Results for “Strings” — Page 45

DOE OSTI2023

Detecting Heavy Neutral SUSY Higgs Bosons Decaying to Sparticles at the High-Luminosity LHC

In supersymmetry (SUSY) models with low electroweak naturalness (natSUSY), which have been suggested to be the most likely version of SUSY to emerge from the string landscape, higgsinos are expected at the few hundred GeV scale, whilst electroweak gauginos inhabit the TeV scale. For TeV-scale heavy neutral SUSY Higgs bosons H and A, as currently required by LHC searches, the dominant decay modes of H,A are gaugino plus higgsino provided these decays are kinematically open. The light higgsinos decay to soft particles, so are largely invisible, whilst the gauginos decay to W, Z or h plus missing transverse energy (ET). Thus, we examine the viability of H,A→W+ET, Z+ET and h+ET signatures at the high luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) in light of large standard model (SM) backgrounds from (mainly) tt¯, VV and Vh production (where V=W,Z). We also examine whether these signal channels can be enhanced over backgrounds by requiring the presence of an additional soft lepton from the decays of the light higgsinos. We find significant regions in the vicinity of mA∼1–2 TeV of the mA vs. tanβ plane, which can be probed at the high luminosity LHC, using these dominant signatures by HL-LHC at 5σ and at the 95% confidence level (CL).

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Hidden Rotation Symmetry of the Jordan–Wigner Transformation and Its Application to Measurement in Quantum Computation

Using a global rotation by 𝜃 about the z-axis in the spin sector of the Jordan–Wigner transformation rotates Pauli matrices 𝑋̂ and 𝑌̂ in the 𝑥−𝑦 -plane, while it adds a global complex phase to fermionic quantum states that have a fixed number of particles. With the right choice of angles, this relates expectation values of Pauli strings containing products of 𝑋̂ and 𝑌̂ to different products, which can be employed to reduce the number of measurements needed when simulating fermionic systems on a quantum computer. Here, we derive this symmetry and show how it can be applied to systems in Physics and Chemistry that involve Hamiltonians with only single-particle (hopping) and two-particle (interaction) terms. We also discuss the consequences of this for finding efficient measurement circuits in variational ground state preparation.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

DOE OSTI2023

Neutrino Flavor Model Building and the Origins of Flavor and CP Violation

The neutrino sector offers one of the most sensitive probes of new physics beyond the Standard Model of Particle Physics (SM). The mechanism of neutrino mass generation is still unknown. The observed suppression of neutrino masses hints at a large scale, conceivably of the order of the scale of a rand unified theory (GUT), which is a unique feature of neutrinos that is not shared by the charged fermions. The origin of neutrino masses and mixing is part of the outstanding puzzle of fermion masses and mixings, which is not explained ab initio in the SM. Flavor model building for both quark and lepton sectors is important in order to gain a better understanding of the origin of the structure of mass hierarchy and flavor mixing, which constitute the dominant fraction of the SM parameters. Recent activities in neutrino flavor model building based on non-Abelian discrete flavor symmetries and modular flavor symmetries have been shown to be a promising direction to explore. The emerging models provide a framework that has a significantly reduced number of undetermined parameters in the flavor sector. In addition, such a framework affords a novel origin of CP violation from group theory due to the intimate connection between physical CP transformation and group theoretical properties of non-Abelian discrete groups. Model building based on non-Abelian discrete flavor symmetries and their modular variants enables the particle physics community to interpret the current and anticipated upcoming data from neutrino experiments. Non-Abelian discrete flavor symmetries and their modular variants can result from compactification of a higher-dimensional theory. Pursuit of flavor model building based on such frameworks thus also provides the connection to possible UV completions: in particular, to string theory. We emphasize the importance of constructing models in which the uncertainties of theoretical predictions are smaller than, or at most compatible with, the error bars of measurements in neutrino experiments. While there exist proof-of-principle versions of bottom-up models in which the theoretical uncertainties are under control, it is remarkable that the key ingredients of such constructions were discovered first in top-down model building. We outline how a successful unification of bottom-up and top-down ideas and techniques may guide us towards a new era of precision flavor model building in which future experimental results can give us crucial insights into the UV completion of the SM.

Almumin, Yahya (ORCID:0000000196396772)↗

DOE OSTI2023

Non-Semisimple TQFT's and BPS q -Series

We propose and in some cases prove a precise relation between 3-manifold invariants associated with quantum groups at roots of unity and at generic q. Both types of invariants are labeled by extra data which plays an important role in the proposed relation. Bridging the two sides - which until recently were developed independently, using very different methods - opens many new avenues. In one direction, it allows to study (and perhaps even to formulate) q-series invariants labeled by spin c structures in terms of non-semisimple invariants. In the opposite direction, it offers new insights and perspectives on various elements of non-semisimple TQFT's, bringing the latter into one unifying framework with other invariants of knots and 3-manifolds that recently found realization in quantum field theory and in string theory.

3-manifold invariants↗

DOE OSTI2024

Global Magni4icence, or: 4G Networks

The global magnificent four theory is the homological version of a maximally supersymmetric $(8+1)$-dimensional gauge theory on a Calabi-Yau fourfold fibered over a circle. In the case of a toric fourfold we conjecture the formula for its twisted Witten index. String-theoretically we count the BPS states of a system of $D0$-$D2$-$D4$-$D6$-$D8$-branes on the Calabi-Yau fourfold in the presence of a large Neveu-Schwarz $B$-field. Mathematically, we develop the equivariant $K$-theoretic DT4 theory, by constructing the four-valent vertex with generic plane partition asymptotics. Physically, the vertex is a supersymmetric localization of a non-commutative gauge theory in $8+1$ dimensions.

Mathematics↗

DOE OSTI2023

Dynamical Scaling Reveals Topological Defects and Anomalous Evolution of a Photoinduced Phase Transition

Nonequilibrium states of quantum materials can exhibit exotic properties and enable unprecedented functionality and applications. These transient states are inherently inhomogeneous, characterized by the formation of topologically protected structures, requiring nanometer spatial resolution on femtosecond timescales to resolve their evolution. Using ultrafast total x-ray scattering at a free electron laser and a sophisticated scaling analysis, we gain unique access to the dynamics on the relevant mesoscopic lengthscales. Our results provide direct evidence that ultrafast excitation of LaTe$_3$ leads to formation of topological vortex strings of the charge density wave. These dislocations of the charge density wave exhibit anomalous, subdiffusive dynamics, slowing the equilibration process, providing rare insight into the nonequilibrium mesoscopic response in a quantum material. Our findings establish a general framework to investigate properties of topological defects, which are expected to be ubiquitous in nonequilibrium phase transitions and may arrest equilibration and enhance competing orders.

FOS: Physical sciences↗

DOE OSTI2023

Pseudorandomness from Subset States

We show it is possible to obtain quantum pseudorandomness and pseudoentanglement from random subset states -- i.e. quantum states which are equal superpositions over (pseudo)random subsets of strings. This answers an open question of Aaronson et al. [arXiv:2211.00747], who devised a similar construction augmented by pseudorandom phases. Our result follows from a direct calculation of the trace distance between t copies of random subset states and the Haar measure, via the representation theory of the symmetric group. We show that the trace distance is negligibly small, as long as the subsets are of an appropriate size which is neither too big nor too small. In particular, we analyze the action of basis permutations on the symmetric subspace, and show that the largest component is described by the Johnson scheme: the double-cosets of the symmetric group S N by the subgroup S t x S N-t . The Gelfand pair property of this setting implies that the matrix eigenbasis coincides with the symmetric group irreducible blocks, with the largest eigenblock asymptotically approaching the Haar average. An immediate corollary of our result is that quantum pseudorandom and pseudoentangled state ensembles do not require relative phases.

Computational Complexity (cs.CC)↗

DOE OSTI2024

The Fuzzball Paradigm

We describe the puzzles that arise in the quantum theory of black holes, and explain how they are resolved in string theory. We review how the Bekenstein entropy is obtained through the count of brane bound states. We describe the fuzzball construction of black hole microstates. These states have no horizon and radiate from their surface like a normal body, so there is no information puzzle. We explain how the semiclassical approximation is violated in gravitational collapse even though curvatures are low at the classical horizon. This violation happens because the collapse leads to a stretching of space that is {\it fast}: light does not have time to travel across the collapsing region to establish the `vecro' correlations needed in the quantum gravitational vacuum. These vecro correlations arise from the existence of virtual fuzzball fluctuations in the gravitational vacuum, and are significant because of the large degeneracy of fuzzball states implied by the Bekenstein entropy. It is plausible that similar effects of fast expansion may be responsible for effects like dark energy and the Early Dark Energy postulated to explain the Hubble tension.

FOS: Physical sciences↗

DOE OSTI2025

Evolving Dark Sector and the Dark Dimension Scenario

String theory naturally leads to the expectation that dark energy is not stable, and may be evolving as captured by the Swampland de Sitter conjectures. Moreover, motivated by the distance conjecture, a unification of dark sector has been proposed, where the smallness of dark energy leads to one extra dimension of micron size with dark matter being the Kaluza--Klein graviton excitations in this extra dimension. We consider the natural possibility that the radius of the dark dimension varies as the dark energy decreases, leading to the variation of the dark matter mass. This correlates the decrease of the dark energy with the variation of the dark matter mass as they depend on the variations of a scalar field $ϕ$ controlling the radius of the extra dimension. A simple realization of this idea for small range of $ϕ$ is adequately captured by choosing a potential which is locally of the form $V=V_0\ {\rm exp}(-cϕ)$ and dark matter mass $m_{\rm DM}=m_0\ {\rm exp}(-c' ϕ)$ where the sign of $ϕ$ is chosen such that $c'\geq 0$ while we have two choices for the sign of $c$ depending on whether the dark dimension expands or shrinks when the dark energy dominates. We find excellent agreement with recent experimental data from DESI DR2 combined with SN measurements (from DES, Union3 or Pantheon+) and reproduces the same significance as CPL parametrization with the added benefit of providing a natural explanation for the apparent phantom behavior ($w<-1$) reported by DESI and DES based on a physical model. DESI and SN datasets independently favor non-zero values of $c'$ and $c$, respectively, both lying within the expected $\mathcal{O}(1)$ range suggested by the Swampland criteria. Moreover, our best fit value $c'\simeq 0.05 \pm 0.01$ is remarkably consistent with the experimental upper bound of $c'\lesssim 0.2$ demanded by the lack of detection of fifth force in the dark sector.

Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.C↗

DOE OSTI2021

Combined Mesonet and Tracker

Title: Combined Mesonet and Trackers (UNL Mobile Mesonets) Authors University of Nebraska PI: Adam Houston, UNL Professor (ahouston2@unl.edu) Mailing Address: 126 Bessey Hall P.O. Box 880340 Lincoln, NE 68588-0340 CoMeT Overview The University of Nebraska-Lincoln operates three Combined Mesonet and Tracker (CoMeTs). CoMeTs are Ford Explorers (model years 2015, 2017, and 2019) with forward-mounted suites of meteorological sensors and dual moonroofs, combining the capability of a mobile mesonet to collect near-surface observations with the capability of an unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) tracker vehicle, which enables an observer in the second row of seats to see the aircraft and maintain compliance with Federal Aviation Administration policies on UAS operation. The CoMeTs collect observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155A, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass (Barbieri et al. 2019). The HMP155A and 109SS-L thermistor are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). This list of sensors is also included in the CoMeT data file metadata. Manufacturer specifications for these instruments are given in Table 1 of Hanft and Houston (2018). The reported measured quantities are summarized below.CoMeT-3 was funded through an equipment allocation included in the NSF TORUS award (AGS-1824649). Instrument Description The specific sensors included on each CoMeT are summarized in the table at the end of this section. In general each CoMeT collects observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210 barometer with a Gill pressure port, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, position using a Garmin 19x HVS receiver, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass. The HMP155 and 109SS are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). Fast temperature and corrected RH measurements (using sensors housed within the U-tube) have a time constant of 10-12 s based on data collected across a temperature and RH shock during the CLOUD-MAP 2017 calibration/validation tests on June 26, 2017. Vehicle speed was < 10 kts for this test. CoMeT-1 CoMeT-2 CoMeT-3 Slow Temperature Slow RH Vaisala HMP155A-L20-PT Part #: 22280-7 Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Fast temperature Campbell Scientific 109SS-L20-PT Part #: 21448-3 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-109 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-150 Pressure Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Wind RM Young 05103-L20-PT Part #: 18435-310 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 GPS Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Compass KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 Logger Campbell Scientific CR6-NA-XT-SW Part #: 28385-9 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Data Collection and Real-Time Processing The reported measured quantities are summarized in the table below. Quantity Units Source Epoch time Seconds GPS Latitude and longitude Degrees GPS Altitude m GPS Pressure hPa PTB210 Temperature (fast) deg C 109SS-L Temperature (slow) deg C HMP155 RH (slow) % HMP155 Vehicle speed m/s GPS Vehicle heading deg C-100 and GPS In addition to the measured variables, several derived variables are calculated. Corrected/fast relative humidity (%) Relative humidity is adjusted to the fast temperature following Richardson et al. (1998) and Houston et al. (2016). Water vapor mixing ratio (g/kg) Dew point temperature (°C) Potential temperature (Kelvin) Virtual potential temperature (Kelvin) Equivalent potential temperature (Kelvin) Regular intercomparisons between all three CoMeTs were performed during TORUS 2019. Comparisons were also conducted between CoMeT-1 and CoMeT-2 during LAPSE-RATE (2018) on 14 July. In these intercomparisons, the vehicles were parked adjacent to each other aligned perpendicular to (and facing into) the wind. To minimize engine heating effects, intercomparisons were only conducted when the wind speed was >10 kts. Data Format Original data files for each deployment are saved as text files and then converted to NetCDF. NetCDF versions have units that are CF compliant and may not match the original units in the txt files. The naming convention for the NetCDF files is as follows: UNL.CoMeT3.{deployment date YYYYMMDD}.{start time of observation collection in UTC HHMM}.L2.{post-processing codes}.cdf example: UNL.CoMeT3.20190627.1931.L2.g1.f1.cdf Post-processing codes are included to track modifications to the raw data. These codes are closely connected to error flags associated with each record. Each letter corresponds to a particular instrument: g: GPS p: Barometer tf: Fast temperature ts: Slow temperature rh: Relative humidity f: Compass w: Wind monitor a: All instruments Each number corresponds to a particular post-processing action described more below. Measured and derived variables are included in the following table. Variable Heading Standard Name Units time Time seconds since 00:00:00, 01-01-1970 Alt Altitude meters lat Latitude degrees north lon Longitude degrees east fast_temp Air Temperature kelvin slow_temp Air Temperature kelvin pressure Air Pressure pascals logger_RH Relative Humidity percent calc_corr_RH Relative Humidity percent wind_speed Wind Speed meters per second wind_dir Wind From Direction degrees vehicle_dir Vehicle Direction degrees dewpoint Dew Point Temperature kelvin mixing_ratio Humidity Mixing Ratio g/g theta Air Potential Temperature kelvin theta_v Virtual Potential Temperature kelvin theta_e Equivalent Potential Temperature Kelvin error_flag The error_flag variable is a string that matches the post-processing codes listed above. All instruments will have an associated code, but will have a “0” if the datum is unchanged from the initial processed value. Error Codes The following table summarizes the error codes for data collected before 2020: Error Code Relevant CoMeT Description g1 1,2,3 Exact correction. GPS position and time reprocessed from raw data g2 1 As far as we can tell this is an exact correction to an error in the GPS time. During the correct time periods the time suddenly went backwards ~250s and stayed at this offset for 750s when it corrected itself. The offset was applied to the “time warp” period. p1 2 Approximate correction. Hole in the pressure tube connecting the pressure port to the barometer. Resulted in erroneously low air pressure measurements when the vehicle was in motion. Derived variables recalculated (dew point temperature [e depends on qv and p], water vapor mixing ratio, potential temperature, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) a1 3 Exact correction. Missing data reprocessed from raw data a2 1 Bug fix to bias correction for ts1, ts2, and rh1: water vapor mixing ratio was off by a factor of 10 and virtual potential temperature was wrong because of this. f1 3 No correction, missing data. Fluxgate compass inoperable. Wind speed and direction calculated using GPS-derived vehicle heading instead. rh1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.7% removed from relative humidity. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +0.6 K removed from slow temperature. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts2 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.0 K removed. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) References Bolton, D., 1980: The Computation of Equivalent Potential Temperature. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1046–1053, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1980)108<1046:TCOEPT>2.0.CO;2. Hanft, W., and A. L. Houston, 2018: An Observational and Modeling Study of Mesoscale Air Masses with High Theta-E. Mon. Wea. Rev., 146, 2503–2524, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0389.1.Wexler Houston, A. L., R. J. Laurence III, T. W. Nichols, S. Waugh, B. Argrow, and C. L. Ziegler, 2016: Intercomparison of unmanned aircraft-borne and mobile mesonet atmospheric sensors. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 33, 1569-1582, doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0178.1. Lowe, P. R., 1977: An Approximating Polynomial for the Computation of Saturation Vapor Pressure. J. Applied Meteorology, 16, 100–103. Richardson, S. J., S. E. Frederickson, F. V. Brock, and J. A. Brotzge, 1998: Combination temperature and relative humidity probes: Avoiding large air temperature errors and associated relative humidity errors. Preprints, 10th Symp. On Meteorological Observations and Instrumentation, Phoenix, AZ, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 278–283. Waugh, S., and S. E. Frederickson, 2010: An improved aspirated temperature system for mobile meteorological observations, especially in severe weather. 25th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Denver, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P5.2. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/25SLS/techprogram/paper_176205.htm.]

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Cleaned 5-Minute Resolution Air Quality and Meteorological Data from Nine TCEQ CAMS Sites in Houston, Texas (Nov 2021 – Oct 2022)

These data encompass 5-minute air monitoring and meteorological observations collected in the greater Houston, Texas metropolitan region, at nine (9) Continuous Ambient Monitoring Stations (CAMS) operated by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) between November 1, 2021 and October 31, 2022. The CAMS sites (CAMS 1, 8, 35, 45, 148, 403, 405, 410, and 1052) were chosen because their instrumentation includes measurements of PM2.5. These sites also provide continuous multi-parameter air-quality and meteorological measurements. Particulate matter (PM2.5, PM10) was sampled along with several trace gases, including ozone (O3), nitrogen oxides (NO, NO2, NOx), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and carbon monoxide (CO). The data set also contains standard surface meteorological parameters (temperature, humidity, pressure, wind speed, and wind direction). Several sites also include AutoGC-based measurements of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Air monitoring instruments deployed at the selected sites comprise the following systems: BAM-1020 or TEOM (PM2.5), Thermo Scientific TEI 49i (O3), TEI 42i (NOx), and AutoGCs (VOCs). This data set is similar to the data included within the houairq5mX1.00 datastream, except for a few additional quality control steps. A systematic data cleaning and verification process was performed on the data set to ensure its quality and preparation for analysis. Removal of non-numeric status flags (e.g., [LIM], [QAS], [SPZ], [CAL], [PMA], [AQI], [SPN], [MAL]) was accomplished by employing rule-based string parsing to extract valid numerical values. Missing entries were set to -9999; however, invalid or anomalous values (e.g., 99999) were retained as originally reported by the TCEQ to preserve data provenance. The time sequence was verified for completeness, removal of duplicates, and uniformity at 5-minute intervals. Column labeling was standardized, and corresponding values were assessed for physical plausibility. All timestamps in the data set were reported in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) as provided by the TCEQ. Further, the latitude and longitude coordinates were added for each CAMS site. A subset of the data (June 1–September 30, 2022) has been used in the following publication: Subba et al. 2025. “Implications of sea breeze circulations on boundary layer aerosols in the southern coastal Texas region.” EGUsphere 2025: 1–49, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-2659.

latitude↗

DOE OSTI2026

The Maximal Entanglement Limit in Statistical and High-energy Physics

These lectures advocate the idea that quantum entanglement provides a unifying foundation for both statistical physics and high-energy interactions. I argue that, at sufficiently long times or high energies, most quantum systems approach a Maximal Entanglement Limit (MEL) in which phases of quantum states become unobservable, reduced density matrices acquire a thermal form, and probabilistic descriptions emerge without invoking ergodicity or classical randomness. Within this framework, the emergence of probabilistic parton model, thermalization in the break-up of confining strings and in high-energy collisions, and the universal small-x behavior of structure functions arise as direct consequences of entanglement and geometry of high-dimensional Hilbert space.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2022

IM3/HyperFACETS Thermodynamic Global Warming (TGW) Simulation Datasets

Publication For a thorough description of the methods, see the peer-reviewed paper: Jones, A.D., Rastogi, D., Vahmani, P. et al. Continental United States climate projections based on thermodynamic modification of historical weather. Sci Data 10, 664 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02485-5 Overview The IM3 / HyperFACETS climate simulations provide 40-year historical (1980-2019) as well as four 80-year future simulations (2020-2099) over the U.S. The future simulations are split into near (2020-2059) and far future (2060-2099) segments. The future scenarios span a range of plausible changes in future climate (both Global Circulation Model (GCM) and Representative Concentration Pathways/Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (RCP/SSP) dimensions). The simulations provide climate variables with high spatiotemporal resolution (25 hourly variables and 207 3-hourly variables at 12 km2). The datasets are generated using dynamical downscaling with the WRF (Weather Research and Forecasting) model (version 4.2.1) and therefore preserve physical consistency across variables. WRF is a state-of-the-art, fully compressible, non-hydrostatic, mesoscale numerical weather prediction model. WRF is coupled with an urban canopy model (UCM), which resolves urban surfaces. The future scenarios were developed using a thermodynamic global warming approach where past events are replayed under a range of future warming conditions. These scenarios therefore provide a perspective on potential increases in extreme event intensity, geographic scope, and duration, with previously non-extreme conditions potentially crossing new thresholds to be considered extreme by today's standards. This approach is not intended to estimate future changes in extreme event frequency that might result from changes in large-scale atmospheric dynamics. This dataset has NOT been bias corrected. A bias corrected version of selected variables is under development and will be released here when available. Scenarios Files Data for each scenario is provided in weekly NetCDF files. 25 variables are available at hourly resolution, and 207 variables are available at three-hourly resolution. Spatial resolution is 12km and spans the conterminous United States (CONUS), including some areas of Canada and Mexico, resulting in a grid of 424 by 299 cells. The spatial projection is a Lambert Conformal Conic with the following proj-string: "+proj=lcc +lat_0=40.0000076293945 +lon_0=-97 +lat_1=30 +lat_2=45 +x_0=0 +y_0=0 +R=6370000 +units=m +no_defs". The available scenarios and simulation periods are listed below: historical | 1980 - 2019 rcp45cooler | 2020 - 2059 rcp45cooler | 2060 - 2099 rcp45hotter | 2020 - 2059 rcp45hotter | 2060 - 2099 rcp85cooler | 2020 - 2059 rcp85cooler | 2060 - 2099 rcp85hotter | 2020 - 2059 rcp85hotter | 2060 - 2099 * The first year (1979, 2019, and 2059) of data within each scenario represents a model warmup period and should not be used. These are located in the `spinup_files` directory. Historical year 2020 is considered an extra year of data beyond the simulation period and can be found in the `additional_files` directory. For information on specific variables and a more in-depth discussion of methodology, please refer to the data landing page at https://tgw-data.msdlive.org. Delta Warming Files The global and CONUS warming deltas for each scenario are provided in degrees Celsius annually and monthly. Restart Files Yearly restart files are provided for each scenario which can be used to restart the WRF model at a particular point in time. Spinup Files The first year of data within each simulation period represents a model warmup period and should not be used. The files are provided here for the sake of reproducibility. Additional Files Additional years of data are provided as an extension of the historic simulation.

Jones, Andrew D.↗

DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a collection of objects stored within an RDate file, stateWaterRightsHarmonized.RData. Each object either describes how one should interact with the other objects, or contains the harmonized water rights data. Here is each object described in detail: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. The column headers for each data frame are: waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. allocatedFlow - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. rightsByState_surface: A list of the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, these lists are the merging of rightsByState_ground and rightsByState_surface by state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page.

Economics↗

DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗

DOE OSTI2026

Dronebase Photovoltaic (PV) Fleet Imagery Quantitative Evaluation (CRADA CRD-22-22941 Final Report)

Combine the Dronebase aerial imagery with corresponding sites in the NLR Photovoltaic (PV) Fleets database. By combining these two data sources in an aggregated, anonymized fashion, we can perform the following analyses: quantifying power loss due to outages caused by stuck trackers, string outages, and shading/snow, validate site metadata, including tilt and azimuth, and correlate.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cosmological Constant in Coherent Quantum Gravity

It is argued that quantum states of geometry, like those of particles, should be coherent on light cones of any size. An exact classical solution, the gravitational shock wave of a relativistic point particle, is used to estimate gravitational drag from coherent energy flows, and the expected gravitational effect of virtual transverse vacuum energy fluctuations on surfaces of causal diamonds. It is proposed that the appropriately spacetime-averaged gravitational effect of the Standard Model vacuum state leads to the observed small nonzero value of the cosmological constant, dominated by gravitational drag of virtual gluonic strings at the strong interaction scale.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Long-haul high rate quantum key distribution

Multiple bit values can be encoded on a single photon in a quantum key distribution (QKD) system using a plurality of sidebands of an optical carrier frequency. Computational and conjugate bases can be defined, and photons decoded based on a selected state from either basis. If n sidebands are available, as many as log2 n bits can be encoded on a single photon. Errors in detected bit values due to selection of an incorrect basis state or other errors can be at least partially corrected by bit distillation to identity bit strings for which a transmitter and a receiver record the same values, without insecure transmission of these values.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗