SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “corrections”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,081 records · Page 60

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Phase diagram of the three-dimensional subsystem toric code

Subsystem quantum error-correcting codes typically involve measuring a sequence of noncommuting parity check operators. They can sometimes exhibit greater fault tolerance than conventional codes, which use commuting checks. However, unlike subspace codes, it is unclear if subsystem codes—in particular their advantages—can be understood in terms of ground-state properties of a physical Hamiltonian. In this paper, we address this question for the three-dimensional subsystem toric code (3D STC), as recently constructed by Kubica and Vasmer [], which exhibits single-shot error correction. Motivated by a conjectured relation between single-shot properties and thermal stability, we study the zero- and finite-temperature phases of an associated noncommuting Hamiltonian. By mapping the Hamiltonian model to a pair of 3D Z 2 gauge theories coupled by a kinetic constraint, we find various phases at zero temperature, all separated by first-order transitions: There are 3D toric code-like phases with deconfined point-like excitations in the bulk, and there are phases with a confined bulk supporting a 2D toric code on the surface when appropriate boundary conditions are chosen. The latter is similar to the surface topological order present in 3D STC. However, the similarities between the single-shot correction in 3D STC and the confined phases are only partial: they share the same sets of degrees of freedom, but they are governed by different dynamical rules. Instead, we argue that the process of single-shot error correction can more suitably be associated with a path (rather than a point) in the zero-temperature phase diagram, a perspective, which inspires alternative measurement sequences enabling single-shot error correction. Moreover, since none of the above-mentioned phases survives at nonzero temperature, the single-shot error-correction property of the code does not imply thermal stability of the associated Hamiltonian phase. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

Li, Yaodong (ORCID:0000000337421944)↗

DOE OSTI2025

Systematic study of the validity of the eikonal model including uncertainties

Nuclear reactions at intermediate beam energies are often interpreted using the eikonal model. In the analysis of complex reaction probes, where few-body reaction methods are needed, the eikonal method may be used as an efficient way for describing the fragment-target reaction process. In this work, we perform a systematic study to test the validity of the eikonal approximation for nucleon-nucleus reactions. We also quantify uncertainties due to the nucleon optical potential on reaction observables. We inspect the validity of the eikonal model and its semiclassical correction by comparing it to exact solutions (obtained from solving the optical-model equation with a finite-differences method) for a wide range of reactions. We also study the effect of relativistic corrections, both kinematic and dynamic, by effectively incorporating the relativistic effects at intermediate energies. The uncertainties from a Bayesian global optical potential (KDUQ) are propagated to the observables of interest. Our study includes neutron and proton reactions on 27 Al , 40 Ca , 90 Zr , and 208 Pb , for a wide range of energies 𝐸 lab = 0–400 MeV. We calculate neutron-total cross sections (elastic and reactions) as well as proton-absorption cross sections as a function of beam energy, using the eikonal model, the eikonal model with a semiclassical correction, and the exact solution. Here, we also compute angular distributions for the methods above. Our results show that for the proton-absorption cross section, the eikonal model can be used down to around 60 MeV and the semiclassical correction extends its use to 30 MeV. However, the validity of the eikonal model for the neutron-total cross section only goes down to ≈120 MeV, a range extended to ≈ 50 MeV when using the semiclassical correction. We find the semiclassical correction to the eikonal model to be less effective in describing the angular distributions. The 1⁢𝜎 uncertainty intervals on the observables we studied is less than 5% for most of the energies considered, but increases rapidly for higher energies, namely energies outside the range of KDUQ (𝐸 lab > 200MeV).

Cluster models↗

DOE OSTI2022

A Solar-assisted Voltage Optimization Method for Transmission Solar Network Power System

This paper proposes a new formulation and solution algorithm that uses transmission level solar inverters to address the security-constrained optimal power flow (SCOPF) problem. The goal is to stabilize voltage fluctuations in transmission networks in base case and contingency scenarios, by using bulk solar power plant with a minimal number of post-contingency corrections. To achieve this goal, a two-stage volt/var optimization method is proposed to first correct all voltage violations with the volt-var alternating current optimal power flow (ACOPF) algorithm for a base case. Then a linearized SCOPF volt-var control algorithm is proposed to identify the corrective actions for all potential voltage violations in all contingency scenarios. The proposed method was tested and validated on a modified IEEE 118-bus system with solar photovoltaic (PV) data.

Photovoltaic, Volt/Var Control↗

DOE OSTI2020

Improving Solution Accuracy and Convergence for Stochastic Physics Parameterizations with Colored Noise

Stochastic parameterizations are used in numerical weather prediction and climate modeling to help capture the uncertainty in the simulations and improve their statistical properties. Convergence issues can arise when time integration methods originally developed for deterministic differential equations are applied naively to stochastic problems. In previous studies, it has been demonstrated that a correction term, known in stochastic analysis as the Itô correction, can help improve solution accuracy for various deterministic numerical schemes and ensure convergence to the physically relevant solution without substantial computational overhead. The usual formulation of the Itô correction is valid only when the stochasticity is represented by white noise. In this study, a generalized formulation of the Itô correction is derived for noises of any color. The formulation is applied to a test problem described by an advection–diffusion equation forced with a spectrum of fast processes. We present numerical results for cases with both constant and spatially varying advection velocities to show that, for the same time step sizes, the introduction of the generalized Itô correction helps to substantially reduce time integration error and significantly improve the convergence rate of the numerical solutions when the forcing term in the governing equation is rough (fast varying); alternatively, for the same target accuracy, the generalized Itô correction allows for the use of significantly longer time steps and, hence, helps to reduce the computational cost of the numerical simulation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Environmental Restorations Operations (Consolidated Quarterly Report Jul - Sep 2019)

This Environmental Restoration Operations (ER) Consolidated Quarterly Report (ER Quarterly Report) provides the status of ongoing corrective action activities being implemented at Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) during the July - September 2019 reporting period. Table I-1 lists the Solid Waste Management Units (SWMUs) and Areas of Concern (A0Cs) currently identified for corrective action at SNL/NM. This section of the ER Quarterly Report summarizes the work completed during this quarterly reporting period at sites undergoing corrective action. Corrective action activities were conducted during this reporting period at the three groundwater AOCs (Burn Site Groundwater [BSG] AOC, Technical Area-V [TA-V] Groundwater [TAVG] AOC, and Tijeras Arroyo Groundwater [TAG] AOC). Corrective action activities are deferred at the Long Sled Track (SWMU 83), the Gun Facilities (SWMU 84), and the Short Sled Track (SWMU 240) because these three sites are active mission facilities. These three active mission sites are located in Technical Area-III. There were no SWMUs or AOCs in the corrective action complete regulatory process during this quarterly reporting period.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Reducing Ground-based Astrometric Errors with Gaia and Gaussian Processes

Stochastic field distortions caused by atmospheric turbulence are a fundamental limitation to the astrometric accuracy of ground-based imaging. This distortion field is measurable at the locations of stars with accurate positions provided by the Gaia DR2 catalog; we develop the use of Gaussian process regression (GPR) to interpolate the distortion field to arbitrary locations in each exposure. We introduce an extension to standard GPR techniques that exploits the knowledge that the 2D distortion field is curl-free. Applied to several hundred 90 s exposures from the Dark Energy Survey as a test bed, we find that the GPR correction reduces the variance of the turbulent astrometric distortions ≈12× , on average, with better performance in denser regions of the Gaia catalog. The rms per-coordinate distortion in the riz bands is typically ≈7 mas before any correction and ≈2 mas after application of the GPR model. The GPR astrometric corrections are validated by the observation that their use reduces, from 10 to 5 mas rms, the residuals to an orbit fit to riz-band observations over 5 yr of the r = 18.5 trans-Neptunian object Eris. We also propose a GPR method, not yet implemented, for simultaneously estimating the turbulence fields and the 5D stellar solutions in a stack of overlapping exposures, which should yield further turbulence reductions in future deep surveys.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

DOE OSTI2020

CSAPR2 CMAC 2.0 level c1 data.

Raw data from ARM precipitation radars must be corrected for atmospheric phenomena and instrument characteristics (e.g., attenuation, clutter) to retrieve precipitation properties. The Corrected Moments in Antenna Coordinates Version 2 (CMAC2) value-added product (VAP) is a set of algorithms and code that does such corrections, and it also retrieves precipitation quantities from the radar measurements. Similar to the X-SAPR radars at the ARM main site, C-SAPR2 radar data also needs corrections and improvements. CMAC 2.0 has been updated to work with the ARM C-SAPR 2 radar. Data and fields that have been processed to: correct for velocity aliasing, unfold and generate a cross-polarimetric phase difference that is monotonically increasing, removing impulses caused by non-uniform beam filling and phase shift on backscatter, recalculate specific differential phase using a 20-point Sobel filter on the aforementioned phase, correct for liquid path attenuation using the polarimetric signals, estimate rainfall rates at the gate using the specific attenuation. In addition, CMAC writes the data out into a community-standard format netCDF File using the CF/Radial conventions. The data are therefore compatible with new and existing National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) tools such as RadXConvert for converting to a variety of popular file formats.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

CPC data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston, TX region from July to September 2022

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

CCN data from TAMU TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V) was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and a Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitor (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Onboard the ROAM-V, aerosol samples are drawn through a shared isokinetic inlet at a flow rate ranging from 3.5 to 7.0 LPM. A portion of this flow is directed through a cyclone impactor (Brechtel, Inc. Model SCC 0.732) and 0.5 LPM is directed to the CCN. To calculate particle losses, we used a two-step method. First, the measured SMPS size distributions were used to calculate particle loss through the inlet during sampling. Second, the corrected SMPS data was used to calculate the average of the total losses per scan down the CCN line. Then, the correction was applied to the CCN data. This calculation was done separately for each deployment location due to changes in the measured size distributions between locations. Particle loss from diffusion (based on Kesten, 1991 and Gormley, 1949), inertial impaction in 90-degree bends (based on Aerosol Measurement, 2011 and Crane, 1977), and cyclone impactor efficiency (based on Dirgo, 1985) were included in the loss calculation. When the SMPS was not sampling at a location (in the case of an instrument malfunction or operator error), the reported CPC data was corrected with an average of the total losses for the entire campaign at the specified deployment location (e.g., if we needed to correct Galveston data, then the average of all calculated losses at Galveston was taken). These flatline corrections were used for all data on 22/07/13, 22/07/20, 22/07/22, and the data from Galveston on 22/08/09. The supersaturation uncertainty is estimated conservatively at +/- 0.03%, where variation in the inlet temperature, pressure, and calibration technique prevents a more accurate measurement. Confidence in the reported supersaturation measurements is based on a pre-campaign calibration (following the methods from our previous work and Deng, 2014 based on Rose, 2008) in addition to inter-comparisons with the DOE for two days (22/08/18 and 22/09/01) where TAMU was co-located with AMF1. The inter-comparisons show good agreement between our instrument and the DOEs instrument on both days at all supersaturations. After the last inter-comparison on 22/09/01, there was no indication of a malfunction by our instrument through the rest of the campaign. Unfortunately, the instrument was dropped during demobilization. A post-campaign calibration was conducted, which showed a substantial departure from the pre-campaign calibration. The drop may have damaged the instrument’s ability to produce the desired supersaturations. Therefore, we do consider the data after 22/09/01 to be correct, but it should be used with caution. The CCN counter sampled for 3 minutes at each supersaturation setpoint (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2%). At the end of a cycle, the instrument was set to 0.01% supersaturation for 5 minutes. The data is comprised of the last 60 seconds of each supersaturation set point (0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2%) to ensure the instrument stabilized and was able to reach thermal equilibrium. We removed the data during the periods where there were operational difficulties, setup, or maintenance. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07055 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Rose et. al. Calibration and Measurement Uncertainties of a Continuous-Flow Cloud Condensation Nuclei Counter (DMT-CCNC): CCN Activation of Ammonium Sulfate and Sodium Chloride Aerosol Particles in Theory and Experiment. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 8, 1153-1179, 2008. Deng et. al. Using Raman Microspectroscopy to Determine Chemical Composition and Mixing State of Airborne Marine Aerosols over the Pacific Ocean. Aerosol Science and Technology, Vol 48, Issue 2, 2014. Kesten et. al. Calibration of a TSI Model 3025 Ultrafine Condensation Particle Counter. Aerosol Science and Technology, 15:2, 107-111, 1991. Gormley et. al. Diffusion from a Stream Flowing through a Cylindrical Tube. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol 52, 163-169, 1948. Aerosol Measurement: Principles, Techniques, and Applications, Third Edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2011. Crane et. al. Inertial Deposition of Particles in a Bent Pipe. Journal of Aerosol Science, Vol 8, 161-170, 1977. Dirgo et. al. Cyclone Collection Efficiency: Comparison of Experimental Results with Theoretical Predictions. Aerosol Science and Technology, 4:4, 401-415, 1985.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

AMICE2 measurements of lab-generated and ambient aerosols at BNL from 2025-07-21 to 2025-08-22

From July 21 through August 22, 2025 the Absorption Measurement Inter-Comparison Experiment phase 2 (AMICE2) was conducted at Brookhaven National Laboratory. The experiment included concurrent operation of several filter-based instruments and in situ instruments sampling from a common sample line. The common sample line provided all instruments with either lab-generated aerosols composed of external mixtures of nigrosin, cabojet, and ammonium sulfate, or with ambient aerosol drawn through an external stack. This data set contains measurements from the CAPS PMssa instrument taken as a reference instrument at 532 nm and against which the effectiveness of the filter corrections may be assessed. It also contains attenuation coefficients from all filter-based instruments and filter transmittances in order to permit correction for filter loading, and the SSA and COA to permit corrections for aerosol darkness. Finally, two sets of multiplicative corrections are provided for the AE-33, TAP, and MA-350 instruments: the first one, Corr1, corrects for filter amplification factor and loading, the second one, Corr2, corrects for the aerosol darkness in terms of the natural log of COA.

Aerosol Extinction↗

DOE OSTI2023

Addendum 2 to the Closure Report for CAU 577 Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, NNSS, Nevada

Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 577, “Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells,” includes five low-level waste cells at the Nevada National Security Site Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site where buried waste received from Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., was subsequently determined to contain chromium that exceeded the toxicity characteristic leaching procedure regulatory limit, which would require the waste to carry hazardous waste code D007. CAU 577 was created to satisfy the requirements of the Settlement Agreement (SA) executed between the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) and the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) on April 25, 2019 (NDEP 2019). The SA required that the chromium-containing waste received from NFS would be addressed following the closure process laid out in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO). The FFACO process ensures proper closure of the chromium-containing waste and documentation of that closure through FFACO-type documents. The following three Corrective Action Sites (CASs) were closed, and their closure was documented in the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030, dated September 2021 (U.S. Department of Energy [DOE] Environmental Management [EM] Nevada Program 2021a): • CAS 05-21-02, Waste Disposal Cell 12 • CAS 05-21-03, Waste Disposal Cell 15 • CAS 05-21-04, Waste Disposal Cell 17 Closure of the following CAS was previously documented in the Addendum to the Closure Report for Corrective Action Unit 577: Area 5 Chromium Containing Waste Disposal Cells, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada, DOE/EMNV--0030-ADD, dated September 2022 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022): • CAS 05-21-05, Waste Disposal Cell 20 This second addendum to the Closure Report documents the closure activities that have occurred for CAS 05-21-06, Waste Disposal Cell 21. This is the last CAS in CAU 577. The final waste shipment was placed in the waste disposal cell on November 21, 2022. Following this, closure activities began on November 28, 2022, and were conducted according to the Corrective Action Decision Document/Corrective Action Plan (CADD/CAP) for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b). The following closure activities were performed: • Constructing an engineered evapotranspiration cover • Installing two subsidence monuments and vadose zone monitoring equipment • Seeding the cover with a mixture of native plant species • Installing four concrete monuments on the corners of the cover and placing two use restriction (UR) warning signs on each monument These activities fulfill applicable federal and state regulations for closure of CAS 05-21-06 and minimize potential future exposure pathways to buried waste. Completed closure activities are also consistent with closure of the nine historical Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) units included in Section 10.2.2 of the RCRA Permit that governs hazardous waste management activities at the Nevada National Security Site (Permit NEV HW0101) (NDEP 2023). UR documentation for this CAS is included in Appendix B of this report. The post-closure plan is presented in detail in the CADD/CAP for CAU 577 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021b), and the requirements are summarized in Section 5.2 of this document. In accordance with paragraph 5D of the SA, a request to incorporate the requirements for post-closure monitoring of CAU 577 was included with the permit application for RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 that was submitted in January 2022 (NNSA/NFO 2022). The request included the post-closure requirements for the three CASs that had been closed at the time of submittal of the application as well as requirements that would be implemented upon future approval of closure of the remaining two CASs. All CAU 577 post-closure monitoring requirements have been captured in the April 4, 2023, Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit (NDEP 2023). As the RCRA Permit NEV HW0101 has been revised since the submittal of the original CAU 577 Closure Report (DOE EM Nevada Program 2021a) and Addendum 1 (DOE EM Nevada Program 2022), the post-closure requirements in this Addendum 2 report do not align with the previous documents. Specific changes resulting from the issuance of Revision 7 of the RCRA Permit are discussed in Section 5.2 of this report. The requirements in this report are consistent with the current permit (NDEP 2023) and supersede all requirements listed in the CAU 577 Closure Report and Addendum 1. All CAU 577 post-closure requirements should be conducted in accordance with the version of the RCRA Permit that is current at the time of the activities being performed. The DOE EM Nevada Program is requesting a Notice of Completion from NDEP for closure of CAU 577. Although CAU 577 is not a legacy site, the FFACO process is being followed to ensure proper closure of the chromium-containing waste. Therefore, transfer of CAU 577 from Appendix III of the FFACO to Appendix IV, Closed Corrective Action Units, is requested, as all closure activities have been completed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2026

CHESS 2025: Leaf Area Index (LAI) for meadow, shrub, tree, and understory vegetation

This dataset contains Leaf Area Index (LAI) measurements made as part of the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) during June and July of 2025. Data were collected in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, across three study domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). Field observations of LAI were collected within 72 hours of airborne data collection by the National Ecological Observatory Network’s Aerial Observation Platform (NEON AOP). The NEON AOP collected waveform LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and imaging spectrometer data in 426 spectral bands from the visible to shortwave infrared. LAI measurements were collected using the LICOR LAI-2200C Plant Canopy Analyzer following protocols outlined in the instrument manual (LI-COR 2019). Sampling targeted four distinct vegetation types: meadows, shrubs, trees, and aspen forest understory. We have archived data separately by site type because different field methods were used for each. At meadow sites, measurements were made at the four corners of 1m x 1m plots, with the instrument moving inward toward the center of the plot. At shrub sites, we measured the canopies of individual shrubs. At tree sites, we made measurements within a 10m x 10m subplot centered around a focal tree, with 30 observations taken on a regular grid. At aspen understory sites, we measured overstory trees following the tree protocol and understory herbaceous vegetation following the meadow protocol. All measurements included above-canopy (A) and below-canopy (B) readings, with specific protocols for scattering correction measurements in direct-sun conditions. Data were processed using the R package `rlai` (Worsham 2025). This package includes functions to calculate LAI, gap fraction, apparent clumping factor (Ω), scattering correction, and other canopy metrics. Package contents: Full file descriptions appear in ‘flmd.csv’. Files named according to the convention ‘lai_*_summary_data_cleaned.csv’ contain summary values of LAI, apparent clumping factor (Ωapp), and scattering correction factors for each site. These are the analysis-ready products that most data users will work with. Files named ‘lai_*_metadata_cleaned.csv’ contain additional site-level observations made during field collection. We have also archived intermediate and supplementary data for users who wish to check our processing approach or apply alternative methods. ‘raw_lai_2200C.zip’ contains the raw files as read from the LI-COR instrument, with no processing applied, in TXT format. The zip archive contains subdirectories by site type, which are further subdivided by sampling area. Filenames correspond to the sampling site number. ‘intermediate_results.zip’ contains detailed output from the processing routines, in JSON format. The zip archive contains subdirectories by site type; filenames correspond to the sampling site number. ‘scattering_correction_logs.zip’ contains logfiles from the implementation of Kobayashi et al.'s (2013) scattering correction algorithm. The logfiles report values of several parameters at each iteration of the algorithm, as the model converges toward a stable solution. They are intended for users who want to verify scattering correction performance. The zip archive contains subdirectories by site type; filenames correspond to the sampling site number. ‘spot_checks.csv’ reports LAI and other values for a small number of files processed with LI-COR FV2200 software (LI-COR 2013) using the same control parameters as in our R-based approach. Additional metadata are provided in a data dictionary describing column names and definitions (dd.csv), and in a file-level metadata file (flmd.csv). All zip files can be expanded with common archive utilities. TXT, CSV, and JSON files can be ingested into R or Python computing environments or read in common text editor utilities. Geospatial information: Geospatial data for mapping measurement site locations are in the files CHESS_polygons_lai_UTM.geojson, CHESS_polygons_shrub_UTM.geojson, and CHESS_polygons_meadow_UTM.geojson in the companion geospatial package for the 2025 CHESS campaign, ‘CHESS 2025: Location data for field observations and sampling’ (Henderson et al., 2026). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgement: Field and remote-sensing data acquisition was performed under a grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC24K1005). This work was also 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. * Todorov and Worsham are co–first authors.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗

DOE OSTI2022

Integrated Issues and Risk Management: A Theoretical Framework Overview

The contractor requirements document for DOE O 226.1B, Implementation of Department of Energy Oversight Policy, requires DOE/NNSA contractors to establish an assurance system that includes, among other things, “Rigorous, risk-informed, and credible self-assessment and feedback and improvement activities. Assessment programs must be risk-informed, formally described and documented, and appropriately cover potentially high consequence activities” and “Contains an issues management process that is capable of categorizing the significance of findings based on risk and priority and other appropriate factors….” However, the term “risk-informed” is not defined in this or any other DOE order, and no formal guidance on how to integrate the two concepts currently exists. The Risk Management Guide for Defense Programs released by NA-18, Office of Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I), states it is “a framework and general guidance to program office personnel on the effective management of program risks and issues”, however it then defines issues as “events with 100% likelihood of affecting program objectives” and states “unless specified otherwise, the term “risk” will also serve to represent issues for the remainder of this plan,” severally limiting its ability to provide adequate guidance on this topic. Outside of DOE scope, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (U.S. NRC) imposes similar requirements. ASME NQA-1-2015 Requirement 16 states “Conditions adverse to quality shall be identified promptly and corrected as soon as practicable. In the case of a significant condition adverse to quality, the cause of the condition shall be determined, and corrective action taken to preclude recurrence. The identification, cause, and corrective action for significant conditions adverse to quality shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of management. Completion of corrective actions shall be verified”. The purpose of this document is to provide a best-in-class framework for an integrated risk and issues management process. This process would provide a robust feedback loop between risk management and issues management to: Enhance risk identification and characterization, use risk handling principles to improve corrective action planning, and ensure regulatory compliance.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2021

Importance of Depth and Artificial Structure as Predictors of Female Red Snapper Reproductive Parameters

Abstract The Red Snapper Lutjanus campechanus is a structure‐associated species occurring across a wide depth range in the northern Gulf of Mexico. We used the random forest machine learning algorithm to understand which habitat and individual fish characteristics could predict reproductive parameters of female Red Snapper. We evaluated fish captured from 2016 to 2018 on three artificial structure types with various structure heights at depths of 100 m or less. Overall, we found that depth and month were important predictors for most reproductive parameters, but the type of structure (artificial reefs, oil platforms, and rigs‐to‐reefs structures) was not important. Maturity was correctly classified in 88.9% of the cases when using the random forest ensemble model, with important predictors including FL, depth, structure height, and month of collection. Spawning seasonality (measured as gonadosomatic index [GSI]) was correctly classified in 59.5% of the cases when using histology reproductive phase, FL, month, and depth variables. Reproductively active or inactive females were correctly classified in 89.3% of the cases using GSI, month, FL, and depth, while females in the developing versus spawning capable phases were correctly classified in 82.2% of the cases using GSI, FL, month, and depth. Histological indicators that show potential spawning within a 36‐h period were correctly classified 61.5% of the time, with the best predictors being depth, FL, GSI, and month. Stepwise regression indicated that month was the only factor that significantly predicted contrasts in relative batch fecundity, with significantly greater values in August compared to all other months. Our findings suggest that female Red Snapper reproductive effort is not consistently or well predicted by artificial structure type or height but that a combination of fish FL, month, and depth can predict reproductive characteristics of female Red Snapper.

Brown‐Peterson, Nancy J.↗

DOE OSTI2025

ChatPORT: Fine-Tuned LLM for Easy Code {PORT}ing

Fine-tuning existing LLMs for specialized tasks has become a very attractive alternative due to its low cost and quick development cycle. With many pre-trained LLMs available, it is an increasingly complex task to choose the correct model as the starting point or base model. In this work we discuss ChatPORT - a specialized fine-tuned LLM geared towards providing correctly translated codes from one programming model to another. We evaluate a number of base models and compare and contrast their features and characteristics that make them a viable starting point. In this paper, we focus on the OpenMP offload porting capabilities of ChatPORT. We build our training data using kernels from the Heterogeneous Computing Benchmarks (HeCBench) [12] and the OpenMP Validation and Verification suite [5] to fine-tune the base models. We then test the model using unseen kernels extracted from the HeCBench benchmark suite. Our results show that: (1) not all open LLMs geared towards HPC are aware of programming models like OpenMP, (2) although all base models benefit from fine-tuning they learn differently and produce different correctness rates, (3) depending on the memory size and compute resource available, different base models can be used for fine-tuning without significantly affecting the quality of transpiled code they generate, (4) fine-tuning improved the correctness rate of the LLM by an average of 43.2%, and (5) feedback-based training data further increased the correctness rate by an average of 6% over the LLMs tested.

Pophale, Swaroop [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000185446367)↗

DOE OSTI2024

Thermal energy of a charm-meson molecule in a pion gas

The thermal corrections to the propagator of a loosely bound charm-meson molecule in a pion gas are calculated to next-to-leading order in the heavy-meson expansion using a zero-range effective field theory. Ultraviolet divergences in the charm-meson-pair self energy are canceled by corrections to the charm-meson-pair contact vertex. Terms that are singular at the charm-meson-pair threshold can be absorbed into thermal corrections to the rest energies and kinetic masses of the charm-meson constituents. The remaining terms reduce to a thermal correction to the binding momentum that is proportional to the pion number density and suppressed by the pion/charm-meson mass ratio. The correction gives a tiny decrease in the binding energy of the charm-meson molecule relative to the charm-meson-pair threshold in the pion gas and a change in its thermal width that is small compared to the thermal widths of the charm-meson constituents. These results are encouraging for the prospects of observing X(3872) and $T$$^{+}_{cc}$ (3875) in the expanding hadron gas produced by heavy-ion collisions.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

DOE OSTI2020

The many-body expansion for aqueous systems revisited: 1. Water-water interactions

We revisit the Many-Body Expansion (MBE) for water-water interactions by examining the effects of the basis set, including those resulting from the Basis Set Superposition Error (BSSE) correction, on the various terms for selected sizes of water clusters up to n = 21. The analysis is performed at the second order Møller-Plesset (MP2) perturbation theory with the family of augmented correlation consistent basis sets up to five zeta quality for the (H2O)n, n = 7, 10, 13, 16 and 21 clusters, for which we report either the complete MBE (n = 7, 10) or the one through the 6-body (n = 13) and the 5-body terms (n = 16, 21). Our results suggest that any sizeable contributions to the total cluster binding energy arising from the 5-body and larger terms are solely an artifact of the size of the basis set. Indeed, all terms above the 4-body converge monotonically to practically zero at the Complete Basis Set (CBS) limit. The magnitudes of the 5-body and above terms are accurately reproduced even with the smaller basis set of the series (aug-cc-pVDZ) once the BSSE correction is taken into account. The same level of theory (MP2/aug-cc-pVDZ, BSSEcorrected) also accurately reproduces the MP2/CBS values of the 3- and 4-body terms. The contribution of electron correlation to the 3- and 4-body terms is quite small, so that neglecting the correlation contribution in all terms above the 3-body results in an error of ??(0.1%). The BSSE correction to the largest 2-body term in the MBE was accurately estimated from the function ?? [1 + erf(-?? ??)], which is proportional to the common (overlapping) area between two Gaussian distributions whose centers are separated by R, with the constants ??, ?? fitted to the calculated BSSE corrections for the individual 2-body terms of the clusters with each basis set. Our results unquestionably demonstrate that the MBE for water-water interactions converges to the 4-body term, since any finite terms above the 4-body are artifacts of the size of the basis set and can be safely truncated at the 4-body term when either a very large basis set is used or BSSE corrections are taken into account even with the aug-cc-pVDZ basis set. We expect these findings to have important consequences in the pursuit of accurate many-body molecular dynamics simulations for aqueous systems.

Heindel, Joseph↗

DOE OSTI2022

IMPROVING THE ACCURACY OF COMPOSITE METHODS: A G4MP2 METHOD WITH G4-LIKE ACCURACY AND IMPLICATIONS FOR MACHINE LEARNING

G4MP2 theory has proven to be a reliable and accurate quantum chemical composite method for the calculation of molecular energies using an approximation based on second-order perturbation theory to lower computational costs compared to G4 theory. However, it has been found to have significantly increased errors when applied to larger organic molecules with 10 or more nonhydrogen atoms. We report here on an investigation of the cause of the failure of G4MP2 theory for such larger molecules. One source of error is found to be the "higher-level correction (HLC)", which is meant to correct for deficiencies in correlation contributions to the calculated energies. This is because the HLC assumes that the contribution is independent of the element and the type of bonding involved, both of which become more important with larger molecules. We address this problem by adding an atom-specific correction, dependent on atom type but not bond type, to the higher-level correction. We find that a G4MP2 method that incorporates this modification of the higher-level correction, referred to as G4MP2A, becomes as accurate as G4 theory (for computing enthalpies of formation) for a test set of molecules with less than 10 nonhydrogen atoms as well as a set with 10-14 such atoms, the set of molecules considered here, with a much lower computational cost. The G4MP2A method is also found to significantly improve ionization potentials and electron affinities. Finally, we implemented the G4MP2A energies in a machine learning method to predict molecular energies.

Dandu, Naveen↗