraints on its operation and development), risks (whose occurrence detracts from objectives), and mitigations (options for reducing the likelihood and or severity of risks). The process successfully guides experts to pool their knowledge, using custom-built software to support information gathering and decision-making.

technology↗
NASA NTRS1993

Modelling decision-making by pilots

Our scientific goal is to understand the process of human decision-making. Specifically, a model of human decision-making in piloting modern commercial aircraft which prescribes optimal behavior, and against which we can measure human sub-optimality is sought. This model should help us understand such diverse aspects of piloting as strategic decision-making, and the implicit decisions involved in attention allocation. Our engineering goal is to provide design specifications for (1) better computer-based decision-aids, and (2) better training programs for the human pilot (or human decision-maker, DM).

Patrick, Nicholas J. M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Achieving a Risk-Informed Decision-Making Environment at NASA: The Emphasis of NASA's Risk Management Policy

This slide presentation reviews the evolution of risk management (RM) at NASA. The aim of the RM approach at NASA is to promote an approach that is heuristic, proactive, and coherent across all of NASA. Risk Informed Decision Making (RIDM) is a decision making process that uses a diverse set of performance measures along with other considerations within a deliberative process to inform decision making. RIDM is invoked for key decisions such as architecture and design decisions, make-buy decisions, and budget reallocation. The RIDM process and how it relates to the continuous Risk Management (CRM) process is reviewed.

Dezfuli, Homayoon↗
DOE OSTI2024

Opportunities and Challenges in the Visualization of Energy Scenarios for Decision-Making: Preprint

Scenario studies are a technique for representing a range of possible complex decisions through time, and analyzing the impact of those decisions on future outcomes of interest. It is common to use scenarios as a way to study potential pathways towards future build-out and decarbonization of energy systems. The results of these studies are often used by diverse energy system stakeholders - such as community organizations, power system utilities, and policymakers - for decision-making using data visualization. However, the role of visualization in facilitating decision-making with energy scenario data is not well understood. In this work, we review visualization designs employed in energy scenario studies found in the literature and publicly accessible online sources. We discuss the effectiveness of existing techniques particularly in regards to decision-making, and present opportunities and challenges in the visualization of energy system scenario data.

decision-making↗
NASA NTRS2019

Tactical Scientific Decision-Making during Crewed Astrobiology Mars Missions

The limitations placed upon human explorers on the surface of Mars will necessitate a methodology for scientific exploration that is different from standard approaches to terrestrial fieldwork and prior crewed exploration of the Moon. In particular, the data transmission limitations and communication latency between Earth and Mars create a unique situation for surface crew in contact with a terrestrial science team. The BASALT research program simulated a series of extravehicular activities (EVAs) in Mars analog terrains under various Mars-relevant bandwidth and latency conditions to investigate how best to approach this problem. Here we discuss tactical decision-making under these conditions, that is, how the crew on Mars interacts with a team of scientists and support personnel on Earth to collect samples of maximum scientific interest. We describe the strategies, protocols, and tools tested in BASALT EVAs and give recommendations on how best to conduct human exploration of Mars with support from Earth-based scientists. We find that even with scientists supporting them, the crew performing the exploration must be trained in the appropriate scientific disciplines in order to provide the terrestrial scientists with enough information to make decisions, but that with appropriate planning and structure, and tools such as a ‘‘dynamic leaderboard,’’ terrestrial scientists can add scientific value to an EVA, even under Mars communication latency

Decision-making↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 132: Risk-Informed Approach for Decision Making in WM, D and D and SNF Management: Reasonable Assurance for Safety

Mr. Larry Camper organized a panel of experts to discuss approaches to better make risk-informed decisions in waste management, decommissioning, and the management of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF). The audience heard the perspectives from four panelists that addressed issues ranging from the technical basis used to make risk-informed decisions to for developing cleanup criteria and promulgating regulations and safety standards both domestically and abroad. A summary of each of the presentations given by the panelists is provided herein. This WMS BOD featured panel focused on the Risk-Informed Approach for Decision Making in WM, D and D and SNF Management and the Reasonable Assurance for Safety. The panelists addressed and discussed with the audience different approaches used for decision-making, summarizing ongoing probabilistic vs. deterministic approaches, including IAEA graded approach, and discussed policies/approaches to achieve reasonable assurance for safety rather than using absolute assurance. Panelists with presentations: Risk-Informed Decision Making - More than a Motto? (Paul Black); NRC Staff Perspective on Risk-Informed Approach and Reasonable Safety Assurance in D and D and LLW (Rateb (Boby) Abu Eid); Risk-Informed Decision-Making and Illustrative National Academies Studies (Charles Ferguson); IAEA's Revised Safety Guidance on Remediation (Michelle Roberts); NDA Radioactive Waste Strategy - A Risk Informed Approach (James McKinney)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗