Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “density estimation”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Analyzing LF/VLF Lightning Waveforms to Estimate D-region Electron Density Profiles

Lightning waveforms in the low frequency (LF; 30-300 kHz) and the very low frequency (VLF; 3-30 kHz) bands can be exploited to produce data-driven ionospheric D-region electron density profile (EDP) estimates with significantly higher spatial and temporal coverage than previously available. The lightning waveforms used in this paper are signals detected in the LF/VLF of negative cloud-to-ground lightning by the Earth Networks Total Lightning Detection Network. Each waveform contains a ground wave and a time-delayed ionospheric reflection. The time delay between the ground wave and ionospheric reflection has previously been used to estimate a single specular reflection altitude, where LF/VLF emissions are reflected by the ionosphere. Here, we expand upon previous methods to include filtering and spectral analysis, and account for oblique propagation to produce higher-order estimates for reflection altitudes and corresponding electron densities. Once estimated, reflection altitudes and corresponding electron densities can be used to derive parameters β and h’, which define an EDP for the D-region. In this study, the lightning waveform (LW) analysis is demonstrated using a single representative 24-hour dataset over the Southeast United States, and then extended to a total of 10 separate datasets with varying locations and ionospheric conditions. The LW-derived D-region EDPs are in agreement with predictions made by the Faraday International Reference Ionosphere model, and the LW EDPs β and h’ values are consistent with previous LF/VLF-derived estimates.

D-region ionosphere↗
DOE OSTI2023

Stochastic multiscale modeling for quantifying statistical and model errors with application to composite materials

This paper provides a coherent and efficient computational framework for stochastic multiscale analysis of material systems in the presence of parametric uncertainties and modeling errors. Uncertainty in those model parameters that are not deduced as upscaled quantities is attributed to an uncertainty “germ”. While such parameters can appear at any scale, they are predominant at the finest analysis scale. Additional uncertainties stemming from statistical estimation, attributed to lack of data and model error, are associated with each submodel contributing to the multiscale system. Here, a robust and efficient framework based on a generalized extended polynomial chaos expansion (gEPCE) is proposed to simultaneously propagate all these uncertainties in order to provide a probabilistic representation of specific quantities of interest (QoI). We characterize the full probability distribution of the QoI and the uncertainty in the failure probability pertaining to its tails. By combining gEPCE with kernel density estimation (KDE) and directional derivatives, we construct sensitivity measures that connect these statistical metrics of QoI to the various sources of uncertainty to assess their individual and combined impacts. An illustrative problem featuring three-point bending of a composite beam is investigated to demonstrate the presented approach.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Machine learning materials properties with accurate predictions, uncertainty estimates, domain guidance, and persistent online accessibility

One compelling vision of the future of materials discovery and design involves the use of machine learning (ML) models to predict materials properties and then rapidly find materials tailored for specific applications. However, realizing this vision requires both providing detailed uncertainty quantification (model prediction errors and domain of applicability) and making models readily usable. At present, it is common practice in the community to assess ML model performance only in terms of prediction accuracy (e.g. mean absolute error), while neglecting detailed uncertainty quantification and robust model accessibility and usability. Here, we demonstrate a practical method for realizing both uncertainty and accessibility features with a large set of models. We develop random forest ML models for 33 materials properties spanning an array of data sources (computational and experimental) and property types (electrical, mechanical, thermodynamic, etc). All models have calibrated ensemble error bars to quantify prediction uncertainty and domain of applicability guidance enabled by kernel-density-estimate-based feature distance measures. All data and models are publicly hosted on the Garden-AI infrastructure, which provides an easy-to-use, persistent interface for model dissemination that permits models to be invoked with only a few lines of Python code. We demonstrate the power of this approach by using our models to conduct a fully ML-based materials discovery exercise to search for new stable, highly active perovskite oxide catalyst materials.

domain of applicability↗
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 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 OSTI2024

Non-uniform active learning for Gaussian process models with applications to trajectory informed aerodynamic databases

The ability to non-uniformly weight the input space is desirable for many applications, and has been explored for space-filling approaches. Increased interests in linking models, such as in a digital twinning framework, increases the need for sampling emulators where they are most likely to be evaluated. In particular, here we apply non-uniform sampling methods for the construction of aerodynamic databases. This paper combines non-uniform weighting with active learning for Gaussian Processes (GPs) to develop a closed-form solution to a non-uniform active learning criterion. We accomplish this by utilizing a kernel density estimator as the weight function. We demonstrate the need and efficacy of this approach with an atmospheric entry example that accounts for both model uncertainty as well as the practical state space of the vehicle, as determined by forward modeling within the active learning loop.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Target Detection via Cognitive Radars Using Change-Point Detection, Learning, and Adaptation

Many radar detection algorithms that assume a stationary environment (clutter) have been proposed and analyzed over the years. However, in practice, changes in the nonstationary environment can perturb the parameters of the clutter distribution, or even alter the clutter distribution family, which can greatly deteriorate the target detection capability. To avoid such potential performance degradation, cognitive radar systems are envisioned which are required to rapidly realize the nonstationarity, accurately learn the new characteristics of the environments, and adaptively update the detector. In this paper, aiming to develop a fully cognitive radar for target detection in nonstationary environments, we propose a unifying framework that integrates (i) change-point detection of clutter distributions by using a data-driven cumulative sum (CUSUM) algorithm and its extended version, (ii) learning/identification of clutter distribution by applying sparse theory and kernel density estimation methods, and (iii) adaptive target detection by automatically modifying the likelihood-ratio test and corresponding detection threshold. Further, with extensive numerical examples, we demonstrate the achieved improvements in detection performance due to the proposed framework in comparison to a nonadaptive case, an adaptive matched filter (AMF) method, and the clairvoyant case. Herein, we also use Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to evaluate the statistical significance of the performance improvements

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Effects of wind field characteristics on pitch bearing reliability: a case study of 5 MW reference wind turbine at onshore and offshore sites; Auswirkungen von Windfeldeigenschaften auf die Zuverlässigkeit von Rotorblattlagern: eine Fallstudie über eine 5-MW-Referenz-Windkraftanlage an Onshore- und Offshore-Standorten

This paper presents a study on pitch bearing basic rating life affected by wind field characteristics at both onshore and offshore wind sites. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory 5 MW reference wind turbine is selected for the study. Wind field characteristics including reference hub height mean wind speed, wind speed distribution, wind shear, and vertical inflow are studied. A decoupled approach is employed where global analysis is performed first. Second, the load effects from the global analysis are applied on a reference pitch bearing designed based on best industrial practices. For the case study onshore site, it is found that the Kernel density estimation best fits the wind distribution, while the International Electrotechnical Commission proposed distribution appears to be not suitable. Moreover, it is shown that the seed number has high effect on the bearing life in turbulence wind and the wind speeds around rated have the highest contribution in both bearing fatigue damage and extreme load failure. The results contribute to better understanding of the wind field characteristics on the pitch bearing life.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Benchmarking FFTF LOFWOS Test# 13 using SAM code: Baseline model development and uncertainty quantification

The development and deployment of advanced reactors, such as the sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR), relies on sophisticated modeling tools to ensure the safety of the design under various transients. The predictive capability of these advanced modeling tools requires validation to garner trust in supporting the licensing of the advanced reactors. For this reason, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) initiated a coordinated research project (CRP) in 2018 for the analysis of the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) Loss of Flow Without Scram (LOFWOS) Test #13.In this study, we present and discuss the benchmarking efforts of the modern system code SAM on the FFTF LOFWOS Test #13. Further, the SAM baseline model was developed according to the benchmark specification, which included a detailed core model with reactivity feedback. Generally, good agreement was observed between the baseline results and benchmark measurements; however, discrepancies persisted, particularly in predicted fuel assembly coolant outlet temperatures. Utilizing the baseline model, uncertainty quantification (UQ) and sensitivity analysis (SA) were conducted with the assistance of various statistical learning and machine learning methods, including kernel density estimation, Gaussian processes, and Sobol indices. Following the baseline model prediction and UQ and SA results, we discuss the reasons for the simulation discrepancies and propose further improvements to the model. This benchmarking effort adheres to the best-estimate plus uncertainty approach and can serve as a valuable example for supporting risk-informed licensing of advanced reactors.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Understanding collective human movement dynamics during large-scale events using big geosocial data analytics

Conventional approaches for modeling human mobility pattern often focus on human activity and movement dynamics in their regular daily lives and cannot capture changes in human movement dynamics in response to large-scale events. With the rapid advancement of information and communication technologies, many researchers have adopted alternative data sources (e.g., cell phone records, GPS trajectory data) from private data vendors to study human movement dynamics in response to large-scale natural or societal events. Big geosocial data such as georeferenced tweets are publicly available and dynamically evolving as real-world events are happening, making it more likely to capture the real-time sentiments and responses of populations. However, precisely-geolocated geosocial data is scarce and biased toward urban population centers. In this research, we developed a big geosocial data analytical framework for extracting human movement dynamics in response to large-scale events from publicly available georeferenced tweets. The framework includes a two-stage data collection module that collects data in a more targeted fashion in order to mitigate the data scarcity issue of georeferenced tweets; in addition, a variable bandwidth kernel density estimation(VB-KDE) approach was adopted to fuse georeference information at different spatial scales, further augmenting the signals of human movement dynamics contained in georeferenced tweets. To correct for the sampling bias of georeferenced tweets, we adjusted the number of tweets for different spatial units (e.g., county, state) by population. To demonstrate the performance of the proposed analytic framework, we chose an astronomical event that occurred nationwide across the United States, i.e., the 2017 Great American Eclipse, as an example event and studied the human movement dynamics in response to this event. Finally, this analytic framework can easily be applied to other types of large-scale events such as hurricanes or earthquakes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Generalized fiducial inference on differentiable manifolds

We introduce a novel approach to inference on parameters that take values in a Riemannian manifold embedded in a Euclidean space. Parameter spaces of this form are ubiquitous across many fields, including chemistry, physics, computer graphics, and geology. Here, this new approach uses generalized fiducial inference (GFI) to obtain a posterior-like distribution on the manifold, without needing to know local parameterizations that map to the constrained space from an unconstrained Euclidean space. Using mathematical tools from Riemannian geometry, we construct a constrained generalized fiducial distribution (CGFD). A Bernstein-von Mises-type result for the CGFD, which provides intuition for how the desirable asymptotic qualities of the unconstrained generalized fiducial distribution are inherited by the CGFD, is provided. To illustrate the practical use of the CGFD, we provide a proof-of-concept example in the context of a linear logspline density estimation problem, and demonstrate that CGFD-based confidence sets exhibit desirable coverage properties via simulation. As an application, we fit a CGFD to COVID-19 case count data from North Carolina, USA.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Enabling probabilistic learning on manifolds through double diffusion maps

Here, we present a generative learning framework for probabilistic sampling that extends Probabilistic Learning on Manifolds (PLoM), which is designed to generate statistically consistent realizations of a random vector in a finite-dimensional Euclidean space, informed by a (representative) set of observations. In its original form, PLoM constructs a reduced-order probabilistic model by combining three main components: (a) kernel density estimation to approximate the underlying probability measure, (b) Diffusion Maps to characterize the manifold of the data, and (c) a reduced-order Itô Stochastic Differential Equation (ISDE) to sample from the learned distribution. However, its sampling dynamics are posed in the ambient space and the retained number of reduced coordinates is chosen by projection-reconstruction error. In practice, this often (i) requires more coordinates than the data’s intrinsic dimension to achieve stable sampling and (ii) lacks a smooth, basis-independent lifting back to the data domain; moreover, standard Diffusion Maps emphasize harmonic eigenfunctions and can miss non-harmonic latent structure. We address these limitations by decoupling geometry learning from sampling: a first Diffusion Maps pass identifies non-harmonic coordinates on which we formulate a full-order ISDE directly in the latent space, while Double Diffusion Maps captures multiscale geometric features and Geometric Harmonics (GH) learns a smooth lifting map to the ambient variables that is independent of the particular diffusion basis. This hybrid design preserves the system’s dynamical richness with a compact geometric representation and enables principled out-of-sample inference. The effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method are illustrated through two numerical studies: one based on data generated from two-dimensional Hermite polynomial functions and another based on high-fidelity simulations of a detonation wave in a reactive flow.

Double diffusion maps↗
DOE OSTI2024

Phase Transitions and Thermal Equation of State of Fe‐9wt.%Si Applied to the Moon and Mercury

Abstract Accurate knowledge of the phase transitions and thermoelastic properties of candidate iron alloys, such as Fe‐Si alloys, is essential for understanding the nature and dynamics of planetary cores. The phase diagrams of some Fe‐Si alloys between 1 atm and 16 GPa have been back‐extrapolated from higher pressures, but the resulting phase diagram of Fe 83.6 Si 16.4 (9 wt.% Si) is inconsistent with temperature‐induced changes in its electrical resistivity between 6 and 8 GPa. This study reports in situ synchrotron X‐ray diffraction (XRD) measurements on pre‐melted and powder Fe 83.6 Si 16.4 samples from ambient conditions to 60 GPa and 900 K using an externally heated diamond‐anvil cell. Upon compression at 300 K, the bcc phase persisted up to ∼38 GPa. The hcp phase appeared near 8 GPa in the pre‐melted sample, and near 17 GPa in the powder sample. The appearance of the hcp phase in the pre‐melted sample reconciles the reported changes in electrical resistivity of a similar sample, thus resolving the low‐pressure region of the phase diagram. The resulting high‐temperature Birch‐Murnaghan equation of state (EoS) and thermal EoS based on the Mie‐Gruneisen‐Debye model of the bcc and hcp structures are consistent with, and complement the literature data at higher pressures. The calculated densities based on the thermal EoS of Fe‐9wt.%Si indicate that both bcc and hcp phases agree with the reported core density estimates for the Moon and Mercury.

Berrada, Meryem↗
DOE OSTI2025

Quantifying Groundwater Response and Uncertainty in Beaver‐Influenced Mountainous Floodplains Using Machine Learning‐Based Model Calibration

Abstract Beavers ( Castor canadensis ) alter river corridor hydrology by creating ponds and inundating floodplains, and thereby improving surface water storage. However, the impact of inundation on groundwater, particularly in mountainous alluvial floodplains with permeable gravel/cobble layers overlain by a soil layer, remains uncertain. Numerical modeling across various floodplain structures considers topographic and sediment complexity and multidirectional flow, linking inundation to groundwater response. This study develops a model‐data integration workflow to address uncertainty in groundwater response to beaver‐induced inundations in a mountainous alluvial floodplain in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Uncertain factors include seasonal hydrologic dynamics, hydraulic conductivities, floodplain structures, and meteorological forcings. We employed an ensemble of groundwater models, based on geophysical and hydrologic data, with machine learning‐based calibration using a neural density estimator. This allowed us to quantify the vertical flux from the soil layer to the permeable gravel bed, the down‐valley underflow within the gravel bed, and their ratios. Results show a significant increase in the vertical flux relative to down‐valley underflow, from 2 during dry pond periods to 20 during wet periods, serving as an analogy for conditions without and with beaver ponds. The study highlights the influence of floodplain structure on groundwater storage, water balance, and water quality impacted by beaver ponds. A thick gravel bed layer, with a large down‐valley underflow, minimizes the effect of beaver‐induced inundation on water quality. We emphasize the need for field‐scale measurements of floodplain structure and improved characterization of evapotranspiration changes to reduce uncertainty in groundwater response. Plain Language Summary Beavers change the flow of water in river corridors by creating ponds, expanding wetlands, and flooding floodplains. This increases surface water area, promotes plant growth, and enhances biodiversity. However, the impact of this flooding on groundwater flow is not well understood, especially in mountainous areas with gravel layers where water moves easily beneath soil. In this study, we used numerical modeling to investigate how beaver ponds influence groundwater in a mountainous floodplain of the Upper Colorado River Basin. We adapted a machine learning method to validate our numerical models using multiple field data sets. Our findings show that beaver ponds significantly increase vertical water flow from the soil to the gravel during wet periods, compared to when the ponds are fully drained. The study also highlights the importance of floodplain structure in controlling both water flow in gravel layers along the river direction and vertical flow from the soil to the gravel with the presence of beavers. To reduce uncertainty in groundwater response, we emphasize the need for more field‐scale measurements of floodplain structure, hydraulic properties, and evapotranspiration changes. Key Points Floodplain structures and hydraulic conductivities are important for groundwater response with beaver ponds in mountainous floodplains Large down‐valley underflow in permeability‐stratified floodplains reduces beaver‐induced impacts on groundwater storage and water quality Machine learning‐based model calibration methods are effective for estimating posterior distributions of groundwater model parameters

Wang, Lijing↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Role of Snowmelt and Subsurface Heterogeneity in Headwater Hydrology of a Mountainous Catchment in Colorado: A Model‐Data Integration Approach

Mountainous headwater streams are sustained by both snowmelt‐driven streamflow and groundwater discharge in the Upper Colorado River Basin. However, predicting headwater stream discharge magnitude and peak flow timing is challenging in mountainous terrains, where snowmelt rates vary with vegetation type and elevation, and heterogeneous subsurface physical properties influence groundwater storage and its release. We used a model‐data integration approach to investigate the roles of snowmelt and subsurface structure in stream discharge and groundwater level. We ran an ensemble of 100 integrated surface‐subsurface hydrologic models for a mountainous headwater catchment near Crested Butte, Colorado, USA. We also evaluated and calibrated these models against observed data sets, including snow depth measurements using distributed temperature probes, stream discharge, and groundwater levels. Calibration with multiple data sources using neural density estimators has further constrained uncertainty in subsurface properties and snowmelt rates. Results indicated that observed slower snowmelt rates in evergreen forests delayed the peak flow and baseflow onset. In upstream areas with lower subsurface permeability, water was stored within the subsurface but was not released as interflow or shallow groundwater flow, and thereby not contributing to downstream streamflow during recession limb periods. Double peaks in groundwater occurred in areas with spatial subsurface heterogeneity, in our case due to the contrast between granodiorite and Mancos shale. These process‐based insights into groundwater and snowmelt dynamics in mountainous headwaters will help improve predictions of headwater hydrology.

Wang, Lijing [University of Connecticut, Storrs, C↗
DOE OSTI2026

FunDiff: diffusion models over function spaces for physics-informed generative modeling

Recent advances in generative modeling-particularly diffusion models and flow matching-have been widely used for synthesizing discrete data such as images and videos. However, adapting these models to physical applications remains challenging, as the quantities of interest are continuous functions governed by complex physical laws. To address this, we introduce FunDiff, an efficient and robust framework for generative modeling in function spaces. FunDiff combines a latent diffusion process with a function autoencoder architecture to handle input functions with varying discretizations, generates continuous functions that can be evaluated at arbitrary locations, and seamlessly incorporate physical priors. These priors are enforced through architectural constraints or physics-informed loss functions, ensuring that generated samples satisfy fundamental physical laws. We theoretically establish minimax optimality guarantees for density estimation in function spaces, demonstrating that diffusion-based estimators achieve optimal convergence rates under suitable regularity conditions. We further demonstrate the practical effectiveness of FunDiff across diverse applications in fluid dynamics and solid mechanics. Empirical results indicate that our method can generate physically consistent samples with high fidelity to the target distribution, and exhibit robustness to noisy and low-resolution data.

Wang, Sifan [Yale University, New Haven, CT (Unite↗
DOE OSTI2024

Developing a robust sensor for infrared imaging bolometers

A new type of large area sensor for infrared imaging bolometers has been developed. It replaces the thin and fragile free-standing metal foils, which typically have been used, with a multi-layer coated sapphire (or diamond) substrate. Sapphire is transparent to mid-infrared wavelengths, is robust against transients, and can be thick enough to even be the vacuum window. The primary radiation absorber is still a thin deposited metal layer, but now it is partially insulated from the supporting sapphire substrate by a black (carbon-based) layer, which also acts as a blackbody remitter. Test results indicate 6× more noise equivalent power density (estimated NEPD = 23 W/m 2 at 5 ms camera exposure time, foil temperature decay time 60 ms) for a 2 μm gold-coated sapphire disk compared to estimated NEP = 4 W/m 2 at 1.8 ms exposure time, with foil decay time 420 ms, for a nominal 2.5 μm thick platinum-free-standing foil.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2024

A meshless stochastic method for Poisson–Nernst–Planck equations

A plethora of biological, physical, and chemical phenomena involve transport of charged particles (ions). Its continuum-scale description relies on the Poisson–Nernst–Planck (PNP) system, which encapsulates the conservation of mass and charge. The numerical solution of these coupled partial differential equations is challenging and suffers from both the curse of dimensionality and difficulty in efficiently parallelizing. We present a novel particle-based framework to solve the full PNP system by simulating a drift–diffusion process with time- and space-varying drift. We leverage Green’s functions, kernel-independent fast multipole methods, and kernel density estimation to solve the PNP system in a meshless manner, capable of handling discontinuous initial states. The method is embarrassingly parallel, and the computational cost scales linearly with the number of particles and dimension. We use a series of numerical experiments to demonstrate both the method’s convergence with respect to the number of particles and computational cost vis-à-vis a traditional partial differential equation solver.

Chemistry↗