Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “DOI”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Integrated Hourly Meteorological Database of 20 Meteorological Stations (1981-2022) for Watershed Function SFA Hydrological Modeling

This dataset contains (a) a script “R_met_integrated_for_modeling.R”, and (b) associated input CSV files: 3 CSV files per location to create a 5-variable integrated meteorological dataset file (air temperature, precipitation, wind speed, relative humidity, and solar radiation) for 19 meteorological stations and 1 location within Trail Creek from the modeling team within the East River Community Observatory as part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (SFA). As meteorological forcings varied across the watershed, a high-frequency database is needed to ensure consistency in the data analysis and modeling. We evaluated several data sources, including gridded meteorological products and field data from meteorological stations. We determined that our modeling efforts required multiple data sources to meet all their needs. As output, this dataset contains (c) a single CSV data file (*_1981-2022.csv) for each location (20 CSV output files total) containing hourly time series data for 1981 to 2022 and (d) five PNG files of time series and density plots for each variable per location (100 PNG files). Detailed location metadata is contained within the Integrated_Met_Database_Locations.csv file for each point location included within this dataset, obtained from Varadharajan et al., 2023 doi:10.15485/1660962. This dataset also includes (e) a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata and (f) a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type. Review the (g) ReadMe_Integrated_Met_Database.pdf file for additional details on the script, methods, and structure of the dataset.The script integrates Northwest Alliance for Computational Science and Engineering’s PRISM gridded data product, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s NCEP-NCAR Reanalysis 1 gridded data product (through the `RCNEP` R package, Kemp et al., doi:10.32614/CRAN.package.RNCEP), and analytical-based calculations. Further, this script downscales the input data into hourly frequency, which is necessary for the modeling efforts.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

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

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

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Disentangling the Impacts of Microtopography and Shrub Distribution on Snow Depth in a Subarctic Watershed: Toward a Predictive Understanding of Snow Spatial Variability: Supporting Data and Code

This repository contains R code and associated datasets for reproducing the analysis described in the manuscript titled “Disentangling the Impacts of Microtopography and Shrub Distribution on Snow Depth in a Subarctic Watershed: Toward a Predictive Understanding of Snow Spatial Variability” (DOI: 10.1029/2024JG008604). The provided scripts facilitate a comprehensive analysis of snow depth variability influenced by microtopography and vegetation distribution in a subarctic watershed. Included datasets are high-resolution spatial maps of snow depth, terrain elevation, vegetation height, and distance from shrubs taller than 1 meter, all formatted as text files (.txt). These data are fully describe in doi:10.15485/2316038. Users can adapt the provided R scripts to accommodate different data formats or larger spatial domains, noting that some output files may require modification due to their size.The code includes implementations for boosted regression tree analysis adapted from methods outlined in Elith et al. (2008). Users interested in understanding or modeling landscape-scale snow distribution patterns, particularly in Arctic or subarctic ecosystems, will find this package useful. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Hot Droughts and Forest Tree Dynamics in the Amazon - Statistical Models, Scripts, Data, and Outputs

This package contains data, outputs, equations, and R scripts for analyses for manuscript entitled "Hot droughts in the Amazon: A window to a future hypertropical climate" by J. Chambers et al., in particular it contains statistical models and analyses for the INPA BIONTE tree mortality study. The Models folder contains details for all statistical models in PDF files. The Scripts folder contains the R scripts for Bayesian Hierarchical Models (two text files) and SEMs (one text file) are separate and reasonably annotated. All data associated with these scripts are in the data folder. The Data folder contains two of the three CSV files used for the analyses and are called by the R scripts. Two of them are part of published datasets (`BIONTE_mortality-rates.csv` from Lima et al. 2024, DOI:10.15486/ngt/1898910 and `SPEI.csv` from Pastorello et al. 2023 DOI:10.15486/ngt/1958257) and also provided in this package for convenience (please see the corresponding datasets for usage and citation terms). The third dataset (`BIONTE_gapfilled_wd.csv`) contains sensitive information and can be obtained by contacting the manuscript lead author. The Outputs folder contains the two output files that provide extra information about the analyses. The file `figuresFeb2025d.pdf` contains all the figures from the manuscript - captions are in the manuscript. The file `ChambersMS.pdf` contains primary results from Bayesian statistical models, regression analyses, and validation steps applied to the tree mortality data from the INPA experiments. The document includes visual summaries, model diagnostics, and leave-one-out (LOO) validation results. A breakdown of file contents can be found in the README file that is part of this package.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Custom surface reflectance, shade mask, and equivalent water thickness maps for the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (2025)

This dataset contains land surface reflectance estimates and additional derived products generated from NEON Imaging Spectrometer (NIS) data collected in the Upper Gunnison river basin during June and July of 2025. Data was collected over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). These products were derived from radiance and LiDAR data collected by the NEON Airborne Observation Platform (AOP) campaign funded by the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) (doi:10.15485/3017965). Products include per-pixel surface reflectance (rfl) and reflectance uncertainty (rfl_unc), observational data (obs), canopy equivalent water thickness (ewt), and shade masks. Atmospheric correction was performed per flightline using the ISOFIT (Imaging Spectrometer Optimal FITting) optimal estimation framework to estimate surface reflectance and the associated per-band reflectance uncertainty. Reflectance retrievals achieved a mean absolute error of 1.5% across diverse validation surfaces (see validation report.pdf). Equivalent water thickness was calculated from surface reflectance using the Beer–Lambert absorption of liquid water. Shade masks were generated based on the geometry between the sun angle, ground surface, and sensor at the time of flight. Data products are provided per-flightline and as mosaics for each domain. Flightline data products are provided as ENVI-formatted binary files (rfl, rfl_unc, ewt) and GeoTIFFs (shade). Reflectance and uncertainty mosaics are provided as tiled NetCDFs, while all other mosaicked products are provided as cloud-optimized GeoTIFFs. These formats are supported by common geospatial software (e.g., QGIS, ArcGIS, ENVI) and programmatic libraries in Python (e.g., rasterio, xarray, spectral, netCDF4) and R (e.g., terra, ncdf4). Processing workflows were designed to be equivalent to those used to generate the 2018 CHESS campaign airborne imaging spectroscopy data products (doi:10.15485/3013527). All outputs were co-registered to a common spatial grid to support time series analyses. CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: Data acquisition was performed under a grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC24K1005). Computational research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004) and was funded by EMIT Extended Mission Phase E Science.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

KBase Credit Metadata Schema

As part of KBase’s commitment to promote open science, we offer users the ability to obtain a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) for their work, which can then be cited in an associated science publication. To further support the community-wide shift towards FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) data, KBase is expanding our data descriptors so that KBase DOIs have comprehensive citations for datasets, in addition to referencing publications or software used in the workflow. This helps encourage a culture of giving attribution for all research inputs and outputs; standard practice for literature, but still relatively new for software products or datasets. It also promotes open science by building trust that contributors get credit for their work, and accelerates knowledge discovery by supporting and incentivizing the release of data.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2020

27 TeV pp collisions, Exotics type, PYTHIA8 generator: tev27pp_pythia8_darkpion_scan

The dark pions (emerging jets) model with the settings as those similar to the CMS paper in JHEP 02 (2019) 179 (https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.10069). The files use the A14 ATLAS tune with NNPDF23_lo_as_0130_qed. The luminosity was estimated from the first file and is not accurate for the entire dataset. All parameter settings and cross sections are included in the logfiles inside separate ProMC files. The files are designed for a detector scans. The emerging jet model is described in: Y. Bai and P. Schwaller, “Scale of dark QCD”,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 063522,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.063522,arXiv:1306.4676; P. Schwaller, D.Stolarski, and A. Weiler, “Emerging jets”,JHEP05(2015) 59,doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2015)059,arXiv:1502.05409. Evens are created using a fixed mediator mass of 10 TeV. The dark pion mass, m(DP), changes in the range 5 GeV - 2500 GeV. Together with the pion mass, Rho mass is m(DP)*4. pTminFSR changes as m(DP)*2+20 GeV. The decay length (ctau) changes in the range 1 -1500 mm. One file per a combination m(DP) - ctau is produced. How to use: Each file has the substring "_mXX_ctYY" where XX and YY indicate the dark pion mass and the decay length (in mm).

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2020

13 TeV pp collisions, Exotics type, PYTHIA8 generator: tev13pp_pythia8_darkqcd

The Dark pions (emerging jets) model with the settings as for the CMS publication JHEP 02 (2019) 179 (https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.10069). The files use the A14 ATLAS tune with NNPDF23_lo_as_0130_qed. The luminosity was estimated from the first file and is not accurate for the entire dataset. All parameter settings and cross sections are included in the logfiles inside separate ProMC files. The emerging jet model is described in: Y. Bai and P. Schwaller, “Scale of dark QCD”,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 063522,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.063522,arXiv:1306.4676; P. Schwaller, D.Stolarski, and A. Weiler, “Emerging jets”,JHEP05(2015) 59,doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2015)059,arXiv:1502.05409. Evens are created using a fixed dark pion mass of 5 GeV and different decay length (ctau). Each file has the substring "_mXX_ctYY" where XX and YY indicate the mediator mass and the decay length (in mm) of dark pion with the mass 5 GeV (fixed).

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2023

surfspecalb1mlawer

!!!This is an intermediate datastream and as such will not be shipped to archive. PCM DOD reviewers requested it have a DOI despite this. Please contact Ken Kehoe if you have questions about it needing a DOI.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Parallax-corrected VISST-derived pixel-level products from satellite GOES-16

The NASA Langley group led by William Smith produced GOES-16 satellite cloud retrievals over an approximate 10 by 10 degree region over the CACTI field campaign location. These retrievals are described here: https://www.arm.gov/capabilities/vaps/visst and are available for download here . They use algorithms historically called VISST that are now referred to as SatCORPS. More information can be found in Trepte et al. (2019), Minnis et al. (2021), and Yost et al. (2021). If using this dataset, please cite these references, the CACTI VISST dataset DOI found at the download link above, and this dataset’s DOI. The CACTI VISST pixel-level retrievals are on a 2 km spatial grid and available every 15 minutes (every 10 minutes late in the campaign), producing 21,765 files for the entire field campaign between October 2018 and April 2019. They are not corrected for parallax error, which is an offset in the actual geographical location of a cloud above the surface due to the satellite viewing the cloud partly from the side off nadir. This dataset applies a correction for parallax using the location relative to the satellite and the retrieved cloud top height above the surface, which allows the dataset to be geo-located with surface-based observations. The parallax correction for each location depends on the longitude, latitude and cloud top height above ground level (AGL) for that longitude and latitude in the original VISST files. The cloud top height AGL requires first computing the surface elevation at each VISST grid point. Data from the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection (ASTER) Global Digital Elevation Map Version 3 at 30-m resolution is projected onto the VISST grid using conservative coarsening (conserving surface elevation) in the xESMF Python package. The surface elevation is then subtracted from the VISST-retrieved cloud top height above mean sea level. These cloud top heights AGL are then combined with longitude and latitude to estimate the latitude and longitude corrections. Due to variability in cloud top height, the parallax shifts produce an irregular grid of values since higher cloud tops are shifted further than lower cloud tops. A ball tree-based neighbor search with Haversine distance is performed using the Python-based scikit-learn library to find the nearest VISST grid point to each parallax correction-shifted point. The data value of the shifted point is then assigned to that VISST grid point. In this manner, the irregular geographical shifts to correct for parallax are projected back to the rectilinear VISST grid. Because relatively higher clouds should obscure lower clouds, the variable values for the highest cloud top are preferentially chosen if two or more values are assigned to a grid point. The parallax correction should be viewed as an improved but still imperfect estimation of the cloud top locations, largely because the cloud top height is an imperfect retrieval. Please see the attached README document for further information. Users are encouraged to contact the authors with any additional questions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Baltimore Ecosystem Study: Soil atmosphere fluxes of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane, 1998 - ongoing

The Baltimore Ecosystem Study (BES) established a network of long-term permanent biogeochemical study plots in 1998. These plots provide long-term data on vegetation, soil and hydrologic processes in the key ecosystem types within the urban ecosystem. The network of study plots includes forest plots (upland and riparian), chosen to represent the range of forest conditions in the area and grass plots (to represent home lawns). Plots are instrumented with lysimeters (drainage and tension) to sample soil solution chemistry, time domain reflectometry probes to measure soil moisture, dataloggers to measure and record soil temperature, and trace gas flux chambers to measure the flux of carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane from soil to the atmosphere. Measurements of in situ nitrogen mineralization, nitrification and denitrification were made at approximately monthly intervals from Fall 1998 - Fall 2000. Detailed vegetation characterization (all layers) was done in summer 1998 and 2015. Data from these plots has been published in Groffman et al. (2006, 2009), Groffman and Pouyat (2009), Savva et al. (2010), Costa and Groffman (2013), Duncan et al. (2013), Waters et al. (2014), Ni and Groffman (2018), Templeton et al. (2019). Literature Cited Costa, K.H. and P.M. Groffman. 2013. Factors regulating net methane flux in urban forests and grasslands. Soil Science Society of America Journal 77:850 - 855. Duncan, J. M., L. E. Band, and P. M. Groffman. 2013. Towards closing the watershed nitrogen budget: Spatial and temporal scaling of denitrification. Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences 118:1-5; DOI: 10.1002/jgrg.20090 Groffman PM, Pouyat RV, Cadenasso ML, Zipperer WC, Szlavecz K, Yesilonis IC,. Band LE and Brush GS. 2006. Land use context and natural soil controls on plant community composition and soil nitrogen and carbon dynamics in urban and rural forests. Forest Ecology and Management 236:177-192. Groffman, P.M., C.O. Williams, R.V. Pouyat, L.E. Band and I.C. Yesilonis. 2009. Nitrate leaching and nitrous oxide flux in urban forests and grasslands. Journal of Environmental Quality 38:1848-1860. Groffman, P.M. and R.V. Pouyat. 2009. Methane uptake in urban forests and lawns. Environmental Science and Technology 43:5229-5235. DOI: 10.1021/es803720h. Ni, X. and P.M. Groffman. 2018. Declines in methane uptake in forest soils. Proceedings of the National Academies of Science of the United States of America 115:8587-8590. Savva, Y., K. Szlavecz, R. V. Pouyat, P. M. Groffman, and G. Heisler. 2010. Effects of land use and vegetation cover on soil temperature in an urban ecosystem. Soil Science Society of America Journal 74:469-480. Templeton, L., M.L. Cadenasso, J. Sullivan, M. Neel and P.M. Groffman. 2019. Changes in vegetation structure and composition of urban and rural forest patches in Baltimore from 1998 to 2015. Forest Ecology and Management. In press. Waters, E.R., J.L. Morse, N.D. Bettez and P.M. Groffman. 2014. Differential carbon and nitrogen controls of denitrification in riparian zones and streams along an urban to exurban gradient. Journal of Environmental Quality 43:955–963.

Groffman, Peter M↗
NASA NTRS1993

Interim report on Landsat national archive activities

The Department of the Interior (DOI) has the responsibility to preserve and to distribute most Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) and Multispectral Scanner (MSS) data that have been acquired by the five Landsat satellites operational since July 1972. Data that are still covered by exclusive marketing rights, which were granted by the U.S. Government to the commercial Landsat operator, cannot be distributed by the DOI. As the designated national archive for Landsat data, the U.S. Geological Survey's EROS Data Center (EDC) has initiated two new programs to protect and make available any of the 625,000 MSS scenes currently archived and the 200,000 TM scenes to be archived at EDC by 1995. A specially configured system has begun converting Landsat MSS data from obsolete high density tapes (HDT's) to more dense digital cassette tapes. After transcription, continuous satellite swaths are (1) divided into standard scenes defined by a world reference system, (2) geographically located by latitude and longitude, and (3) assessed for overall quality. Digital browse images are created by subsampling the full-resolution swaths. Conversion of the TM HDT's will begin in the fourth quarter of 1992 and will be conducted concurrently with MSS conversion. Although the TM archive is three times larger than the entire MSS archive, conversion of data from both sensor systems and consolidation of the entire Landsat archive at EDC will be completed by the end of 1994. Some MSS HDT's have deteriorated, primarily as a result of hydrolysis of the pigment binder. Based on a small sample of the 11 terabytes of post-1978 MSS data and the 41 terabytes of TM data to be converted, it appears that to date, less than 2 percent of the data have been lost. The data loss occurs within small portions of some scenes; few scenes are lost entirely. Approximately 10,000 pre-1979 MSS HDT's have deteriorated to such an extent, as a result of hydrolysis, that the data cannot be recovered without special treatment of the tapes. An independent consulting division of a major tape manufacturer has analyzed affected tapes and is confident that restorative procedures can be applied to the HDT's to permit one pass to reproduce the data on another recording media. A system to distribute minimally processed Landsat data will be procured in 1992 and will be operational by mid-1994. Any TM or MSS data in the national archive that are not restricted by exclusive marketing rights will be reproduced directly from the archive media onto user specified computer-compatible media. TM data will be produced either at a raw level (radiometrically and geometrically uncorrected) or at an intermediate level (radiometrically corrected and geometrically indexed). MSS data will be produced to an intermediate level or to a fully corrected level (radiometrically corrected and geometrically transformed to an Oblique Mercator projection). The system will be capable of providing ordered scenes within 48 hours of receipt of order.

Boyd, John E.↗
NASA NTRS1997

STS-87 Day 04 Highlights

On this fourth day of the STS-87 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Kevin R. Kregel, Pilot Steven W. Lindsey, Mission Specialists Winston E. Scott, Kalpana Chawla, and Takao Doi, and Payload Specialist Leonid K. Kadenyuk check out the spacesuits for the EVA planned for later during the mission. Mission Control developed plans that may allow Scott and Doi to recapture the Spartan satellite by hand during that EVA.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1997

STS-87 Day 14 Highlights

On this fourteenth day of the STS-87 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Kevin R. Kregel, Pilot Steven W. Lindsey, Mission Specialists Winston E. Scott, Kalpana Chawla, and Takao Doi, and Payload Specialist Leonid K. Kadenyuk focus on completion of hands-on sample processing in the microgravity glovebox facility. They also prepare the spacesuits and tools that will be used for the EVA by Scott and Doi. The crew take time out from their schedule to discuss the mission with reporters from the U.S., Japan and the Ukraine during the traditional in-flight news conference.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1997

STS-87 Day 06 Highlights

On this sixth day of the STS-87 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. Kevin R. Kregel, Pilot Steven W. Lindsey, Mission Specialists Winston E. Scott, Kalpana Chawla, and Takao Doi, and Payload Specialist Leonid K. Kadenyuk begin the final preparations for the EVA by Scott and Doi. They are to manually capture the SPARTAN Satellite. After this is accomplished they are to test tools and techniques that will be required for the assembly of the International Space Station.

Source record↗