Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “data harmonization”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR)

From Lisk et al. (in review): "In the arid and semi-arid western U.S., access to water is regulated through a legal system of water rights. Individuals, companies, organizations, municipalities, and tribal entities have documents that declare their water rights. State water regulatory agencies collate and maintain these records, which can be used in legal disputes over access to water. While these records are publicly available data in all western U.S. states, the data have not yet been readily available in digital form from all states. Furthermore, there are many differences in data format, terminology, and definitions between state water regulatory agencies. Here, we have collected water rights data from 11 western U.S. state agencies, harmonized terminology and use definitions, formatted them consistently, and tied them to a western U.S.-wide shapefile of water administrative boundaries. We demonstrate how these data enable consistent regional-scale western U.S. hydrologic and economic modeling."

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2020

The IsoGenie database: an interdisciplinary data management solution for ecosystems biology and environmental research

Modern microbial and ecosystem sciences require diverse interdisciplinary teams that are often challenged in “speaking” to one another due to different languages and data product types. Here we introduce the IsoGenie Database, a de novo developed data management and exploration platform, as a solution to this challenge of accurately representing and integrating heterogenous environmental and microbial data across ecosystem scales. The IsoGenieDB is a public and private data infrastructure designed to store and query data generated by the IsoGenie Project, a ~10 year DOE-funded project focused on discovering ecosystem climate feedbacks in a thawing permafrost landscape. The IsoGenieDB provides (i) a platform for IsoGenie Project members to explore the project’s interdisciplinary datasets across scales through the inherent relationships among data entities, (ii) a framework to consolidate and harmonize the datasets needed by the team’s modelers, and (iii) a public venue that leverages the same spatially explicit, disciplinarily integrated data structure to share published datasets. The IsoGenieDB is also being expanded to cover the NASA-funded Archaea to Atmosphere (A2A) project, which scales the findings of IsoGenie to a broader suite of Arctic peatlands, via the umbrella A2A Database (A2A-DB). The IsoGenieDB’s expandability and flexible architecture allow it to serve as an example ecosystems database.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Investigating the Global Biogeophysical Impact of Area and Mass Based Wood Harvest in a Vegetation Demography Model

Wood harvesting alters land surface properties and energy redistribution, but there is a lack of studies estimating these changes on a global scale. We coupled a vegetation demographic model, the Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator, with the E3SM land model to perform offline model simulation to investigate the land biogeophysical responses, including canopy coverage, leaf area index, albedo, surface roughness length, and energy fluxes, to historical wood harvest on the global scale. In this study, we found 50% less harvested carbon (C) when choosing the area-based harvest rate as driving data that has not been spatially harmonized, compared to reharmonized mass-based harvesting. By considering the uncertainty from reconstruction of historical wood harvest time series and the choice of wood harvest approach in the model, continuous wood harvest (1850–2015) results in 5%–10% of canopy coverage loss, contributing 0.5%–1% increase of albedo over disturbed land, which is much stronger than a non-demographic land surface model. Changes in energy flux from the wood harvest are negligible (<1%), but the responses of land surface properties vary (up to 30%) due to differences in model structure between the single canopy, sun-shade leaf model and vegetation demographic model.

Shu, Shijie [Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Comparison of High Intensity Proton Efficiencies for Rf Harmonics 1 and 2

There have been many changes to the Booster setup over the past seven years, but the most fundamental physical change is probably the change from an Rf harmonic of 2 to 1. By looking at the intensity data over this period it is possible to compare the running efficiencies in each case. The harmonic change occurred at the beginning of the 1998 run. Another fundamental, though administrative, change that occurred after the 1998 run was the advent of ALARA alarms that limit the amount of beam loss that is allowed to occur during different parts of the cycle. These ALARA alarm limits also depend on the AGS repetition period since it is the amount of beam energy lost per unit time that is used as the criterion for these alarms. The 1998 h=1 run did not have an ALARA constraint, but subsequent h=1 runs did have that constraint. The highest Booster proton intensity was obtained in the h=2 mode (about 23 Tp). At best, the h=1 mode only yielded about 20 Tp per cycle. Is it because the h=2 setup can produce higher intensity than the h=1 setup that the h=2 intensity was higher, or is it because other factors are responsible? This note seeks to shed some light on this question. In order to compare the two setups (h=1 vs. h=2) intensity scaler data was taken from the setup books over the past seven years. In general, this data was taken when the Booster was in an optimized state. What ‘optimized’ means is not so clearly defined, but would typically mean that the Booster configuration was ‘optimized’ so that it yields the highest intensity late in the AGS given physical and other constraints.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Identifying DQ-Domain Admittance Models of a 2.3-MVA Commercial Grid-Following Inverter Via Frequency-Domain and Time-Domain Data

Here, we present two methods to identify the admittance of a 2.3-MVA commercial grid-following inverter through frequency-domain data and time-domain data. In addition to the well-known harmonic injection method to obtain the admittance at frequency points followed by vector fitting, we adopt a step response-based method where the step response data of the converter are collected and their s-domain expressions are obtained. In turn, the s-domain admittance model of the converter is found. The two methods can be used for cross validation. Step responses and frequency-domain responses obtained from the two methods are compared. Results show that the time- domain data-based method leads to an admittance comparable with that from the frequency-domain measurement in the range less than 60 Hz. In addition, two insights are obtained from the frequency-domain admittance measurements. First, when the dq- frame is aligned to the point of common coupling (PCC) voltage, the per unit DQ-domain admittance directly reflects operating conditions. Second, existence of negative-sequence control can be detected via sequence-domain admittances.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR) v.1

Abstract In the arid and semi-arid Western U.S., access to water is regulated through a legal system of water rights. Individuals, companies, organizations, municipalities, and tribal entities have documents that declare their water rights. State water regulatory agencies collate and maintain these records, which can be used in legal disputes over access to water. While these records are publicly available data in all Western U.S. states, the data have not yet been readily available in digital form from all states. Furthermore, there are many differences in data format, terminology, and definitions between state water regulatory agencies. Here, we have collected water rights data from 11 Western U.S. state agencies, harmonized terminology and use definitions, formatted them for consistency, and tied them to a Western U.S.-wide shapefile of water administrative boundaries.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Reviews and syntheses: The promise of big diverse soil data, moving current practices towards future potential

Abstract. In the age of big data, soil data are more available and richer than ever, but – outside of a few large soil survey resources – they remain largely unusable for informing soil management and understanding Earth system processes beyond the original study. Data science has promised a fully reusable research pipeline where data from past studies are used to contextualize new findings and reanalyzed for new insight. Yet synthesis projects encounter challenges at all steps of the data reuse pipeline, including unavailable data, labor-intensive transcription of datasets, incomplete metadata, and a lack of communication between collaborators. Here, using insights from a diversity of soil, data, and climate scientists, we summarize current practices in soil data synthesis across all stages of database creation: availability, input, harmonization, curation, and publication. We then suggest new soil-focused semantic tools to improve existing data pipelines, such as ontologies, vocabulary lists, and community practices. Our goal is to provide the soil data community with an overview of current practices in soil data and where we need to go to fully leverage big data to solve soil problems in the next century.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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 OSTI2025

Assessing methods in fusion and fitting for time series construction in remote sensing-based earth observations

This study evaluates the comparative performance of spatiotemporal fusion and time-series fitting methods for constructing high-spatiotemporal-resolution remote sensing time-series data. Due to in-class similarity of fusion methods and fitting methods, we employ the Fit-FC (Fitting, spatial Filtering, and residual Compensation) model as a representative fusion method and the linear harmonic fitting model as a representative fitting method. Both Fit-FC and the linear harmonic fitting are widely used for high-spatiotemporal-resolution time-series data construction, and we modify the original Fit-FC model to enable automatic time-series fusion. To ensure data representativeness, we use 3 years (2019–2021) of Harmonized Landsat and Sentinel-2 surface reflectance datasets and Terra MCD43A4 products. Eight experimental regions are selected worldwide to guarantee generalization of the comparative performance between fusion and fitting methods, covering diverse land-use types (cropland, developed land, forest, and grassland) and varying climatological conditions. Time-series of NDVI and surface reflectance are analyzed under both actual observations and simulated data-missing scenarios. The constructed time-series data reveals that (1) the modified Fit-FC and linear harmonic fitting model achieve excellent performance in constructing high-resolution time-series images; (2) the fusion method outperforms the fitting method in constructing time-series of NDVI and surface reflectance images in cropland-, forest-, and grassland-dominated regions; (3) both methods achieve comparable performance in developed-dominated regions; (4) the fusion method is more robust to missing data, and better captures abrupt phenological transitions under conditions of continuous missing data; (5) the fitting method is computationally more efficient, making it suitable for large-scale time-series image reconstruction. This study provides valuable insights for selecting optimal strategies to generate high-resolution time-series images across diverse application scenarios and lays a foundation for extensions to other vegetation indices or land surface variables.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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 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 included 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.

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 OSTI2021

Anharmonicity in partially filled skutterudites Yb x Co 4 Sb 12

Here, we report an experimental investigation of Yb filler ion dynamics in partially filled skutterudite samples Yb x Co 4 Sb 12 ( x = 0.26 and x = 0.4). From extended x-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) measurements at the Yb L 2 -edge, the mean-square displacements of the Yb fillers were extracted over a wide temperature range from 10 to 500 K. We found that the low-temperature dynamics of Yb fillers are described well using a harmonic oscillator approximation with Einstein temperatures of 70 ± 5 K for both samples. This finding is consistent with the observed low-energy phonon mode at 5.3(5) meV in the inelastic x-ray scattering (IXS) data. However, the temperature dependence deviates from the harmonic approximation at high temperatures due to significant cubic anharmonicity, which was revealed in the EXAFS cumulant analysis. Our study also demonstrates that complementary information on filler dynamics in skutterudites can be acquired using EXAFS and IXS.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2026

From models to reality: a systematic review on simulated and measured residential heat pump energy savings

High-performance HVAC solutions are central to residential energy management. A substantial share of these are electric, reversible-cycle systems, with heat pumps representing the largest portion of current and near-term adoption. This review synthesizes peer-reviewed and grey literature on residential space heating and cooling heat pumps. The academic literature is dominated by modeling (73.8%), with limited field measurement (13.1%). Grey literature from United States serve as a supplemental resource providing measured savings. Conversions from electric-resistance heating consistently show the largest site energy reductions, while oil/propane baselines yield moderate savings, and gas baseline scenario often deliver small and region-dependent savings. This study cross-checks the grey literature measured data with simulation data filtered from the ResStock dataset. The comparison indicates a discrepancy between simulations and measured data: simulated site EUIs are typically lower than measured EUIs, but percentage energy savings fall in similar ranges, implying simulations capture directional effects while underestimating energy use. Factors associated with variability and model–measurement differences include system characterization and control representation (e.g., backup heat engagement, thermostat/setpoint strategies, commissioning/installation quality), occupant behavior, weather normalization, metering scope, and envelope characterization. This paper also outlines the proposed methodology for comparing simulation and measured data for heat pumps. It emphasizes the metrics used for comparison and units harmonization, building characteristics matching, and compact metadata are needed for simulations to match measured data. The proposed methodology is expected to improve the credibility of simulated savings as measured evidence grows.

Yu, Lili↗
DOE OSTI2025

Enabling pan-repository reanalysis for big data science of public metabolomics data

Public untargeted metabolomics data is a growing resource for metabolite and phenotype discovery; however, accessing and utilizing these data across repositories pose significant challenges. Therefore, here we develop pan-repository universal identifiers and harmonized cross-repository metadata. This ecosystem facilitates discovery by integrating diverse data sources from public repositories including MetaboLights, Metabolomics Workbench, and GNPS/MassIVE. Our approach simplified data handling and unlocks previously inaccessible reanalysis workflows, fostering unmatched research opportunities.

El Abiead, Yasin↗
DOE OSTI2024

Overcoming barriers to improved decision-making for battery deployment in the clean energy transition

Decarbonization plans depend on the rapid, large-scale deployment of batteries to sufficiently decarbonize the electricity system and on-road transport. This can take many forms, shaped by technology, materials, and supply chain selection, which will have local and global environmental and social impacts. Current knowledge gaps limit the ability of decision-makers to make choices in facilitating battery deployment that minimizes or avoids unintended environmental and social consequences. These gaps include a lack of harmonized, accessible, and up-to-date data on manufacturing and supply chains and shortcomings within sustainability and social impact assessment methods, resulting in uncertainty that limits incorporation of research into policy making. These gaps can lead to unintended detrimental effects of large-scale battery deployment. To support decarbonization goals while minimizing negative environmental and social impacts, we elucidate current barriers to tracking how decision-making for large-scale battery deployment translates to environmental and social impacts and recommend steps to overcome them.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Exploring origins for correlations between flow harmonics and transverse momentum in small collision systems

High statistics data sets from experiments at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) with small and large collision species have enabled a wealth of new flow measurements, including the event-by-event correlation between observables. One exciting such observable $ρ(v^2_n, [p_T])$ gauges the correlation between the mean transverse momentum of particles in an event and the various flow coefficients (v n ) in the same event [P. Bozek, Phys. Rev. C 93, 044908 (2016)]. Recently it has been proposed that very low multiplicity events may be sensitive to initial-state glasma correlations [G. Giacalone, B. Schenke, and C. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 192301 (2020)] rather than flow-related dynamics. We find utilizing the ip-jazma framework that the color domain explanation for the glasma results are incomplete. We then explore predictions from pythia8, and the version for including nuclear collisions called pythia-angantyr, which have only nonflow correlations, and from the ampt model which has both nonflow and flow-type correlations. We find that pythia-angantyr has nonflow contributions to $ρ(v^2_n, [p_T])$ in p + O, p + Pb, and O + O collisions that are positive at low multiplicity and comparable to the glasma correlations. It is striking that in pythia8 in p + p collisions there is actually a sign change from positive to negative $ρ(v^2_n, [p_T])$ as a function of multiplicity. The ampt results match the experimental data general trends in Pb+Pb collisions at the LHC, except at low multiplicity where ampt has the opposite sign. In p + Pb collisions, ampt has the opposite sign from experimental data and we explore this within the context of parton geometry. Predictions for p + O, O + O, and Xe + Xe are also presented.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗