Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “data needs”

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 793 records · Page 44
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1979

Information adaptive system of NEEDS

The NASA End-to-End Data System (NEEDS) program was initiated by NASA to improve significantly the state of the art in acquisition, processing, and distribution of space-acquired data for the mid-1980s and beyond. The information adaptive system (IAS) is a program element under NEEDS Phase II which addresses sensor specific processing on board the spacecraft. The IAS program is a logical first step toward smart sensors, and IAS developments - particularly the system components and key technology improvements - are applicable to future smart efforts. The paper describes the design goals and functional elements of the IAS. In addition, the schedule for IAS development and demonstration is discussed.

Howle, W. M., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Predicting Strength and Fatigue for Suited and Unsuited Conditions from Empirical Data

The need for longer and more labor-intensive extra-vehicular activities (EVA) is required for construction and maintenance of the International Space Station (ISS). Issues pertaining to human performance while wearing a space suit (EMU) for prolonged periods have become more important. This project was conducted to investigate how a pressurized Extra-vehicular Mobility Unit (EMU) affects human upper body joint strength and fatigue and how to predict it from computer models based on the data collected.

Maida, James C.↗
DOE OSTI2021

State-of-the-art of data collection, analytics, and future needs of transmission utilities worldwide to account for the continuous growth of sensing data

Nowadays, transmission system operators require higher degree of observability in real-time to gain situational awareness and improve the decision-making process to guarantee a safe and reliable operation. Digitalization of energy systems allows utilities to monitor the system dynamic performance in real-time at fast time scales. The use of such technologies has unlocked new opportunities to introduce new data driven algorithms for improving the stability assessment and control of the system. Motivated by these challenges, a group of experts have worked together to highlight and establish a baseline set of these common concerns, which can be used as motivation to propose innovative analytics and data-driven solutions. In this document, the results of a survey on 10 transmission system operators around the world are presented and it aims to understand the current practices of the participating companies, in terms of data acquisition, handling, storage, modelling and analytics. The overall objective of this document is to capture the actual needs from the interviewed utilities, thereby laying the groundwork for setting valid assumptions for the development of advanced algorithms in this field.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Proceedings for the Workshop on Applied Nuclear Data Activities 2024

The Workshop for Applied Nuclear Data Activities (WANDA) is designed to increase communication among nuclear data (ND) users in multidisciplinary federal programs, ND producers, ND funders, and other ND experts. It also presents an opportunity to cross-pollinate ideas as well as introduce ND gaps identified by federal programs to ND experts and ND capabilities to the various federal ND users. WANDA 2024 included five technical sessions, three of which focused on Fusion Energy Sciences (FES)—FES Fusion Neutronics, FES Tritium Production, and FES Material Damage—and two stand-alone sessions—Isotopes and Targetry for Nuclear Data and Uncertainty Quantification. The FES sessions successfully brought new voices to the WANDA discussions, expanding the application space in which nuclear data are critical. FES programs need accurate nuclear data with realistic uncertainty quantification to properly estimate, for example, shielding, activation, tritium production, helium production, structural material integrity, and superconducting magnet operation. This includes a variety of projectile (neutrons, photons, charged particles) and target atoms. One of the action items common to all the FES sessions was a need to perform sensitivity studies to identify the prioritization of nuclear data needs. The Isotopes and Targetry session highlighted the many capabilities available to produce high-quality targets for nuclear data measurements, including 3D printing with spherical powders, combustion synthesis coupled with spin coating & electrospraying, inkjet printing, and isotopic doping. These new methods open doors for more accurate measurement, but it was also stressed that sample characterization following any method of fabrication is of the highest importance to accurately interpret nuclear data measurement results that used that sample. The Uncertainty Quantification (UQ) session was broken into two categories: nuclear data uncertainty quantification and the use of that uncertainty quantification. Thematic to the UQ session was the loss of information when going from nuclear data measurement, to evaluation, to evaluated file, and finally to neutron transport calculations. Current evaluated ND libraries typically only contain covariances, which assume that the probability distributions are Gaussian. Beyond being a simplified assumption for many evaluations, this can lead to negative values on many observables when attempting to sample the covariance. The covariance format, however, is very efficient in that a simple set of linear equations can transform uncertainty from parameters or cross sections to the application of interest. Focused collaboration is needed between nuclear data evaluators and nuclear data users to ensure that needs are being met.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Lessons Learned on the Interface Between Quantum and Conventional Networking

The future Quantum Internet is expected to be based on a hybrid architecture with core quantum transport capabilities complemented by conventional networking. Practical and foundational considerations indicate the need for conventional control and data planes that (i) utilize extensive existing telecommunications fiber infrastructure, and (ii) provide parallel conventional data channels needed for quantum networking protocols. We propose a quantum-conventional network (QCN) harness to implement a new architecture to meet these requirements. The QCN control plane carries the control and management traffic, whereas its data plane handles the conventional and quantum data communications. We established a local area QCN connecting three quantum laboratories over dedicated fiber and conventional network connections. We describe considerations and tradeoffs for layering QCN functionalities, informed by our recent quantum entanglement distribution experiments conducted over this network.

Alshowkan, Muneer↗
NASA NTRS2010

Certification

Objective 1: Provide regulators with a methodology for development of airworthiness requirements for certification of UAS. a) Rationale: a comprehensive methodology does not currently exist to support development of regulation for certification of UAS. Regulation is essential to enable routine access to the NAS. b) Approach: 1) assess existing approaches and classification schemes for deriving acceptable means of compliance to airworthiness requirements. 2) investigate a service-based approach to classification of UAS. 3) conduct comparative analysis of different methodologies. 4) work with FAA to determine best approach and conduct case study. 5) participate in regulatory/standards organizations developing safety and performance requirements for UAS. Objective 2: Provide regulators and industry with hazard and risk-related data to support criteria for UAS type design. a) Rationale: There is presently little UAS specific data (incident, accident, and reliability), especially in a civil context, to support risk assessment and development of standards and regulation. b) Approach: Identify gaps in existing data, provide measured data as needed, and formulate recommendations by: 1) evaluating UAS incident/accident data collection efforts and determining additional support necessary for regulation. 2) assessing UAS-specific hazards and risks. 3) evaluating need for reliability data for UAS-unique systems, components and subsystem, and determining additional measurement requirements. 4) developing guidance and best practices for UAS type design.

Hayhurst, Kelly↗
DOE OSTI2021

Anonymization of Network Traces Data through Condensation-based Differential Privacy

Network traces are considered a primary source of information to researchers, who use them to investigate research problems such as identifying user behavior, analyzing network hierarchy, maintaining network security, classifying packet flows, and much more. However, most organizations are reluctant to share their data with a third party or the public due to privacy concerns. Therefore, data anonymization prior to sharing becomes a convenient solution to both organizations and researchers. Although several anonymization algorithms are available, few of them allow sufficient privacy (organization need), acceptable data utility (researcher need), and efficient data analysis at the same time. This article introduces a condensation-based differential privacy anonymization approach that achieves an improved tradeoff between privacy and utility compared to existing techniques and produces anonymized network trace data that can be shared publicly without lowering its utility value. Our solution also does not incur extra computation overhead for the data analyzer. A prototype system has been implemented, and experiments have shown that the proposed approach preserves privacy and allows data analysis without revealing the original data even when injection attacks are launched against it. When anonymized datasets are given as input to graph-based intrusion detection techniques, they yield almost identical intrusion detection rates as the original datasets with only a negligible impact.

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 OSTI2022

Adaptive Generation of Training Data for ML Reduced Model Creation

Machine learning proxy models are often used to speed up or completely replace complex computational models. The greatly reduced and deterministic computational costs enable new use cases such as digital twin control systems and global optimization. The challenge of building these proxy models is generating the training data. A naive uniform sampling of the input space can result in a non-uniform sampling of the output space of a model. This can cause gaps in the training data coverage that can miss finer scale details resulting in poor accuracy. While larger and larger data sets could eventually fill in these gaps, the computational burden of full-scale simulation codes can make this prohibitive. In this paper, we present an adaptive data generation method that utilizes uncertainty estimation to identify regions where training data should be augmented. By targeting data generation to areas of need, representative data sets can be generated efficiently. The effectiveness of this method will be demonstrated on a simple one-dimensional function and a complex multidimensional physics model.

Cianciosa, Mark↗
DOE OSTI2021

Intelligent Prediction of States in Multi-port Autonomous Reconfigurable Solar power plant (MARS)

In power electronics, prediction of states may be used for identification of faults, determination of aging of components, identification of bad data measurements, among others. Prediction of states in power electronics have broadly been based on: (a) physics-based models, (b) data-driven models, and (c) hybrid models. In this paper, data-driven approaches are presented for intelligent prediction of states in multi-port autonomous reconfigurable solar power plant (MARS) and compared. The data-set needed to train the data-driven models based on artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms has been identified and the trained models are evaluated under different extrapolated normal and abnormal operating conditions. The AI algorithms include nonlinear auto-regressive exogenous model (NARX), spiking neural networks (SNN), and decision tree. The models are compared and contrasted. The best model (NARX) is evaluated under different normal and abnormal operating conditions that have indicated accurate prediction.

Debnath, Suman↗
DOE OSTI2021

Data Movement Categories

We have endeavored to classify the commonly seen data movement needs, as observed in data-intensive institutions (both commercial and non-profit), into four categories. Knowing how to map a data movement task into one of the four categories helps select proper data mover tools. For each category, how the data storage is involved, high-level examples and the nature of typical solutions are described. Finally, some general remarks are provided to help further orient readers new to this field - the 4th IT pillar.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS1993

Telemetry ground system development via the component approach

NASA's deployment of major space projects such as the Earth Observing System (EOS) will demand increased functionality and ground-based telemetry processing performance well above current capabilities. At the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, custom hardware and software components have been developed and combined into a unique architecture to address this problem. The hardware components utilize Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASIC's) developed specifically to support NASA's telemetry data systems needs and designed to handle data rates up to 300 Mbps. A generalized set of software components, called the Telemetry Processing Control Environment facilitate the rapid construction of control and monitoring functions for the ground-based telemetry processing systems. This combination of hardware and software elements enables rapid construction of flexible, cost-effective telemetry processing systems capable of meeting the performance requirements facing NASA in the coming decade.

Thorn, Karen E.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Fuzzy Logic Enhanced Digital PIV Processing Software

Digital Particle Image Velocimetry (DPIV) is an instantaneous, planar velocity measurement technique that is ideally suited for studying transient flow phenomena in high speed turbomachinery. DPIV is being actively used at the NASA Glenn Research Center to study both stable and unstable operating conditions in a high speed centrifugal compressor. Commercial PIV systems are readily available which provide near real time feedback of the PIV image data quality. These commercial systems are well designed to facilitate the expedient acquisition of PIV image data. However, as with any general purpose system, these commercial PIV systems do not meet all of the data processing needs required for PIV image data reduction in our compressor research program. An in-house PIV PROCessing (PIVPROC) code has been developed for reducing PIV data. The PIVPROC software incorporates fuzzy logic data validation for maximum information recovery from PIV image data. PIVPROC enables combined cross-correlation/particle tracking wherein the highest possible spatial resolution velocity measurements are obtained.

Wernet, Mark P.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Ocean climate data for user community in West and Central Africa: Needs, opportunities, and challenges

The urgent need to improve data delivery systems needed by scientists studying ocean role in climate and climate characteristics has been manifested in recent years because of the unprecedented climatic events experienced in many parts of the world. Indeed, there has been a striking and growing realization by governments and the general public indicating that national economies and human welfare depend on climate and its variability. In West and Central Africa, for instance climatic events, which have resulted in floods and droughts, have caused a lot of concern to both governments and people of the region. In particular, the droughts have been so widespread that greater awareness and concern have become generated for the need to find solutions to the problems created by the consequences of the climatic events. Particularly in the southern border regions of the Sahara Desert as well as in the Sahel region, the drought episodes considerably reduced food production and led to series of socioeconomic problems, not only in the areas affected by the droughts, but also in the other parts of West Africa. The various climatic variabilities which have caused the climatic events are no doubt related to the ocean-atmosphere interactions. Unfortunately, not much has been done on the understanding of these interactions, particularly as they affect developing countries. Indeed, not much has been done to develop programs which will reflect the general concerns and needs for researching into the ocean-atmosphere systems and their implications on man-environmental systems in many developing countries. This is for example, true of West and Central Africa, where compared with the middle latitude countries, much less is known about the characteristics of the ocean-atmosphere systems and their significance on man-environmental systems of the area.

Ojo, S. O.↗
NASA NTRS1979

Data System Implications Derived from User Application Requirements for Satellite Data

An investigation of the data system needs as driven by users of space acquired Earth observation data is documented. Two major categories of users, operational and research, are identified. Limiting data acquisition alleviates some of the delays in processing thus improving timeliness of the delivered product. Trade offs occur between timeliness and data distribution costs, and between data storage and reprocessing. The complexity of the data system requirements to apply space data to users' needs is such that no single analysis suffices to design and implement the optimum system. A series of iterations is required with analyses of the salient problems in a general way, followed by a limited implementation of benefit to some users with a continual upgrade in system capacity, functions, and applications served. The resulting most important requirement for the data system is flexibility to accommodate changing requirements as the system is implemented.

Neiers, J.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Atomic oxygen effects on spacecraft materials: The state of the art of our knowledge

In the flight materials exposure data base extensive quantitative data is available from limited exposures in a narrow range of orbital environments. More data is needed in a wider range of environments as well as longer exposure times. Synergistic effects with other environmental factors; polar orbit and higher altitude environments; and real time materials degradation data is needed to understand degradation kinetics and mechanism. Almost no laboratory data exists from high fidelity simulations of the LEO environment. Simulation and test system are under development, and the data base is scanty. Theoretical understanding of hyperthermal atom surface reactions in the LEO environment is not good enough to support development of reliable accelerated test methods. The laser sustained discharge, atom beam sources are the most promising high fidelity simulation-test systems at this time.

Koontz, Steven L.↗