Computer vision based rock-bolt detection in orthomosaic imagery obtained in GPS-denied environments for mining safety assessments
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Benham, Kevin Andrew [Sandia National Laboratories↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Vision”
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.
Innovative Nuclear Technology and a Vision for the Future
Overview of INL and all the capabilities at the lab.
99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
RoadBench: A Vision-Language Foundation Model and Benchmark for Road Damage Understanding
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Xiao, Xi [ORNL] (ORCID:0009000009316982)↗
Future Electric Power Industry and Grids—Now What Again is Our Destination?
Having a vision that others agree to support and work toward is highly desirable but hard to achieve. We seem to lack a common and shared understanding of the vision—or worse, multiple visions (vivid mental images or documented statements) with varying areas of focus and details: • some appear to be similar but have differing underlying goals and characteristics, or • some reflect differing viewpoints as to effects on various stakeholders. These desirable and undesirable situations apply to realizing visions for enterprise and industry, including the electricity sector. Multiple industry stakeholder groups have developed goals, industry vision statements, and characterizations of the future. The viewpoints are promoted, discussed, refined by their stakeholder group, and often published to promote broad understanding and to inform or influence others. The GridWise Architecture Council asked itself how well-aligned these characterizations of the future are. If these publications collectively set the overall direction for the industry, it is useful to identify their answers to questions such as, where is the electric industry headed, guided by what objectives, and with what role(s) for the customers, electric utilities, and other stakeholders? Are these goals, visions, and future states moving toward a common vision, do they provide value for the stakeholders, and are they likely to meet the objective stated? This paper addresses these questions via an assessment and characterization of a sampling of stakeholder groups’ publicly available vision and future state reports for the electricity industry. Identified electric power grid architectural topic areas needing further work are described, along with GridWise Architecture Council analysis and observation, potential collaborative work efforts, and suggested next steps.
24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
Parallel asynchronous systems and image processing algorithms
A new hardware approach to implementation of image processing algorithms is described. The approach is based on silicon devices which would permit an independent analog processing channel to be dedicated to evey pixel. A laminar architecture consisting of a stack of planar arrays of the device would form a two-dimensional array processor with a 2-D array of inputs located directly behind a focal plane detector array. A 2-D image data stream would propagate in neuronlike asynchronous pulse coded form through the laminar processor. Such systems would integrate image acquisition and image processing. Acquisition and processing would be performed concurrently as in natural vision systems. The research is aimed at implementation of algorithms, such as the intensity dependent summation algorithm and pyramid processing structures, which are motivated by the operation of natural vision systems. Implementation of natural vision algorithms would benefit from the use of neuronlike information coding and the laminar, 2-D parallel, vision system type architecture. Besides providing a neural network framework for implementation of natural vision algorithms, a 2-D parallel approach could eliminate the serial bottleneck of conventional processing systems. Conversion to serial format would occur only after raw intensity data has been substantially processed. An interesting challenge arises from the fact that the mathematical formulation of natural vision algorithms does not specify the means of implementation, so that hardware implementation poses intriguing questions involving vision science.
Coon, D. D.↗
Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA's Constellation System: Interim Report
In 2004 NASA initiated studies of advanced science mission concepts known as the Vision Missions and inspired by a series of NASA roadmap activities conducted in 2003. Also in 2004 NASA began implementation of the first phases of a new space exploration policy, the Vision for Space Exploration. This implementation effort included development of a new human-carrying spacecraft, known as Orion, and two new launch vehicles, the Ares I and Ares V rockets.collectively called the Constellation System. NASA asked the National Research Council (NRC) to evaluate the science opportunities enabled by the Constellation System (see Preface) and to produce an interim report on a short time schedule and a final report by November 2008. The committee notes, however, that the Constellation System and its Orion and Ares vehicles have been justified by NASA and selected in order to enable human exploration beyond low Earth orbit, and not to enable science missions. This interim report of the Committee on Science Opportunities Enabled by NASA s Constellation System evaluates the 11 Vision Mission studies presented to it and groups them into two categories: those more deserving of future study, and those less deserving of future study. Although its statement of task also refers to Earth science missions, the committee points out that the Vision Missions effort was focused on future astronomy, heliophysics, and planetary exploration and did not include any Earth science studies because, at the time, the NRC was conducting the first Earth science decadal survey, and funding Earth science studies as part of the Vision Missions effort would have interfered with that process. Consequently, no Earth science missions are evaluated in this interim report. However, the committee will evaluate any Earth science mission proposal submitted in response to its request for information issued in March 2008 (see Appendix A). The committee based its evaluation of the preexisting Vision Missions studies on two criteria: whether the concepts offered the potential for a significant scientific advance, and whether or not the concepts would benefit from the Constellation System. The committee determined that all of the concepts offered the possibility of a significant scientific advance, but it cautions that such an evaluation ultimately must be made by the decadal survey process, and it emphasizes that this interim report s evaluation should not be considered to be an endorsement of the scientific merit of these proposals, which must of course be evaluated relative to other proposals. The committee determined that seven of these concepts would benefit from the Constellation System, whereas four would not, but it stresses that this conclusion does not reflect an evaluation of the scientific merit of the projects, but rather an assessment of whether or not new capabilities provided by the Constellation System could significantly affect them. Some of the mission concepts, such as the Advanced Compton Telescope, already offer a significant scientific advance and fit easily within the mass and volume constraints of existing launch vehicles. Other mission concepts, such as the Palmer Quest proposal to drill through the Mars polar cap, are not constrained by the launch vehicle, but rather by other technology limitations. The committee evaluated the mission concepts as presented to it, aware nevertheless that proposing a far larger and more ambitious mission with the same science goals might be possible given the capabilities of the Ares V launch vehicle. (Such proposals can be submitted in response to the committee s request for information to be evaluated in its final report.) See Table S.1 for a summary of the Vision Missions, including their cost estimates, technical maturity, and reasons that they might benefit from the Constellation System. The committee developed several findings and recommendations.
Source record↗
Strategic Energy Plan: Playa de Ponce, Ponce, Puerto Rico
Un Nuevo Amanecer Inc. (UNA), a community-based NGO (501C(3)), sought technical assistance through the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Energy Technology Innovation Partnership Project (ETIPP) to develop a strategic energy plan (SEP) for the community of Playa de Ponce on the south coast of Puerto Rico. A SEP helps communities identify energy goals and priority projects, and outline strategies and actions to build a shared path toward their energy vision. The primary goal of this SEP is to collaboratively explore pathways for the community's energy future. Researchers from the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) engaged with the community for a period of seven months and facilitated a series of in-person community engagement workshops along with ETIPP regional partner Puerto Rico Hispanic Federation, UNA, and community leaders. The SEP workshops were held twice, March 18-20 and June 24-26, 2025. Through facilitated discussions, the community worked together to define and articulate a clear vision for its short-, medium-, and long-term energy goals. The workshops played a key role in identifying the specific strategies and priority projects that would best suit the needs of the community. The discussions outlined the community's energy aspirations, establishing a shared vision, setting goals, and outlining the priority actions needed to bring them to fruition. During the workshops, the community shared some of the most pressing energy challenges that they face on a regular basis, such as high energy costs that disproportionately impact an aging population and unreliable electricity during extreme weather events that result in frequent power outages. These issues have also exacerbated risks to public health and safety of the community. In response, UNA requested technical assistance through ETIPP to inform the development of a SEP tailored to Playa de Ponce to support its energy vision. This document explores four community-driven energy strategies aligned with that vision. Figure 1 shows the strategies outlined in this plan, which are categorized into three focus areas as identified by the community: energy reliability; safety and security; and stakeholder participation, education, and capacity building. This document serves as a shared roadmap for developing and implementing energy solutions that meet the needs of Playa de Ponce. It is intended to serve as a public resource for the community, UNA, and local authorities - providing tools, information and a shared foundation to inform future implementation efforts. This plan is intended to complement ongoing planning frameworks at the municipal, regional, and island-wide levels. As a living document, this SEP can evolve alongside Playa de Ponce's changing energy goals, while offering a framework to help them realize their energy vision.
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
A summary of image segmentation techniques
Machine vision systems are often considered to be composed of two subsystems: low-level vision and high-level vision. Low level vision consists primarily of image processing operations performed on the input image to produce another image with more favorable characteristics. These operations may yield images with reduced noise or cause certain features of the image to be emphasized (such as edges). High-level vision includes object recognition and, at the highest level, scene interpretation. The bridge between these two subsystems is the segmentation system. Through segmentation, the enhanced input image is mapped into a description involving regions with common features which can be used by the higher level vision tasks. There is no theory on image segmentation. Instead, image segmentation techniques are basically ad hoc and differ mostly in the way they emphasize one or more of the desired properties of an ideal segmenter and in the way they balance and compromise one desired property against another. These techniques can be categorized in a number of different groups including local vs. global, parallel vs. sequential, contextual vs. noncontextual, interactive vs. automatic. In this paper, we categorize the schemes into three main groups: pixel-based, edge-based, and region-based. Pixel-based segmentation schemes classify pixels based solely on their gray levels. Edge-based schemes first detect local discontinuities (edges) and then use that information to separate the image into regions. Finally, region-based schemes start with a seed pixel (or group of pixels) and then grow or split the seed until the original image is composed of only homogeneous regions. Because there are a number of survey papers available, we will not discuss all segmentation schemes. Rather than a survey, we take the approach of a detailed overview. We focus only on the more common approaches in order to give the reader a flavor for the variety of techniques available yet present enough details to facilitate implementation and experimentation.
Spirkovska, Lilly↗
Low Gravity Materials Science Research for Space Exploration
On January 14, 2004, the President of the United States announced a new vision for the United States civil space program. The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has the responsibility to implement this new vision. The President also created a Presidential Commission 'to obtain recommendations concerning implementation of the new vision for space exploration.' The President's Commission recognized that achieving the exploration objectives would require significant technical innovation, research, and development in focal areas defined as 'enabling technologies.' Among the 17 enabling technologies identified for initial focus were advanced structures; advanced power and propulsion; closed-loop life support and habitability; extravehicular activity system; autonomous systems and robotics; scientific data collection and analysis; biomedical risk mitigation; and planetary in situ resource utilization. The Commission also recommended realignment of NASA Headquarters organizations to support the vision for space exploration. NASA has aggressively responded in its planning to support the vision for space exploration and with the current considerations of the findings and recommendations from the Presidential Commission. This presentation will examine the transformation and realignment activities to support the vision for space exploration that are underway in the microgravity materials science program. The heritage of the microgravity materials science program, in the context of residence within the organizational structure of the Office of Biological and Physical Research, and thematic and sub-discipline based research content areas, will be briefly examined as the starting point for the ongoing transformation. Overviews of future research directions will be presented and the status of organizational restructuring at NASA Headquarters, with respect to influences on the microgravity materials science program, will be discussed. Additional information is included in the original extended abstract.
Clinton, R. G., Jr.↗
Effects of Learning on Performance When Computerized Dynamic Posturography Assessments Are Repeated
Background: Computerized dynamic posturography is widely used to measure balance control performance. Clinically, performance is assessed by comparing individual data against standards obtained from a normative population. When performing repeated assessments to track performance changes, one must be concerned with the influence of learning effects. Subjects do not have the opportunity to practice before the first session, and often a second session is not performed prior to an experiment. Thus, the objective of this activity was to examine learning effects on balance control performance. We hypothesize that subjects will perform better on the second session when compared to the first, and that the difference will be greater for more difficult conditions. Methods: Data were collected from 204 subjects using the NeuroCom Equitest system during quiet stance with arms crossed at the chest on up to two sessions. All subjects performed standard sensory organization tests (SOTs) including 1) normal vision, fixed support; 2) absent vision, fixed support; 3) sway-referenced vision, fixed support; 4) normal vision, swayreferenced support; 5) absent vision, sway-referenced support; and 6) sway-referenced vision, sway-referenced support. 120 of these subjects performed modified sensory organization tests (mSOTs 2 and 5) which included static (20 back) and dynamic (20, 0.33Hz) head tilts. Median equilibrium scores (mEQ) were calculated from peak-to-peak anterior-posterior sway across trials. Data collected on the first session were then compared with the second to examine learning effect. Results: There were no differences in mEQ scores between the first and second sessions for SOTs 1, 2, and 4, while mEQ scores were higher for the second session when compared to the first for SOTs 3, 5, and 6 and for all mSOTs. Discussion: An additional familiarization session or practice trials prior to the first session may be necessary for more challenging SOT and mSOT conditions to minimize learning effect.
Taylor, Laura C.↗
Relating Standardized Visual Perception Measures to Simulator Visual System Performance
Human vision is quantified through the use of standardized clinical vision measurements. These measurements typically include visual acuity (near and far), contrast sensitivity, color vision, stereopsis (a.k.a. stereo acuity), and visual field periphery. Simulator visual system performance is specified in terms such as brightness, contrast, color depth, color gamut, gamma, resolution, and field-of-view. How do these simulator performance characteristics relate to the perceptual experience of the pilot in the simulator? In this paper, visual acuity and contrast sensitivity will be related to simulator visual system resolution, contrast, and dynamic range; similarly, color vision will be related to color depth/color gamut. Finally, we will consider how some characteristics of human vision not typically included in current clinical assessments could be used to better inform simulator requirements (e.g., relating dynamic characteristics of human vision to update rate and other temporal display characteristics).
Kaiser, Mary K.↗
Comparison of Active and Passive Head Impulse Testing of the Horizontal Vestibulo-Ocular Reflex: Exploring the Feasibility of Different Approaches for Spaceflight
INTRODUCTION: Astronauts experience a wide variety of sensorimotor disturbances primarily due to microgravity-induced vestibular adaptations during spaceflight. Head Impulse Testing (HIT) will be conducted during the Complement of Integrated Protocols for Human Exploration Research program(CIPHER) Vestibular Health study to examine changes in the horizontal vestibulo-ocular reflex in response to high-velocity head movements to detect changes in peripheral vestibular function [1,2]. However, correct interpretation will require consideration of potential artifacts and the constraints of conducting this test across different phases of the mission. Therefore, the aims of our study were to (1) examine reliability across different test operators, and (2) compare results of active (aHIT) versus passive (pHIT) approaches to evaluate the feasibility of self-administered versus operator-assisted approaches. A comparison of responses with visual viewing of a wall target (default condition) versus vision occluded evaluated the influence of other oculomotor control influence across conditions, and comparison with computer-generated rotator head impulse tests (rHIT) examined the variability associated with the ocular responses independent of the variability in executing the head movements themselves. METHODS: Seventeen non-astronaut volunteers (male n=12, age=22.9 ± 3.0; female n=5, age=27.0 ± 6.0, mean ± std) completed HIT testing using video-oculography (VOG) goggles and a high-torque rotator system. The test order was counterbalanced across conditions: (1) passive head-on-torso (pHIT, default condition for flight study) using two operators (Op1 and Op2), (2) active head-on-torso (aHIT, subject initiated), and (3) passive head and torso using rotary chair (rHIT). Eye and head movement data were processed to obtain gain in each direction. The main outcome measures were average gain and asymmetry [1], as well as the percentage of acceptable trials not excluded due to insufficient head amplitude or recording artifacts. RESULTS: While the pHIT gains were similar with vision (1.032 ± 0.043) and vision occluded (1.029 ± 0.038) conditions, the percentage of acceptable trials was greater with vision (Op1 = 93.0%, Op2 = 93.2%) versus occluded (Op1 = 70.7%, Op2 = 67.6%). The reliability between operators was greater for pHIT gain (Intraclass Correlation, ICC = 0.66, p = 0.001) than for pHIT asymmetry (ICC = 0.57, p = 0.01). The percentage of acceptable trials reduced by ~20% during the self-administered aHITs for both visual conditions and tended to be lower than computer-generated rHITs (76% versus 83%). While the aHIT gains were not significantly different than pHIT gains for vision or vision occluded conditions, these measures were poorly correlated. Both aHIT and pHIT gains were significantly greater than the rHIT gains, presumably due to the reduced velocities from the rotator. The asymmetry measures were poorly correlated across pHIT, aHIT, and rHIT conditions, although none of the subjects had asymmetries greater than 16%. DISCUSSION: Our findings support the feasibility of using the standard pHIT methodology for spaceflight. Similarities between visual conditions reflect that these responses are mediated by the peripheral lateral canals rather than other oculomotor mechanisms. The inter-tester reliability was acceptable despite differences in the tester training. In addition to concerns of non-vestibular mechanisms introduced during self-administered aHITs [2], operator-assisted pHITs resulted in higher percentage of acceptable trials and should result in more efficient and reliable measures during spaceflight.
M R Ehrenburg↗
Policy and Technology Readiness: Engaging the User and Developer Community to Develop a Research Roadmap
A key challenge for research roadmapping in the crisis response and management domain is articulation of a shared vision that describes what the future can and should include. Visioning allows for far-reaching stakeholder engagement that can properly align research with stakeholders needs. Engagement includes feedback from researchers, policy makers, general public, and end-users on technical and non-technical factors. This work articulates a process and framework for the construction and maintenance of a stakeholder-centric research vision and roadmap in the emergency management domain. This novel roadmapping process integrates three pieces: analysis of the research and technology landscape, visioning, and stakeholder engagement. Our structured engagement process elicits research foci for the roadmap based on relevance to stakeholder mission, identifies collaborators, and builds consensus around the roadmap priorities. We find that the vision process and vision storyboard helps SMEs conceptualize and discuss a technology's strengths, weaknesses, and alignment with needs
policy readiness↗
TH-C-204-00: Medical Physics Workshop: An Update On the Journal’s Improvement Activities and Guidance On Writing and Reviewing Papers
In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
TH-C-204-02: Improving Manuscript Quality Via Structured Reviews, Enhanced Scientific Category Taxonomy, and Outreach
In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
TH-C-204-03: Writing Good Scientific Papers and Responding to Critiques
In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
Remote Sensor Design for Visual Recognition with Convolutional Neural Networks
While deep learning technologies for computer vision have developed rapidly since 2012, modeling of remote sensing systems has remained focused around human vision. In particular, remote sensing systems are usually constructed to optimize sensing cost-quality trade-offs with respect to human image interpretability. While some recent studies have explored remote sensing system design as a function of simple computer vision algorithm performance, there has been little work relating this design to the state-of-the-art in computer vision: deep learning with convolutional neural networks. We develop experimental systems to conduct this analysis, showing results with modern deep learning algorithms and recent overhead image data. Our results are compared to standard image quality measurements based on human visual perception, and we conclude not only that machine and human interpretability differ significantly, but that computer vision performance is largely self-consistent across a range of disparate conditions. This repository contains all the code required to replicate the results of our research paper, and the corresponding docker environment in which that code can be executed. All code is written in Python3 and utilizes the PyTorch library (v1.0) for neural network model training and evaluation. Jupyter notebooks are used to visualize images transformed with our code, in addition to plotting experimental results. We also include the specific parameter files used to execute our experiments, with the intent that these experiments can be replicated.
Zelinski, michaelE.↗
Nanostructures for Electrical Energy Storage (NEES) (2020 Final Technical Report)
Nanostructures for Electrical Energy Storage (NEES, www.efrc.umd.edu) was an Energy Frontier Research Center supported by the DOE Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences, from 8/1/2009 to 7/31/2020. Led by the University of Maryland, NEES enjoyed extensive collaborations with its funded partners, including two DOE Laboratories and six universities. The NEES vision has been to reveal a set of scientific insights and design principles that can underpin a next-generation electrical energy storage approach, building on advances in nanoscale science and technology to achieve simultaneous high power and high energy over extended charge/discharge cycling. The vision is motivated by the recognition that scaling into the nano regime opens the door to new physical phenomena and that the tools enlisted in nanoscale research provide major new opportunities for the synthesis not only of materials at molecular scale but for structures at nano scale and above. NEES has translated this vision into its research program based on two observations. First, while the behavior of ions and electrons in electrolytes and in electrode materials is crucial to electrical energy storage (or more appropriately electrochemical energy storage), it is the transport of ion and electron charge between different structural components of a storage device that ultimately determine its performance. With it well recognized that the choice of electrode materials typically constrain ion transport kinetics as well as maximum ion concentration, the search for better electrode materials has been a primary driver of battery research. At the same time the synthesis of electrodes is typically based on aggregation of particles with varying size, shape, and orientation in the electrode. Together with the presence of additional materials to impart electrical conductivity and cohesion to the composite electrode, change in electrode materials is necessarily accompanied by structural changes at the nano/micro scale that are difficult to categorize and manage. From the beginning, NEES’ vision has been to create and study simpler, highly controlled spatial arrangements of known materials as battery components (electrodes, current collectors, and electrolyte) and to understand how design and structure above the molecular scale determines the energy storage performance available from known materials. Second, advances in nanoscience dramatically expanded the portfolio of synthesis methods, structural motifs, and new phenomena available for research. Some of these gave rapid access to new building blocks at the deep nanoscale (e.g., carbon nanotubes grown by self-assembly, nanoscale arrays formed by electrochemical self-alignment, monolayer films controlled by self-limiting reaction). Such advances served as the enabler for the NEES vision to be pursued experimentally through study of 3D structures created and controlled at the nano, micro, and meso scales. Here, we use meso as in the BES MESO Report, implying not only intermediate or varying length scales, but very much the way behavior is influenced by other factors including aggregation of nanocomponents at different densities and spatial configurations, statistical variations in the aggregates, hierarchical architectures in which they can be assembled, or local 3D configurations that result from the architectures. Over its life cycle, NEES has pursued two overarching goals: (1) to understand the scientific fundamentals of electrochemical storage from the nanoscale to the mesoscale; and (2) to create and learn from innovative, controlled, heterogeneous nanostructures, where such nanostructures can enable the first goal and serve as models for future paradigms in energy storage. Specific goals have included: Synthesize heterogeneous nanostructures comprised of multiple materials arranged in controlled fashion and characterize their behavior; Demonstrate and elucidate design principles for achieving simultaneous high power and high energy; Develop materials processes which enable precision control of thin layers and 3D structures; Investigate the impact of artificial interphases on electrode stability during ion insertion/deinsertion; Create dense arrays of nanostructures to understand how the architecture of these assemblies, along with nanostructure design, influences energy storage behavior at the mesoscale; Identify and understand the consequences of nanoconfinement and local inhomogeneities in 3D mesoscale arrays; Develop and apply computational models to stimulate, guide and interpret experiments.
25 ENERGY STORAGE↗