Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “POLO”

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.

82 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Low-temperature dechlorination of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) for production of H 2 and carbon materials using liquid metal catalysts

Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) is ubiquitous in everyday life; however, it is not recycled because it degrades uncontrollably into toxic products above 250°C. Therefore, it is of interest to controllably dechlorinate PVC at mild temperatures to generate narrowly distributed carbon materials. We present a catalytic route to dechlorinate PVC (~90% reduction of Cl content) at mild temperature (200°C) to produce gas H 2 (with negligible coproduction of corrosive gas HCl) and carbon materials using Ga as a liquid metal (LM) catalyst. A LM was used to promote intimate contact between PVC and the catalytic sites. During dechlorination of PVC, Cl is sequestrated in the carbonaceous solid product. Later, chlorine is easily removed with an acetone wash at room temperature. The Ga LM catalyst is reusable, outperforms a traditional supported metal catalyst, and successfully converts (untreated) discarded PVC pipe.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Bridging the Gap: User-Centric Energy Monitoring for Policy-Driven Application Optimization in HPC Data Centers

Application energy optimization in HPC data centers face two critical gaps. Systematic methodologies that connect data center policies to application decisions and accessible monitoring tools that enable data-driven optimization. We address both gaps through two complementary pillars. First, we present a methodology based on extended weighted Energy Delay Product (EDP) to translate data center operational priorities and integrate energy considerations into the energy optimization workflow which starts from continuous monitoring through targeted optimization. Second, we present a user-space monitoring tool, Omnistat, that enables this methodology by providing developers with direct access to actionable energy telemetry. Through deployment on the Frontier supercomputer and case studies exploring performance-energy trade-offs, we show how these pillars help energy as an integral optimization target for developers as active participants in data center efficiency.

Shin, Woong [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000172077814)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Characterizing the Impact of GPU Power Management on an Exascale System

As GPU-accelerated high-performance computing (HPC) systems approach exascale performance, controlling energy consumption without compromising throughput is essential. Architectures such as the AMD MI250X-based Frontier supercomputer provide runtime mechanisms like frequency and power capping, enabling energy tuning without modifying application code. Although both target energy reduction, they operate via distinct hardware control paths and influence workloads differently. We present a comprehensive evaluation of these strategies on a leadership-class system using diverse HPC proxy applications representative of production workloads. Our study analyzes performance–energy trade-offs across multiple capping levels, node counts (1 and 32), and application profiles. Results show that frequency capping generally achieves higher energy efficiency and scalability, with gains of up to 13.2% without performance loss, while power capping is more effective for single-node runs or bursty GPU utilization. We also provide practical guidelines to help system administrators and users balance energy efficiency and performance in large-scale scientific workloads.

Costa, Mariana [Universidade Federal do Rio Grande↗
DOE OSTI2024

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2024 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for ground state atomistic materials modeling

We provide the ensemble of fifteen pre-trained graph foundation models (GFMs) for atomistic materials modeling applications. Each one of the fifteen GFMs has been trained on five open-source datasets that (once aggregated) amount to over 154 million atomistic structures, which cover over two-thirds of the natural elements of the periodic table and that comprises a broad set of organic and inorganic compounds. This vast set of atomistic structures comprises ground state configurations that are dynamically stable (i.e., equilibrated structures with atomic forces approximately close to zero values) as well as dynamically unstable structures (i.e., non-equilibrium structures with non-negligible non-zero values of atomic forces). The ensemble of datasets aggregated does NOT include excited states. The datasets have been curated to remove atomistic structures with spectral norm of the force tensor above 100 eV/angstrom. Moreover, a linear term of the energy was computed for each dataset using a linear regression model that uses the chemical concentration of each natural element as regressor. The linear term predicted by the linear regression model has been subtracted from each original energy value to perform a re-alignment of the energy values across different electronic structures approximation theories performed to generate the diverse multi-source, multi-fidelity datasets. The folder "ADIOS_files" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "ADIOS_files" directory contains 6 sub-directories named as follows: - ANI1x-v3.bp - MPTrj-v3.bp - OC2020-20M-v3.bp - OC2020-v3.bp - OC2022-v3.bp - qm7x-v3.bp Each sub-directory contains the pre-processed datasets converted in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used to the development, training, and performance testing of the ensemble go predictive graph foundation models. Each GFM was developed using HydraGNN (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN) as underlying graph neural network (GNN) architecture. The multi-task learning (MTL) capability of HydraGNN was used to simultaneously train the GFMs on labeled values for direct predictions of energy (a total system property of an atomistic structure that measures the chemical stability) and atomic forces (an atomic level property of an atomistic structure that measures the dynamical stability). The hyper parameters of the GFM have been tuned using scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) algorithms implemented in the software DeepHyper (https://github.com/deephyper/deephyper). The pre-training of each HPO trial was performed using distributed data parallelism (DDP) to scale the training across 128 compute nodes of the exascale OLCF supercomputer Frontier. Each HPO trial was trained only for 10 epochs and an early stopping was performed to avoid wasting significant computational resources on GNN architectures that were clearly underperforming. For each HPO trial, the 'omnistat' tool developed by (AMD Research - Advanced Micro Device) was used to measure the total energy consumption in kWh. The ensemble of GFMs was obtained by selecting the fifteen best performing HPO trials. Four models have been selected for their clear advantage in accuracy, and these are the GFMs with IDs 229, 156, 147, 260. Additional eleven models have been selected based on judicious balance between accuracy and energy consumption needed for training, and these are the GFMs with IDs 165, 78, 137, 1, 175, 171, 181, 67, 179, 167, 351. Each selected GFM of the ensemble was continued to cumulate a total of at most 30 epochs. In some cases, the total number of epochs actually performed was les than 30 due to two combined factors: (1) the size of the GFM (i.e., the number of model parameters to train) and (2) the total wall-clock time for which the computational resources could be allocated on OLCF-Frontier. The "Ensemble_of_models" directory contains 15 sub-directories named as follows: - gfm_0.229 - gfm_0.156 - gfm_0.147 - gfm_0.260 - gfm_0.165 - gfm_0.78 - gfm_0.137 - gfm_0.1 - gfm_0.175 - gfm_0.171 - gfm_0.181 - gfm_0.67 - gfm_0.179 - gfm_0.167 - gfm_0.351 Each one of these sub-directories refers to one of the fifteen HPO trials that have been selected to continue the pre-training with at most 30 epochs. With each sub-directory associated with a specific HPO trial, the following files can be found: - config.json: file for argument parsing to develop and train an HydraGNN architecture - gfm_0.ID_epoch_N.pk: file with model parameters for HPO ID trial after N epochs of training The ensemble of fifteen GFM architectures was used for (1) ensemble averaging to stabilize the predictions of energy and atomic forces after pre-training for post-processing analysis and (2) ensemble uncertainty quantification (UQ). The code used to develop, pre-train, and load the pre-trained models for post-processing analysis is available on the ORNL-GitHub at the following link: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/tree/Predictive_GFM_2024

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2026

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

International Photovoltaic Modeling Intercomparison [Slides]

Irradiance transposition models seem to perform well, except the Isotropic with -11.25 W/m 2 underestimation. Most temperature models could not capture behavior when ΔΤ between module and ambient is negative. Uncertainties due to derate factors: modelers overbudgeted resulting in significant power underestimation; maybe ~10% is appropriate for commercial systems but not lab-scale? Most software and models cluster together showing good reproducibility among participants. Modeler’s skills seem to be more important than the PV model itself (flat efficiency with irradiance, positive power temperature coefficients, etc.). Results and best practices will be communicated in a journal article.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Power System Modeling for the Study of High Penetration of Distributed Photovoltaic Energy

Many conventional power systems are evolving due to the growth of renewable energy and distributed energy resources (DERs). Modeling the interplay of transmission and distribution systems is critical to analyze how DERs impact a system’s conventional operation and which electric infrastructure improvements are needed to achieve a balance between centralized generation and DERs. This article describes the process, tools, and resources used to model electric power systems with a centralized infrastructure in an isolated context and limited access to actual utility data. Photovoltaic systems installed on residential rooftops were the main design option. This work broadened the typical power system modeling to include planning and social considerations. This integrative engineering-social method allows for interdisciplinary teams to work in the development of a model as part of broader design goals for a renewable-dominant energy system. The Puerto Rico electric power system was used as a case study to demonstrate the process. The integrative engineering-social perspective in developing the model and the actions to manage data limitations are aspects that could be followed in other locations with aggressive renewable energy goals and where utility data are not readily available.

Cuello-Polo, Gustavo↗
DOE OSTI2023

Degradation Mechanisms in TOPCon/POLO Solar Cells

This presentation shows how Poly-Si/SiO2 contacts show a post firing degradation/regeneration cycle. The following conclusions were made: 1) cycle changes surface passivation (Jo), but not the bulk lifetime; 2) cycle time depends on anneal temperature in light or dark (higher T, faster cycle); 3) 400 degrees Celsius anneal eliminates the cycle - only generation occurs; 4) cycle time and magnitude is not correlated with Tfire; 5) contact passivation is stable after cycling; 6) fundamental nature of defect(s) responsible is not known; 7) TOPCon cells/modules, if constructed well, seem to show minimal degradation issues (PVEL, Jolywood, Jinko, ET Solar), and 8) NREL/ASU are studying TOPCon cells and UC Davis has a molecular dynamics model for TOPCon.

degradation↗
DOE OSTI2023

Case Study: Calorimetry

This chapter presents the use of adsorption microcalorimetry to study acid-base catalysis over mixed metal oxides. Understanding the acid-base properties of catalysts is of paramount importance for steering product selectivity in a wide variety of catalytic industrial processes. In particular, catalytic conversion of biomass into biofuels and chemicals demands comprehensive understanding of the acid-base properties of the catalyst to selectively convert functional groups. Herein, the use of probe molecules to measure the strength and density of acid and basic sites on mixed metal oxide surfaces is introduced. Further, the challenges when characterizing mixed metal oxides, presenting surface reconstruction, are explained. An example displays how combining adsorption calorimetry with ab initio calculations explains the activation of a reactant on the surface of a mixed metal oxide. Acid-base catalysis over nanoshapes is studied to unveil that different nanoshapes lead to different extents of surface reconstruction, which ultimately affect acid-base catalysis. The use of steady-state isotopic transient kinetic analysis (SSITKA), in combination with adsorption microcalorimetry, unveils that surface reconstruction of a set of perovskites impacts the density of active sites to a greater extent than the intrinsic reactivity of the active site. At the end of this chapter, fundamental insights into catalyst transient behavior during isomerization of n-butane, and the reaction mechanism for conversion of 4-methylpentan-2-ol, are presented.

Polo Garzon, Felipe↗
DOE OSTI2020

Nevada Higher Education Benefits from US Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program's Transfer of Geologic Samples - 20442

The Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), formerly the Nevada Test Site, was the location of 100 historic atmospheric and 828 historic underground nuclear tests from 1951 to 1992. Related to this historic nuclear testing, geologic and hydrologic studies of the site were conducted utilizing the skills and the expertise of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and national laboratories (Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory), who were principal in leading the development of weapons and were responsible for specific underground testing programs. The subsurface samples and technical/scientific data associated with NNSS geologic studies (past and present) are preserved and stored at the USGS Mercury Core Library and Data Center located at the NNSS. Currently, the facility stores over 2,000,000 linear feet of cores and cuttings from more than 2,600 drill holes that can be accessed for study. Most of the samples and historic geologic work was focused directly on subsurface geologic settings that relate directly to historic underground nuclear testing. Since 1992, the United States has observed a unilateral moratorium on full-scale nuclear testing, and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program is now responsible for hydrogeologic characterization of the potential impacts to the natural groundwater systems that may have resulted from historic underground nuclear tests. As part of this effort, the EM Nevada Program Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity has drilled and completed over 58 deep (2,000 - 7,000 ft.) characterization wells, totaling in excess of 170,000 linear feet of cuttings and core samples. Cutting samples were collected as triplicate samples for each respective depth interval, to account for potential later nondestructive/destructive analysis and to preserve samples for regulatory purposes. Recently, it was recognized by the EM Nevada Program that opportunities may exist to reduce the cost and floor space required for the storage of geologic samples at the Mercury Core Library without impacting the integrity and representative nature of the samples necessary for project execution. An initiative was sponsored by EM Nevada Program to evaluate several options: 1) disposal of a portion of cuttings and cores in a land fill setting; 2) reduction in sample volume through skeletonizing core and cuttings from wells to a representative but much smaller number of samples; and 3) solicit potential interest in the academic community where other geoscientists could freely access the samples for studies. The Nevada state university system through the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology responded positively to the opportunity to receive these NNSS samples from the EM Nevada Program. In June 2019, approximately 17,000 geologic samples, representing greater than 170,000 linear feet of drilling and weighing over 20,000 pounds, were shipped from the NNSS to the Great Basin Science Sample and Records Library located in Reno, Nevada. The benefits resulting from this transfer were realized by the EM Nevada Program in terms of cost and space savings for geologic sample storage at the NNSS. The transfer did not impact the EM Nevada Program mission as access to representative geologic samples for regulatory and scientific purposes was preserved. Moreover, the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology acquired a significant resource of subsurface geologic samples and supporting technical data to support academic and scientific studies in a complex volcanic setting in southwest Nevada. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗