Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Distribution parameters”

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

Future Intensity‐Duration‐Frequency Curves of Extreme Precipitation in the Midwest United States From Convection‐Permitting Modeling

Abstract During the last four decades, global warming has statistically significant intensified extreme precipitation events in the Midwestern United States (defined here as the region covering Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky), leading to increased risks to human life, property, and infrastructure. To enable climate change adaptation and resilience across various economic and social sectors in this region, updated information about future climate changes, specifically at finer spatial scales, is essential. Leveraging a new 150‐year dynamical downscaling data set at convection‐permitting resolution, this study introduces a framework to construct the projected future intensity‐duration‐frequency (IDF) curves of heavy precipitation, which are prominent tools for infrastructure design and water resources management. This framework generates IDF curves at both sub‐daily and multi‐day duration utilizing hourly in situ observations as well as quantile‐based statistical techniques in bias‐correction and return levels selection. The assumption of non‐stationarity in the distribution parameter fitting process is also implemented in this workflow. Compared to historical IDF curves for 1980–2022, future projected IDF curves for 2058–2100 under Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios indicate an average intensity increase of approximately 15% and 25%, respectively, across 74 stations, considering both annual and seasonal timescales. Future projections suggest that extreme precipitation events may become more severe across six investigated return periods, with longer return periods showing a greater increase. The frequency of future extreme precipitation events in the Midwest region is also projected to double. Furthermore, current results reveal spatial heterogeneity of future trends across stations owing to the high‐resolution input data set. Plain Language Summary This study investigates the evolving nature of extreme precipitation events in the Midwestern United States under a changing climate. By leveraging a high‐resolution dynamical downscaling data set, we construct projected intensity‐duration‐frequency (IDF) curves for future extreme rainfall events. These curves serve as vital tools for infrastructure planning and water resource management. Our analysis reveals a significant increase in both the intensity and frequency of extreme precipitation events in the region. Future projected IDF curves for the late century indicate an average intensity increase of approximately 15%–25% compared to historical values. Moreover, the frequency of such events is expected to double. Spatial heterogeneity in future trends is observed across different stations within the Midwest, highlighting the importance of high‐resolution modeling in capturing localized climate variability. These findings underscore the urgent need for climate adaptation strategies to mitigate the increasing risks associated with extreme precipitation events in the region. Key Points This study introduces a workflow to construct future intensity‐duration‐frequency (IDF) curves over the Midwest United States using a new convection‐permitting modeling data set The current IDF construction workflow reproduces well the historical observed IDF 30 curves in summer months with median relative errors of 2.4% among 74 stations and 6 investigated durations The projected IDF curves show diverse future trends of extreme precipitation across stations, with intensity increases of approximately 15% and 25% under RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 climate scenarios, respectively, and a doubling of frequency on average

Nguyen, Trung↗
DOE OSTI2023

VarIabiLity seLection of AstrophysIcal sources iN PTF (VILLAIN): I. Structure function fits to 71 million objects

Light-curve variability is well-suited to characterizing objects in surveys with high cadence and a long baseline. This is especially relevant in view of the large datasets to be produced by the Vera C. Rubin Observatory Legacy Survey of Space and Time (LSST). We aim to determine variability parameters for objects in the Palomar Transient Factory (PTF) and explore differences between quasars (QSOs), stars, and galaxies. We relate variability and colour information in preparation for future surveys. We fit joint likelihoods to structure functions (SFs) of 71 million PTF light curves with a Markov chain Monte Carlo method. For each object, we assume a power-law SF and extract two parameters: the amplitude on timescales of one year, A, and a power-law index, γ. With these parameters and colours in the optical (Pan-STARRS1) and mid-infrared (WISE), we identify regions of parameter space dominated by different types of spectroscopically confirmed objects from SDSS. Candidate QSOs, stars, and galaxies are selected to show their parameter distributions. QSOs show high-amplitude variations in the R band, and the highest γ values. Galaxies have a broader range of amplitudes and their variability shows relatively little dependency on timescale. With variability and colours, we achieve a photometric selection purity of 99.3% for QSOs. Even though hard cuts in monochromatic variability alone are not as effective as seven-band magnitude cuts, variability is useful in characterizing object subclasses. Through variability, we also find QSOs that were erroneously classified as stars in the SDSS. We discuss perspectives and computational solutions in view of the upcoming LSST.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Use of vision and sound to classify feller-buncher operational state

Productivity measures in logging involve simultaneous recognition and classification of event occurrence and timing, and the volume of stems being handled. In full-tree felling systems these measurements are difficult to implement in an autonomous manner because of the unfavorable working environment and the abundance of confounding extraneous events. This paper proposed a vision method that used a lowcost camera to recognize feller-buncher operational events including tree cutting and piling. It used a fine K-nearest neighbors (fKNN) algorithm as the final classifier based on both audio and video features derived from short video segments as inputs. The classifier’s calibration accuracy exceeds 94%. The trained model was tested on videos recorded under various conditions. The overall accurate rates for short segments were greater than 89%. Comparisons were made between the human- and algorithm derived event detection rates, events’ durations, and inter-event timing using continuously recorded videos taken during feller operation. Video results between the fKNN model and manual observation were similar. Statistical comparison using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test to evaluate measured parameters’ distributions (manual versus automated event duration and inter-event timing) did not show significant differences with the lowest P-value among all Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests equal to 0.12. Here the result indicated the feasibility and potential of using the method for the automatic time study of drive-to-tree feller bunchers.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Modelling the stellar halo with RR-Lyrae stars

ABSTRACT A seven-parameter distribution function (DF) is fitted to $20\, 000$ RR-Lyrae stars for which only astrometric data are available. The observational data are predicted by the DF in conjunction with the gravitational potential of a self-consistent model Galaxy defined by DFs for the dark halo, the bulge, and a four-component disc. Tests of the technique developed to deal with missing line-of-sight velocities show that adding such velocities tightens constraints on the DF only slightly. The recovered model of the RR-Lyrae population confirms that the population is flattened and has a strongly radially biased velocity distribution. At large radii, its density profile tends to ρ ∼ r−4.5 but no power law provides a good fit inside the solar sphere. The model is shown to provide an excellent fit to the data for stars brighter than r = 16.5 but at certain longitudes it predicts too few faint stars at Galactocentric radii $\sim 20\, \mathrm{kpc}$, possibly signalling that the halo is not axisymmetric. The DF is used to predict the velocity distribution of BHB stars for which space velocities are available. The z components are predicted successfully but too much anisotropy in the vRvϕ plane is expected.

Li, Chengdong↗
DOE OSTI2022

Constraining galaxy–halo connection with high-order statistics

ABSTRACT We investigate using three-point statistics in constraining the galaxy–halo connection. We show that for some galaxy samples, the constraints on the halo occupation distribution parameters are dominated by the three-point function signal (over its two-point counterpart). We demonstrate this on mock catalogues corresponding to the Luminous red galaxies (LRGs), Emission-line galaxies (ELGs), and quasars (QSOs) targeted by the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) Survey. The projected three-point function for triangle sides less up to 20 h−1 Mpc measured from a cubic Gpc of data can constrain the characteristic minimum mass of the LRGs with a preci sion of 0.46 per cent. For comparison, similar constraints from the projected two-point function are 1.55 per cent. The improvements for the ELGs and QSOs targets are more modest. In the case of the QSOs, it is caused by the high shot-noise of the sample, and in the case of the ELGs, it is caused by the range of halo masses of the host haloes. The most time-consuming part of our pipeline is the measurement of the three-point functions. We adopt a tabulation method, proposed in earlier works for the two-point function, to significantly reduce the required compute time for the three-point analysis.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Massive red spiral galaxies in SDSS-IV MaNGA survey

ABSTRACT Massive red spiral galaxies (MRSGs) are supposed to be the possible progenitors of lenticular galaxies (S0s). We select a large sample of MRSGs ($M_*\gt 10^{10.5}\rm {\rm M}_{\odot }$) from Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory (MaNGA) DR17 using the g − r colour versus stellar mass diagram, along with control samples of blue spirals and S0s. Our main results are as follows: (1) After comparing the Sérsic index, concentration parameter, asymmetry parameter distribution, size–mass relation, and Σ1 (stellar mass surface density within the central 1 kpc)−mass relation, we find MRSGs are similar to S0s and have more compact and symmetric structures than blue spirals. MRSGs also resemble S0s in Dn4000, metallicity, Mgb/$\rm \left\langle Fe \right\rangle$, and V/σ radial profile. (2) By using MaNGA 2D spectra data, we separate the spatial regions into inner (R < 0.8Re) and outer (0.8 < R < 1.5Re) regions, and detect residual star formation in the outer regions of MRSGs. (3) When we select a sub-sample of MRSGs with NUV − r > 5, we find that they are completely star formation quenched in both inner and outer regions. Compared to optically selected MRSGs, NUV − r selected MRSGs appear to be more concentrated and have more massive dark matter haloes. The similarities between S0s and MRSGs suggest the possible evolutionary trend between MRSGs and S0s.

Astronomy & Astrophysics↗
DOE OSTI2022

Parameter estimation for X-ray scattering analysis with Hamiltonian Markov Chain Monte Carlo

Bayesian-inference-based approaches, in particular the random-walk Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) method, have received much attention recently for X-ray scattering analysis. Hamiltonian MCMC, a state-of-the-art development in the field of MCMC, has become popular in recent years. It utilizes Hamiltonian dynamics for indirect but much more efficient drawings of the model parameters. We described the principle of the Hamiltonian MCMC for inversion problems in X-ray scattering analysis by estimating high-dimensional models for several motivating scenarios in small-angle X-ray scattering, reflectivity, and X-ray fluorescence holography. Hamiltonian MCMC with appropriate preconditioning can deliver superior performance over the random-walk MCMC, and thus can be used as an efficient tool for the statistical analysis of the parameter distributions, as well as model predictions and confidence analysis.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Embedded Error Bayesian Calibration of Thermal Decomposition of Organic Materials

Organic materials are an attractive choice for structural components due to their light weight and versatility. However, because they decompose at low temperatures relative to tradiational materials they pose a safety risk due to fire and loss of structural integrity. To quantify this risk, analysts use chemical kinetics models to describe the material pyrolysis and oxidation using thermogravimetric analysis. This process requires the calibration of many model parameters to closely match experimental data. Previous efforts in this field have largely been limited to finding a single best-fit set of parameters even though the experimental data may be very noisy. Furthermore the chemical kinetics models are often simplified representations of the true de- composition process. The simplification induces model-form errors that the fitting process cannot capture. In this work we propose a methodology for calibrating decomposition models to thermogravimetric analysis data that accounts for uncertainty in the model-form and experimental data simultaneously. The methodology is applied to the decomposition of a carbon fiber epoxy composite with a three-stage reaction network and Arrhenius kinetics. The results show a good overlap between the model predictions and thermogravimetric analysis data. Uncertainty bounds capture devia- tions of the model from the data. The calibrated parameter distributions are also presented. In conclusion, the distributions may be used in forward propagation of uncertainty in models that leverage this material.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Comprehensive compartmental model and calibration algorithm for the study of clinical implications of the population-level spread of COVID-19: a study protocol

The complex dynamics of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has made obtaining reliable long-term forecasts of the disease progression difficult. Simple mechanistic models with deterministic parameters are useful for short-term predictions but have ultimately been unsuccessful in extrapolating the trajectory of the pandemic because of unmodelled dynamics and the unrealistic level of certainty that is assumed in the predictions. We propose a 22-compartment epidemiological model that includes compartments not previously considered concurrently, to account for the effects of vaccination, asymptomatic individuals, inadequate access to hospital care, post-acute COVID-19 and recovery with long-term health complications. Additionally, new connections between compartments introduce new dynamics to the system and provide a framework to study the sensitivity of model outputs to several concurrent effects, including temporary immunity, vaccination rate and vaccine effectiveness. Subject to data availability for a given region, we discuss a means by which population demographics (age, comorbidity, socioeconomic status, sex and geographical location) and clinically relevant information (different variants, different vaccines) can be incorporated within the 22-compartment framework. Considering a probabilistic interpretation of the parameters allows the model's predictions to reflect the current state of uncertainty about the model parameters and model states. We propose the use of a sparse Bayesian learning algorithm for parameter calibration and model selection. This methodology considers a combination of prescribed parameter prior distributions for parameters that are known to be essential to the modelled dynamics and automatic relevance determination priors for parameters whose relevance is questionable. This is useful as it helps prevent overfitting the available epidemiological data when calibrating the parameters of the proposed model. Population-level administrative health data will serve as partial observations of the model states.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Deep Learning without Global Optimization by Random Fourier Neural Networks

Here we introduce a new training algorithm for deep neural networks that utilize random complex exponential activation functions. Our approach employs a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling procedure to iteratively train network layers, avoiding global and gradient-based optimization while maintaining error control. It consistently attains the theoretical approximation rate for residual networks with complex exponential activation functions, determined by network complexity. Additionally, it enables efficient learning of multiscale and high-frequency features, producing interpretable parameter distributions. Despite using sinusoidal basis functions, we do not observe Gibbs phenomena in approximating discontinuous target functions.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data and scripts associated with a manuscript modeling microbial regulation of priming effects

This data package is associated with the publication “Modeling Microbial Regulatory Feedback in Organic Matter Decomposition Identifies Copiotrophic Traits as Key Drivers of Positive Priming” published as a preprint on BioRXiv by Ahamed et al. (2026); https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.11.607483. The package contains MATLAB scripts and saved simulation outputs used to implement a cybernetic model of microbial regulation during complex organic matter (OM) decomposition governing priming effects. It includes models of (i) single microbial functional groups (copiotrophic or oligotrophic degraders) and (ii) binary consortia composed of degraders and non-degraders with contrasting or common growth traits. Simulation results were generated using Monte Carlo analyses, with randomized key model parameters across a range of environmental mixing fractions of complex and labile OM. The dataset was created to provide a transparent and reusable computational framework for systematically exploring how microbial growth traits, metabolic regulation, and community composition influence OM decomposition dynamics and priming effects. For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About. In addition to a readme, this data package also includes a file-level metadata (FLMD) file that describes each file and a data dictionary (DD) that describes the variable definitions. This package includes: (1) annotated MATLAB code implementing the system of ordinary differential equations and cybernetic control laws; (2) saved output files containing data (e.g., biomass, substrates, enzyme levels, priming metrics); and (3) scripts for processing saved outputs and regenerating figures. Specifically, the data package contains three main MATLAB scripts: runPrimingModel.m, runPlotData.m, and runPlotSuppFigS1.m, along with this readme and supporting documentation. Users should begin with runPrimingModel.m, which contains the annotated code implementing the system of ordinary differential equations and cybernetic control laws. This script runs the Monte Carlo simulations of microbial OM decomposition and allows users to modify microbial trait definitions, adjust parameter distributions, or define new community configurations. Simulation outputs are automatically saved as .mat files in the folder named SavedData, which stores all pre-generated results included in this package. The second script, runPlotData.m, reads files from the SavedData folder and processes them to regenerate the figures presented in the manuscript. The third script, runPlotSuppFigS1.m, specifically generates Figure S1 in the Supplementary Material of the manuscript. The package also includes the aforementioned files in non-proprietary .txt format. If users intend to use them, they should first save the files in their respective .m or .mat formats prior to execution in MATLAB.

Biomass concentration↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Impala's horn applied to posterior samples of Ti-6Al-4V strength model parameters

We have generated strength model parameters for the Preston-Tonks-Wallace (PTW) model of plastic deformation based on a collection of Ti-6Al-4V alloy data and a Bayesian framework. This data collected from the literature includes different chemistries and processes. The experiments include quasistatic compression, Split Hopkinson Pressure Bar (SHPB) compression, and Taylor cylinders. Here we use posterior parameter distributions applied to a hypothetical impact referred to as the Impala's horn. The Impala's horn is like a Taylor cylinder, but modified to have a conical pro le that is truncated before coming to a point. The smaller diameter at the impact end results in higher calculated strain rates and strains than the same velocity impact with the traditional Taylor profile. The modified geometry exercises the behavior of the strength model outside the range of conditions found in the calibration data. Here we sort posterior strength models based on their flow stress at characteristic values for this hypothetical deformation. Then we compare the performance of these posterior models based on two simple observable final state properties of the Impala's horn.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Performance Comparison of Circular and Spherical Error Probable Estimators

This report compares the performance of three Circular Error Probable (CEP) estimators: the Grubbs-Patnaik estimator, a new, non-iterative, radial-integration estimator, and a median estimator. It also compares the performance of two Spherical Error Probable (SEP) estimators. The performance of each estimator is assessed in terms of bias, uncertainty, robustness, and computational complexity. Robustness is evaluated with respect to outliers, variations in the underlying statistical distribution characterizing munition impact positions, and impact-position measurement errors. The performance assessments indicate the radial-integration and Grubbs-Patnaik estimators perform nearly identically providing the statistical distribution of impact-position coordinates is jointly normal with zero means. In that case, both estimators outperform the median estimator by about 2% relative to the true CEP in terms of estimator uncertainty. The bias performance of the radial-integration and median estimators is close to zero for jointly normal impacts, however, the Grubbs-Patnaik estimator can be significantly biased for jointly normal impacts with non-zero means. When the statistical distribution characterizing impact positions is known, but not jointly normal, the radial-integration estimator is superior. In this case, the median estimator also outperforms the Grubbs-Patnaik estimator but is not quite as good as the radial-integration estimator. If the statistical distribution characterizing impacts is unknown and not jointly normal, or if distribution parameters are difficult or impractical to estimate, or if test data is corrupted with outliers, then the median estimator dramatically outperforms the other estimators, especially in terms of estimation bias. Unexpectedly, measurement noise did not significantly degrade the performance of any of the estimators, except for cases with signal to noise ratios less than five. Although the Grubbs-Patnaik estimator has remained the gold standard for CEP estimation for over half a century, the performance assessments indicate the new, non-iterative, radial-integration estimator and the median estimator offer significant advantages and, in most practical real-world conditions, are superior estimators. These estimators are also useful for SEP estimation whereas the Grubbs-Patnaik estimator does not extend to three dimensions.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Commissioning of SRF Cavity Analyzer System

Research and development in Superconducting Radio Frequency (SRF) cavities manufacturing, surface treatment, preparation, and doping techniques for the improvement of cavities performance necessitate reliable cavities’ intrinsic quality factor measurement with accurate and repeatable results. Fermilab Vertical Test Stand facility (VTS) performs ~270 cavities tests per year, including R&D cavities as well as production cavities at each step of their preparation for the placement in accelerator’s cryomodules. Current Fermilab VTS testing system is based on the scalar approach of power measurement, which neglects potential error factors of the RF networks with distributed parameters, hence the assessed measurement errors of such a system might be slightly underestimated. Alternative approach, utilizing a vector measurement (amplitude and phase) of RF signals in the setup with a cavity as a device under test, promises an enhanced accuracy and results traceability. New cavity an alyser system based on this approach (Vector VTS) was developed by D. Frolov et al. and currently undergoes a commissioning process. Basic underlying principles of the system will be presented with the methods of quality factor extraction from S-parameters measurement of multiport cavities and brief error analysis will be discussed. The system architecture will be shown with main components parameters and ensuing testing capabilities. Multiple tests results will be discussed with a cross-check comparison of the results obtained with a conventional testing method. System advantages such as automated calibration process and additional features as a built- in microphonics measurement capability will be presented.

Netepenko, A.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Simulating target tests at AP0 facility for Mu2e

The predicted production of muons and energy deposition for the production target of the Mu2e experiment are dependent on the documentation of cross-sections values, the properties of the target’s material, etc. Hence, making real tests on similar targets before its use on Mu2e will be a good indicator of the accuracy of the simulations done for the experiment. The main goal of the project is to simulate a target test at the AP0 Target Facility, previously used to create the muon beam for the Muon g-2 experiment. Results from these simulations will be used as input to engineering models of the target to produce predicted stress and surface temperature distributions, parameters that will later be measured in future beam runs to validate underlying cross section models.

Delgado, Amii Matamoros↗