Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Physics informed machine learning”

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.

1,082 records · Page 61
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Status Report on Regulatory Criteria Applicable to the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)

Although the interest in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in nuclear energy is increasing rapidly, at present their implementation is limited. This rapid increase in interest is not surprising considering that implementing AI and ML technology would allow for continuous monitoring, facilitate the implementation of predictive maintenance with optimized staffing plans, enable automation and autonomy opportunities that could drastically reduce fixed operation and maintenance costs, and provide training for operations and maintenance. Other industries are using AI for construction, and in the nuclear arena AI could provide great benefit in decommissioning activities. The ability of AI and ML to operate in real time vastly increases their potential impact. Before AI can be used in design, operations, or as a regulatory tool, the specifics on the regulations applicable to the use of AI for nuclear power applications need to be established. The difficulty is that the specific use cases will dictate the applicability of regulations. For example, even within the application domain associated with operations, the regulations might vary if the AI is used to create a virtual reference for plant operations or is used for training, optimization of maintenance intervals, prioritization of maintenance activities, etc. Different still is if the AI is to be used for design or setting technical specifications, which will introduce additional requirements. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing reviews are based on an applicant’s design meeting its performance assessment based on (1) safety goals and objectives, (2) deterministic and/or probabilistic analysis of accident scenarios, and (3) quantitative assessment of design alternatives against the safety goals and objectives using accepted engineering tools, methodologies, and performance criteria. The current regulatory framework does not explicitly address AI or autonomous control. However, as implementing AI technology will require the use of a digital platform, it must meet the requirements of an instrumentation and control (I&C) system. The regulatory requirements for AI, which will be incorporated into the I&C system, will be very dependent on how it is used (i.e., its functionality, safety classification, etc.). The licensing process is primarily risk-based with the identification of components and systems as nonsafety, important to safety, or safety related. A risk-informed approach allows further gradation of components and systems based on risk metrics such as core damage frequency or large early release fractions. Thus, the use cases and the risk categorization of impacted systems and components will determine the regulatory requirements. Regardless of how AI is used it presents new opportunities for risk-informing operating, maintenance, and regulatory decisions. Trustworthiness, transparency, and the ability to validate and verify the results will be paramount in showing that the systems and plant still meet their performance requirements. This report describes the results of research to identify regulatory implications of AI technologies and their uses. Specifically, this report reviews current regulatory guidance relevant to the application of AI for design (including design changes or new designs including advanced reactors), construction, operations, training, maintenance, research, testing, and as a regulatory tool. AI can be automated at different levels from purely informative purposes to autonomous controls. The focus of this review included determination of constraints on the application of AI technology, identification of any regulatory gaps or uncertainties, and clarification of anticipated technical basis information likely to be important for regulatory acceptance of these technologies. Currently, any use of AI at nuclear power plants is focused on nonsafety-related applications. The NRC and other regulatory bodies are evaluating providing guidance to address gaps rather than create new regulations to address the use of AI and ML. This approach seems to be the best to encourage AI development without adding regulatory uncertainty.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

ORNL_AISD-Ex: Quantum chemical prediction of UV/Vis absorption spectra for over 10 million organic molecules

We performed calculations of electronic excitation energies and associated oscillator strengths based on the time-dependent density-functional tight-binding (TD-DFTB) method [1]. The SMILES (Simplified molecular-input line-entry system) strings of the molecules from the AISD HOMO-LUMO database [2] were converted to a 3D atomistic structure and stored in a PDB file after preliminary geometry optimization using the Merck Molecular Force Field (MMFF94) in RDKit [3,4]. The primary information stored in the PDB file archive consists of Cartesian coordinates for each atom of the molecule in their 3D location in space, along with summary information about the structure, sequence, and experiment. We then performed molecular geometry optimization using the density-functional tight-binding (DFTB) method [5] in the electronic ground state, followed by single-point excited states calculations, as described below. We note that, since RDKit employs a random choice for the generation of molecular conformers, the molecular geometries obtained in this dataset could be different from the ones that were generated when the AISD HOMO-LUMO dataset was generated. The computed excitation energies and associated oscillator strengths can be converted to predict UV/Vis absorption spectra, where excitation energies correspond to absorption peak positions, and oscillator strengths are a good measure of the probability of absorption of visible or UV light in transitions between electronic ground and excited states. The conversion of SMILES strings to 3D Cartesian coordinates of fully DFTB-optimized molecules was successful for 10,502,904 out of 10,502,917 molecules. For these molecules, both geometry optimizations and excited states calculations were successful. The DFTB calculations did not complete for 13 molecules of the original AISD HOMO-LUMO dataset. We still provide information about the geometry of these molecules. The molecules are diverse for chemical compositions (which span 5 non-hydrogen elements: oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, fluorine, sulfur) and molecular size (the smallest molecule contains 5 non-hydrogen atoms, and the largest molecule contains 71 non-hydrogen atoms). The DFTB method [5] is an approximation to density functional theory (DFT), utilizing a minimal basis set in conjunction with a two-center approximation to the electronic Hamiltonian and overlap matrix elements. The DFTB total energy is the sum of an electronic and a repulsive energy contribution, and their calculation requires optimized electronic parameters and diatomic repulsive potential energy functions. All DFTB calculations were performed using the DFTB+ code [6] (version 21.2) and the wrapper for DFTB+ in the Atomic Simulation Environment (ASE) (version 3.22.1) [7], which performed an internal conversion of Cartesian coordinates from PDB to the .gen file format. For the geometry optimizations on the electronic ground state potential energy surface of the molecules, we have chosen the third-order DFTB (DFTB3) method [5c] and employed the matching 3ob set of electronic parameters and repulsive potentials [8]. The empirical γ-damping for hydrogen bond correction, and Grimme's D3 empirical dispersion correction with Becke-Johnson damping (D3(BJ)) [9] dispersion correction was included to improve the description of non-covalent interactions. For excited states single-point energy calculations, we employed the TD-DFTB method in conjunction with the DFTB2 method [5b] and the matching mio [5b,10] and halorg [11] parameter sets. We opted to request the simultaneous calculation of 50 excited states for singlet transition to investigate sufficient number of excited states, based on linear response theory using the Casida equation [Ref: T. A. Niehaus, S. Suhai, F. Della Sala, P Lugli, M. Elstner, G. Seifert, and Th. Frauenheim. Tight-binding approach to time-dependent density-functional response theory. Phys. Rev. B, 63:085108, 2001] and the ARPACK diagonalizer [R. B. Lehoucq, D. C. Sorensen, and C. Yang. Arpack users guide: Solution of large-scale eigenvalue problems by implicitly restarted arnoldi methods, 1997. 46, 51]. The dataset contains 1001 tar.gz files. Tar files are named as “ornl_aisd_ex_1.tar.gz†through “ornl_aisd_ex_1000.tar.gzâ€. Additionally, the 13 failed molecules are in “ornl_aisd_ex_unprocessed.tar.gzâ€. Except for the tar files listed below, each tar file contains 10,500 molecules. Tar files numbered 34, 121, 128, 352, 360, 429, 495, 509, 518, 627, 676, 668, and 862 contain 10,499 molecules each. The last tar file numbered 1000 contains 13,417 molecules. The total size of the uncompressed dataset is over 283 Gigabytes. The code for calculating the electronic excitation energies and statistical analysis of the dataset is provided at the following GitLab repository: https://github.com/ORNL/Analysis-of-Large-Scale-Molecular-Datasets-with-Python Calculating the UV spectrum of a molecule requires performing 3 main operations: 1. Converting the smiles string representation of a molecule into a geometric structure where each atom is assigned XYZ coordinates. The geometric structure is written to the file smiles.pdb. 2. Using smiles.pdb to compute the relaxed geometry of the molecule, which corresponds with the position of the atoms at the position of equilibrium at the ground state. This generates the files band.out, detailed.out, and geo_end.gen. 3. Using geo_end.gen to calculate the UV spectrum of the molecule which is written into the file EXC.DAT. Every molecule in the dataset has its own directory. The files contained in each molecule directory are as follows: 1. geo_end.gen 2. detailed.out 3. band.out 4. EXC.DAT 5. smiles.pdb REFERENCES [1] Niehaus, T. A.; Suhai, S.; Della Salla, F.; Lugli, P.; Elstner, M.; Seifert, G.; Frauenheim, Th. Tight-binding approach to time-dependent density-functional response theory. Phys. Rev. B, 2001, 63, 085108/1-9. [2] Blanchard, A.; Gounley, J.; Metha, K.; Yoo, P.; Irle, S. AISD HOMO-LUMO. DOI: 10.13139/ORNLNCCS/1869409 [3] RDKit: Cheminformatics and Machine Learning Software. 2013, [http://www.rdkit.org] [4] Tosco, P.; Stiefl, N. and Landrum, G. Bringing the MMFF force field to the RDKit: implementation and validation. J Cheminform. 2014, 6, 1–4. [5] a) Porezag, D.; Frauenheim, T.; Kohler, T.; Seifert, G.; Kaschner, Construction of tight-binding-like potentials on the basis of density-functional theory: Application to carbon, R. Phys. Rev. B 1995, 51, 12947-12957; b) Elstner, M.; Porezag, D.; Jungnickel, G.; Elsner, J.; Haugk, M.; Frauenheim, Th.; Suhai, S.; Seifert, G.; Phys. Rev. B 1998, 58, 7260-7268; c) Gaus, M.; Cui, Q.; Elstner, M. DFTB3: Extension of the Self-Consistent-Charge Density-Functional Tight-Binding Method (SCC-DFTB), J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2011, 7, 931-948; d) Cui, Q.; Elstner, M. Density functional tight binding: values of semi-empirical methods in an ab initio era, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2014, 16, 14368-14377. [6] Hourahine, B. et al. DFTB+, a software package for efficient approximate density functional theory based atomistic simulations, J. Chem. Phys. 2020, 152, 124101/1-19. [7] Larsen, A. H. et al. The atomic simulation environment—a Python library for working with atoms. J. Phys.: Cond. Matter 2017, 29, 273002. [8] Kubillus, M.; Kubar, T.; Gaus, M.; Rezac, J.; Elstner, M. Parameterization of the DFTB3 Method for Br, Ca, Cl, F, I, K, and Na in Organic and Biological Systems, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2015, 11, 332-342. [9] Brandenburg, J. G.; Grimme, S. Accurate Modeling of Organic Molecular Crystals by Dispersion-Corrected Density Functional Tight Binding (DFTB), J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2014, 5, 1785−1789. [10] a) Niehaus, T. A.; Elstner, M.; Frauenheim, Th.; Suhai, S. Application of an approximate density-functional method to sulfur containing compounds. J. Mol. Struct.: THEOCHEM 2001, 541, 185-94; b) Elstner, M.; Hobza, P.; Frauenheim, Th.; Suhai, S.; Kaxiras, E. Hydrogen bonding and stacking interactions of nucleic acid base pairs: A density-functional-theory based treatment. J. Chem. Phys. 2001, 114, 5149-55. [11] Kubar, T.; Bodrog, Z.; Gaus, M.; Köhler, C.; Aradi, B.; Frauenheim, Th.; Elstner, M. Parametrization of the SCC-DFTB Method for Halogens. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 2013, 9, 2939-49.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗