Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Data Collection”

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 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Scope and Goals of the NASA Quesst Community Test Campaign With the X-59 Aircraft

In its mission to expand knowledge and improve aviation, NASA conducts research to address sonic boom noise, the prime barrier to overland supersonic flight. For half a century, civilian aircraft have been required to fly slower than the speed of sound when over land to prevent sonic boom disturbances to communities under the flight path. However, lower noise levels may be achieved via new aircraft shaping techniques that reduce the merging of shockwaves generated during supersonic flight. As part of its Quesst mission, NASA is building a piloted, experimental aircraft called the X-59 to demonstrate low noise supersonic flight. After initial flight testing to ensure the aircraft performs as designed, NASA will begin a national campaign of supersonic flights over communities to collect data on how people perceive the sounds from this new design. The data collected will support the efforts of national and international noise regulators to develop new standards that would allow supersonic flight over land at low noise levels. This paper provides an update on the planned experimental scope and key goals of the community test campaign.

sonic boom↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Quesst Community Survey Campaign with the X-59 Aircraft

In its mission to expand knowledge and improve aviation, NASA conducts research to address sonic boom noise, the prime barrier to overland supersonic flight. For half a century, civilian aircraft have been required to fly slower than the speed of sound when over land to prevent sonic boom disturbances to communities under the flight path. However, lower noise levels may be achieved via new aircraft shaping techniques that reduce the merging of shockwaves generated during supersonic flight. As part of its Quesst mission, NASA is building a piloted, research aircraft called the X-59 to demonstrate low noise supersonic flight. After initial flight testing to ensure the aircraft performs as designed, NASA will begin a national campaign of supersonic flights over communities to collect data on how people perceive the sounds from this new design. The data collected will support the efforts of national and international noise regulators to develop new standards that would allow supersonic flight over land at low noise levels. This presentation summarizes the NASA Quesst community survey campaign and motivates key topics for focused technical discussions.

sonic boom↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Space Launch System: Comprehensive Test Program Leads to Mission Success during Artemis I Flight Test

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket had a successful first launch on Nov. 16, 2022, sending an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to the Moon on the agency’s Artemis I mission. Ten 6U CubeSats were also deployed from SLS during the mission. Orbital insertion parameters, including insertion velocity and altitude, were within hundredths and tenths of a percent from predicted values, corroborating data collected from the individual elements that showed similar performance accuracy. While launch remains the main test – and Artemis I was a true test flight – to collect data, confirm and refine computer models, and validate hardware test data, multiple test programs led up to the first flight and enabled the historic launch. Additionally, SLS was designed from the beginning to be a crew-rated launch vehicle, and teams put the astronauts who will fly on it at the forefront of the development process. This paper and presentation will cover the SLS design and development programs that led to the successful Artemis I mission, and which have set the stage to send the first astronauts back to cislunar space since the Apollo 17 crew in 1972.

John Honeycutt↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comprehensive Test Program of NASA's Space Launch System Rocket Leads to Successful Artemis Mission

NASA’s SLS (Space Launch System) rocket had a successful first launch on Nov. 16, 2022, sending an uncrewed Orion spacecraft to the Moon on the agency’s Artemis I mission. Ten 6U CubeSats were also deployed from SLS during the mission. Orbital insertion parameters, including insertion velocity and altitude, were within hundredths and tenths of a percent from predicted values, corroborating data collected from the individual elements that showed similar performance accuracy. While launch remains the main test – and Artemis I was a true test flight – to collect data, confirm and refine computer models, and validate hardware test data, multiple test programs led up to the first flight and enabled the historic launch. Additionally, SLS was designed from the beginning to be a crew-rated launch vehicle, and teams put the astronauts who will fly on it at the forefront of the development process. This paper and presentation will cover the SLS design and development programs that led to the successful Artemis I mission, and which have set the stage to send the first astronauts back to cislunar space since the Apollo 17 crew in 1972.

John Honeycutt↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Quesst Community Survey Campaign with the X-59 Aircraft

In its mission to expand knowledge and improve aviation, NASA conducts research to address sonic boom noise, the prime barrier to overland supersonic flight. For half a century, civilian aircraft have been required to fly slower than the speed of sound when over land to prevent sonic boom disturbances to communities under the flight path. However, lower noise levels may be achieved via new aircraft shaping techniques that reduce the merging of shockwaves generated during supersonic flight. As part of its Quesst mission, NASA is building a piloted, research aircraft called the X-59 to demonstrate low noise supersonic flight. After initial flight testing to ensure the aircraft performs as designed, NASA will begin a national campaign of supersonic flights over communities to collect data on how people perceive the sounds from this new design. The data collected will support the efforts of national and international noise regulators to develop new standards that would allow supersonic flight over land at low noise levels. This presentation summarizes the NASA Quesst community survey campaign.

supersonic flight↗
DOE OSTI2020

DIGITAL APPLICATIONS USING REAL-TIME VEHICLE EXHAUST INFORMATION

Vehicle emission is a major source of air pollution that causes a significant number of deaths globally. It has a profound impact on energy and the environment as well. The existing vehicle emission monitoring system is unable to help mitigating the pollution properly and therefore, requires precise real-time pollution measurement. The purpose of this paper is to discuss novel applications using the real-time measurement of pollutants from a vehicle tailpipe where exhaust gases enter the environment. Today, it is possible to measure such emission due to the emergence of affordable digital technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), wireless connectivity, cloud platform, and artificial intelligence. This paper discusses how digital technologies can be used for real-time monitoring of NOx gas as a measure of vehicle emission and predictive analytics applications. A description of data collection and pre-processing methodologies, actual collected data, and an approach to identify patterns between inputs such as vehicle speed and altitude and output such as NOx emission are included. Applying a simple neural network has produced promising results and is a first step towards developing predictive applications.

Digital, Vehicle Exhaust, IoT, AI, 1.4.2, Predicti↗
DOE OSTI2021

Multi-sensor agent devices

Apparatus, methods, and systems implementing multi-sensor agent devices are described herein. The agent devices can each include a plurality of sensors for measuring parameters of interest to an entity such as an electric power utility. The sensors can be organized in individually-IP-addressable sensor clusters, with each sensor cluster including an associated microcontroller. The agent devices can be controlled by a control center of the entity to operate in a coordinated manner, such as to gather and transmit data regarding parameters of interest. The agent devices can be transported to desired areas for data collection by unmanned aerial systems such as drones, and the collected data can be stored in a distributed blockchain ledger.

Fuhr, Peter L.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Braxton Marlatt Intern Poster

The Internet of Things (IoT) encompasses a vast network of interconnected devices embedded with software, sensors, and network connectivity, enabling data collection and exchange. While IoT technology revolutionizes various industries, it also introduces significant security challenges. This research focuses on enhancing IoT security through the implementation of Zero Trust Architecture concepts, specifically targeting the Network and Device pillars of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency’s Zero Trust Maturity Model. By generating Codified Attack Surfaces (CAS) using custom Structured Threat Information eXpression bundles, this project aims to provide enhanced visibility into network communications, detect vulnerabilities in device firmware, and improve the overall security posture for IoT devices and networks. The methodology involves defining custom STIX schema and objects, collecting data from intra-IoT traffic, external network traffic, and firmware analysis, and automating the conversion and correlation of this data into STIX bundles. The automated generation of attack surfaces offers comprehensive insights into activity, vulnerabilities, and anomalies within an IoT environment, enabling proactive threat identification and mitigation.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRS2019

Citizen Science Data Quality: The GLOBE Program

The Global Learning and Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) Program is an international program that provides a way for students and the public to contribute Earth system observations. Currently 122 countries, more than 40,000 schools, and 200,000 citizen scientists are participating in GLOBE. Since 1995, participants have contributed 195 million observations. Modes of data collection and data entry have evolved with technology over the lifetime of the program, including the launch of the GLOBE Observer mobile app in 2016 to broaden access and public participation in data collection. GLOBE must meet the data needs of a diverse range of stakeholders, from elementary school classrooms to scientists across the globe, including NASA scientists. Operational quality assurance measures include participant training, adherence to standardized data collection protocols, range and logic checks, and an approval process for photos submitted with an observation. In this presentation, we will discuss the current state of operational data QA/QC, as well as additional QA/QC processes recently explored and future directions.

Amos, Helen↗
DOE OSTI2026

Fine-Root Ecology Database (FRED): A Global Collection of Root Trait Data with Coincident Site, Vegetation, Edaphic, and Climatic Data, Version 4.

To address the need for a centralized root trait database, we compiled the Fine-Root Ecology Database (FRED) from published and unpublished data sources. We have continued to add to the FRED database since the release of FRED 1.0 in 2017, followed by 2.0 in 2018, and 3.0 in 2021. This new release of FRED 4.0 now has 213,941 observations of 238 root traits, for a combined total of roughly 3.4 million data fields for root traits and ancillary data together. FRED 4.0 has 39.8% more root trait observations than FRED 3.0 and a 34.4% increase in unique data sources. This release of FRED 4.0 also includes significant increases in geographic regions that have long been underrepresented in global datasets, notably in the tropical low latitudes. Ancillary data on associated site, vegetation, edaphic, and climatic conditions from across the globe have also increased concurrently with root trait observations. FRED is focused on fine roots (traditionally defined as roots less than 2 mm in diameter), as coarse roots are studied using different methodology, often at very different scales, and have different traits and trait interpretations. Despite this fine-root focus, FRED accepts data collected from roots of all sizes and contains observations of many root classes including coarse roots. Data collection will continue for the foreseeable future. The FRED4_Entire_Database_2026.csv file is the flat csv data file for FRED 4.0, and the FRED4_dd.csv file is the data dictionary of all columns available in FRED, including column IDs, column names, definitions, and unit (where applicable).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Comparison Between Continuous and Intermittent Actigraphy Outcomes During Long-Duration Missions

INTRODUCTION Historically, astronauts have worn actigraphy watches continuously throughout their missions. This has enabled reliable sleep estimation and comparisons between sleep and other outcomes and mission activities such as the arrival of a visiting vehicle. However in late 2020, astronauts were scheduled to wear an actiwatch for one 2-week period every two months, substantially decreasing availability of data. Our aim was to compare sleep and mission events between data collected continuously and data collected intermittently to identify any differences. METHODS Crewmembers (n = 19) who volunteered for the NASA Standard Measures protocol between January 2019 and March 2022 were provided with actiwatches (Phillips, Respironics, Bend OR) that they wore either continuously (C; n = 9) or for two weeks every two months while in space (2W; n = 10). We used crew schedules to identify mission events that were asynchronous with actigraphy. We further compared sleep outcomes (sleep duration, wake after sleep onset [WASO], sleep efficiency) between the C and 2W actigraphy collection. RESULTS In the 2W group, sleep data was not available for 52% of EVAs, 67% of visiting vehicle events, and 67% of commander turnovers. Average sleep duration for the 2W group (M = 6.91, ± 1.24 SD) was significantly lower compared to the C group (7.51 ± 1.08, p < .01). Sleep efficiency was better for those in the C group (90.56 ± 5.19) than for those in the 2W group (87.02 ± 6.47 p < .01). There were no significant differences in WASO (C = 26.66 ±12.99; 2W = 32.38 ± 18.83). DISCUSSION Continuous actigraphy data collection yields different sleep outcomes compared to intermittent data collection. In addition, many mission events were not captured with intermittent data collection. Our findings support the use of continuous actigraphy data collection.

fatigue↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Combined Computational, Experimental, and Technology Development Approach to In-Space Laser Manufacturing Maturation at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center

In-space manufacturing (ISM) is emerging as a field vital to continued access and capabilities in the space environment. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) is advancing the frontier of in-space laser manufacturing (ISLM) techniques through work initially focused on maturing laser beam welding (LBW) and laser forming (LF) for use in space. Such techniques proffer the ability to assemble and join structures in space from sheet metal or other stock – extant satellites, in situ resource utilization of Lunar regolith, etc. – by forming to desired shapes and then joining via in-space welding (ISW). ISLM processes are useful for assembly, joining, modification, and repair of structures in free space and on the Lunar surface such as large observatories, antennas, trusses, blast/thermal/radiation shields, pressure vessels, and more. However, these techniques are not yet qualified & certified (Q&C) for regular application in space. It would be prohibitively expensive, laborious, and time-consuming to perform Q&C via traditional experimental approaches as data collection & experimentation in space is resource-intensive. As such, benchmark experiments and focused, properly instrumented technology demonstration efforts in space can collect sufficient data that – when combined with verified computational models in an integrated computational materials engineering (ICME) approach – can validate ICME tools capable of translating more readily obtained ground data to in-space, in situ, computationally informed Q&C of ISLM techniques. Several ISLM projects at MSFC are obtaining the data required to validate ICME tools through both ground and flight experiments. A parabolic flight experiment of LBW under vacuum is manifested for August 2024, including both microgravity and Lunar gravity profiles. This collaboration with the Ohio State University is investigating common aerospace alloys such as 316L stainless steel, 2219 aluminum alloy, and Ti64 titanium alloy. In situ data collection includes videography, thermography, and reference thermocouples to build a thermal model of the welds. This will elucidate the relevant physics when combined with post-flight microstructural examination and mechanical testing. MSFC is also progressing towards a suborbital flight experiment of LBW under vacuum, which could provide reams of data on ISW during sustained, high-quality reduced gravity. The effect of combined thermal (cryogenic and high-temperature) and vacuum exposure on both LBW (NASA-funded) and LF (DARPA-funded) is being investigated through ground experiments. In addition to the copious data collected during these ground experiments, ruggedization of LBW hardware will also be pursued. The datasets from these experiments will be used to validate computational models which will inform future ISLM efforts in an ICME framework. A variety of techniques across lengths scales, from CALPHAD-driven thermodynamics & kinetics to phase field modeling of solidification to kinetic Monte Carlo simulations of grain evolution at the mesoscale, will be employed to accelerate the infusion and eventual Q&C of LBW and LF for use in space. The development of data-driven surrogate models to bridge ground to flight experiments and thereby reduce the need for resource-intensive experiments in space will also be investigated. These ICME techniques, surrogate models, and datasets from ground testing can also be employed to advance manufacturing in terrestrial environments.

in-space welding↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Pace OCI Crosstalk Characterization Based on Pre-Launch Testing

Scheduled to launch in 2024, the Ocean Color Instrument (OCI) onboard the Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) mission will collect hyperspectral data from 315 nm – 895 nm via two grating spectrometers (in both the blue and red spectral regions) and 9 multi-spectral bands in the short-wave infrared (940 nm – 2260 nm). The increased spectral resolution and radiometric accuracy is expected to improve upon data collected by heritage sensors such as SeaWiFs, MODIS, and VIIRS, allowing new applications in ocean color, aerosol, and cloud science. During ground testing, higher than expected spatial-spectral crosstalk was measured for the hyperspectral bands in the blue spectrograph. Using a monochromatic-collimated light source, light from a single science pixel (1km x 1km) was found to produce crosstalk signals over 31 pixels in the cross-track direction. This spatial augmentation is caused by the spectral crosstalk’s asynchronous spatial movement during Time Delay Integration (TDI). To fully characterized the magnitude and spectral dependency from this, a crosstalk model was developed by synthesizing data collected from monochromatic-collimated light and monochromatic light that filled the OCI optical aperture. The model was validated by showing good agreement between predicted values and other relevant test data collected using both monochromatic and white light sources.

PACE↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2021

Patient-Reported Outcomes in Pediatric Cancer Registration Trials: A US Food and Drug Administration Perspective

Pediatric patient-reported outcome (PRO) data can help inform the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) benefit-risk assessment of cancer therapeutics by quantifying symptom and functional outcomes from the patient’s perspective. This study assessed use of PROs in commercial pediatric oncology trials submitted to the FDA for regulatory review. FDA databases were searched to identify pediatric oncology product applications approved between 1997 and 2020. Sponsor-submitted documents were reviewed to determine whether PRO data were collected, which instruments were used, and the quality of collected data (ie, sample size, completion rates, and use of fit-for-purpose instruments). The role of PROs in each trial (endpoint hierarchy) was also recorded in addition to whether any PRO endpoints were included in product labeling. We reviewed 17 pediatric oncology applications, 4 of which included PRO data: denosumab, tisagenlecleucel, larotrectinib, and selumetinib. In these 4 instances, PROs served as exploratory endpoints and were not incorporated in product labeling. Trials that collected PRO data were phase II or phase I/II single-arm studies with sample sizes of 28 to 88 patients. Symptomatic adverse events (AEs) were characterized using clinician-reported Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) without additional patient self-report. PROs were infrequently used in pediatric cancer registration trials. When PROs were used, PRO data were limited by lack of a clear research objective and corresponding prospective statistical analysis plan. Contemporary PRO symptom libraries, such as the National Cancer Institute’s Pediatric PRO-CTCAE, may provide an opportunity to better evaluate the occurrence and impact of symptomatic AEs, from the patient’s perspective, in pediatric oncology trials.

Oncology↗
DOE OSTI2022

Human Performance Analysis Depending on Operator Expertise (Student vs. Operator) and Simulator Complexity (Rancor Microworld vs. Compact Nuclear Simulator)

Human reliability analysis (HRA) evaluates human errors and provides human error probabilities (HEPs) for application in probabilistic safety assessment (PSA), which is a comprehensive safety assessment method for nuclear power plants (NPPs). Generally, HRA methods estimate HEPs based on human reliability data collected from actual historical measurement, simulator experiments, or expert judgement. Most recent HRA data collection studies focus on collecting data via full-scope main control room (MCR) simulators with actual licensed reactor operators. Contrary to this, Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has adopted a different approach, which attempts to collect HRA data based on experiment using simplified simulators and student participants by following the Simplified Human Error Experimental Program (SHEEP). This approach has a couple of advantages compared to full-scope data collection. Representatively, it has relatively low entry point for collecting HRA data, and secures large sample sizes with reasonable cost and labor. In the previous studies, we developed the SHEEP framework, then verified whether the data collected through the framework could support a representative full-scope data collection study, i.e., the Human Reliability Data Extraction (HuREX) study. Also, we analyzed human performance measurements depending on participant type (i.e., student vs. operator). In this paper, we analyze human performance data collected from an experiment comparing operator expertise and simulator complexity when using the more simplified simulator developed by INL, i.e., Rancor Microworld and the less simplified simulator, i.e., Compact Nuclear Simulator (CNS) developed by Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests and correlation analysis are used for analyzing the experimental data.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS1996

SWADE Data Guide

This is a guide to the data that was collected during the Surface Wave Dynamics Experiment (SWADE) carried out from October 1990 through March 1991. The area studied was the Mid-Atlantic bight. Buoys collected data continuously during this time. Included are three 3-meter discus buoys the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) set in the area for this project, they then later added a fourth 3-meter discus and an experimental coastal buoy. Data from all of the NDBC buoys and stations from New England to Florida have been included in the data set; in addition, several other buoys monitored meteorological and ocean conditions for parts of the experiment. Several times during the project, there were intensive data collection periods. During the third of these, there were 7 aircraft and a ship collecting data. Maps of each mission from the platforms that have shared their data are included. The anonymous FTP site that has been established to make this data public is described.

Oberholtzer, David↗