Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Color”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 1,351 records · Page 75
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Dataset of U.S. School Bus Depots

A large body of public health literature describes how undesirable or dangerous facilities, such as truck depots and industrial plants, located in or near communities can lead to health harms. Research also describes the high levels of traffic-related air and noise pollution that is linked to health harms and may be disproportionately distributed near many schools. Therefore, a primary use case for this dataset is to analyze the location of school bus depots and to create an evidence base that would better enable the work of community members, advocates, and other stakeholders toward improving air quality and public health. Other possible uses for this school bus depot dataset include electricity grid planning and reliability, given recent momentum toward school bus electrification. This dataset was created using an object-based approach with remote sensing data. The primary source of aerial imagery was the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP) dataset. NAIP imagery was analyzed to locate individual school buses based on their color and size, and then classified clusters of school buses as potential depots, which were then verified visually. The resulting dataset contains 11,309 depots across the 48 contiguous U.S. states and Washington, D.C. Fifty-one percent (5,730 depots) are at schools, defined as being 350 meters or less from the nearest school. The accuracy of the dataset was assessed by comparing it with independent reference datasets containing 506 depots from the records of two school transportation companies. We found good agreement, with an omission error rate of 15.2% (77 depots). This dataset represents one of the only remote sensing projects to conduct object detection using data at the sub-meter to 1-meter resolution for a continental-scale application.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Wet and dry plastic deposition data for western US National Atmospheric Deposition Program sites (2017-2019)

Raw plastic counts and calculated plastic deposition rates for 11 National Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP) sites in the western USA recorded from 2017-2019. Samples were collected to determine plastic deposition rates in remote locations and identify the potential sources of plastic to the atmosphere. Samples were collected using an Aerochem Metrics Wet and Dry sampler. Wet deposition refers to the material retained on a 0.45-micron filter. Dry deposition refers to the dry only deposition collected using a Dry Side Insert (DSI) (Brahney et al. 2020). Plastics are identified as either fibers or particles (includes small colored films). Wet deposition rates are recorded weekly and dry plastic deposition rates are based on monthly sampling intervals. Sites included are Grand Canyon National Park (AZ03), Joshua Tree National Park (CA67), Rocky Mountain National Park (CO98), Niwot Ridge (CO02), Ashley National Forest (UT95), East River SFA (CO10)), Craters of the Moon National Park (ID03), Great Basin National Park (NV05), Canyonlands National Park (UT09), Bryce Canyon Nationa Park (UT99), and Wind River Range (WY06). Data collection is being published in collaboration with the Department of Energy's research project, "Constraining physical understanding of aerosol loading, biogeochemistry, and snowmelt hydrology from hillslope to watershed scale in the East River Scientific Focus Areas.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Organic carbon feedbacks to soil structure in Profundihumic and Haplic Ferralsols in Campinas, Sao Paulo, Brazil

Increasing soil organic matter content coincides with increasing soil porosity and decreasing bulk density, but the mechanisms that lead to changes in soil structure are unclear. We quantified and compared soil characteristics across two contrasting soils (heavily weathered ferralsols in Brazil) to clarify the effects of organic matter content on soil porosity. We found that high organic matter content fosters higher biologic activity, including root growth and animal burrowing, which in turn increase soil porosity and decreases bulk density.This dataset includes soil physical, morophological, and chemical variables from 6 soil profiles were sampled in Campinas, Sa ̃o Paulo state, southeastern Brazil to 1 m depth. Sites are regenerated mixed savanna and rainforest in the protected area of Viracopos Airport in Campinas, lightly grazed by cattle.This dataset includes soil color, bulk density, texture (percent sand, silt, clay, and coarse fragments as well as class), soil pH, cation exchange capacity, C stock, C concentration, N stock, N concentration, delta 13C, Delta 14C, and soil porosity in Excel and csv format.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Data for Myers-Pigg et al. (2026), "Short-term coastal forest responses to a hurricane-scale freshwater and saltwater flooding experiment"

Coastal upland forests are exposed to intensifying precipitation regimes and sea level rise, increasing tree mortality and transforming these coastal forests into wetland ecosystems. Despite these well-known risks, the differing degrees to which hydrological, biogeochemical, and biological components of upland forests respond to novel salinity exposure is relatively unknown. The Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) experiment decouples two distinct disturbances associated with hydrological extremes: (1) flooding from heavy precipitation and (2) exposure to saline conditions from storm surge. This dataset includes data reported in Myers-Pigg et al. (2025), which analyzed data from the first TEMPEST flooding treatment in 2022. This includes: - Colored dissolved organic matter in porewaters - Soil temperature and oxygen - Groundwater temperature and chemistry - Dissolved organic carbon concentrations in porewaters - Soil-to-atmosphere CH4 and CO2 fluxes - Soil temperature, water content, and electrical conductivity - Root-influenced CH4 and CO2 flux - Tree sap flow velocity - The R analytical code and documentation about the computational environmental in which it was run (the "sessionInfo.txt" file) All data files are plain-text comma separated value (CSV) and no special software is required to read them.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Dataset for Cruz-O'Byrne et al (2026): "Divergent biogeochemical responses in upland coastal forest soils to repeated flooding and shifts in water chemistry"

Hydrologic disturbances from accelerated sea-level rise and the increasing frequency and intensity of storms and tidal flooding are altering biogeochemical processes in upland coastal forests, transforming these ecosystems into wetlands. However, the initial effects of flooding on belowground biogeochemistry and the mechanisms driving greenhouse gas dynamics and soil organic matter stability during the early stages of this transition remain poorly understood. This dataset presents the results of a mesocosm experiment conducted in a controlled, highly instrumented laboratory environment, in which freshwater and brackish water pulses were applied to intact soil monoliths from a temperate upland coastal forest to examine how floodwater chemistry influences soil biogeochemistry and organo-mineral interactions. All data files are plain-text CSV (comma-separated value), and no special software is required to read them. Details about the content of each file are available in the document “Dataset_readme”. The dataset consists of the following data: • rcruzobyrne_moisture: Soil volumetric water content (VWC) • rcruzobyrne_GHG: Headspace greenhouse gas (GHG) concentration and fluxes • rcruzobyrne_methane_isotopes: Headspace methane isotope signature • rcruzobyrne_porewater: Porewater chemistry • rcruzobyrne_CDOM: Porewater colored dissolved organic matter (CDOM) • rcruzobyrne_FTIR: Soil Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy Details of the experimental setup, data collection, and data analysis are provided in the manuscript by Cruz-O’Byrne et al (2026) Divergent biogeochemical responses in upland coastal forest soils to repeated flooding and shifts in water chemistry. Biogeochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10533-026-01340-0

EARTH SCIENCE > ATMOSPHERE > GREENHOUSE GAS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

CHESS 2025: Crown polygons and extracted reflectance for field sampling sites

This dataset contains (1) crown polygons for each tree, meadow, and shrub site sampled in the 2025 Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) campaign (in geojson format, .geojson) and (2) extracted reflectance, uncertainty, and shade estimates for each crown polygon from the 2018 National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) and 2025 CHESS campaigns. (in CSV format, .csv). Additional metadata are provided in a data dictionary describing column names and definitions (dd.csv), and in a file-level metadata file (flmd.csv). Crown polygons were manually delineated for each site in the 2025 campaign using a combination of field-collected GPS data (doi:10.15485/3022418), RGB (red, green, blue) and false color reflectance mosaics (doi:10.15485/3013535), and LiDAR-derived (Light Detection and Ranging) canopy height (CHM) and digital surface (DSM) models (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). Where there was misalignment between the spectrometer- and LiDAR-derived data products, polygons prioritized alignment with the spectrometer-derived data products. Polygons were delineated conservatively to only select pixels representative of vegetation samples collected in the field. Crown polygons for 2018 are published at (doi:10.15485/1618130) and were developed using the same protocol. For each polygon, all pixels from all flightlines were extracted where the pixel centroid was contained within the polygon. For each pixel, we extracted the surface reflectance, uncertainty, and shade estimates. Details on the extracted datasets are available at (doi:10.15485/3013527, doi:10.15485/3013535). 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 Acknowledgment: This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004) and was funded by EMIT Extended Mission Phase E Science.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2024

Triangular cross-section beam splitters in silicon carbide for quantum information processing

Abstract Triangular cross-section color center photonics in silicon carbide is a leading candidate for scalable implementation of quantum hardware. Within this geometry, we model low-loss beam splitters for applications in key quantum optical operations such as entanglement and single-photon interferometry. We consider triangular cross-section single-mode waveguides for the design of a directional coupler. We optimize parameters for a 50:50 beam splitter. Finally, we test the experimental feasibility of the designs by fabricating triangular waveguides in an ion beam etching process and identify suitable designs for short-term implementation.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Evaluation of sucrose crystallization kinetics using confocal microscopy: Determining differences in sucrose crystallization kinetics between single and polycrystal studies

Sucrose solution crystal growth kinetics are dependent on temperature, concentration, and impurities. A double polarized confocal microscopy system was used to obtain photographs with high contrast between growing crystals and the background for color background removal image processing. Seeded solutions of 72 wt% sucrose at 27, 35, 45, and 55°C were compared for single and polycrystals. Polycrystal analysis was determined to offer more rapid image processing and to be more applicable to systems in real operating conditions, while single-crystal analysis was determined to give more comprehensive descriptions of individual crystal behavior at the cost of slower processing.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Anatomy of Continuous Mars SEIS and Pressure Data from Unsupervised Learning

The seismic noise recorded by the Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy, and Heat Transport (InSight) seismometer (Seismic Experiment for Interior Structure [SEIS]) has a strong daily quasi-periodicity and numerous transient microevents, associated mostly with an active Martian environment with wind bursts, pressure drops, in addition to thermally induced lander and instrument cracks. That noise is far from the Earth’s microseismic noise. Quantifying the importance of nonstochasticity and identifying these microevents is mandatory for improving continuous data quality and noise analysis techniques, including autocorrelation. Cataloging these events has so far been made with specific algorithms and operator’s visual inspection. We investigate here the continuous data with an unsupervised deep-learning approach built on a deep scattering network. This leads to the successful detection and clustering of these microevents as well as better determination of daily cycles associated with changes in the intensity and color of the background noise. We first provide a description of our approach, and then present the learned clusters followed by a study of their origin and associated physical phenomena. We show that the clustering is robust over several Martian days, showing distinct types of glitches that repeat at a rate of several tens per sol with stable time differences. We show that the clustering and detection efficiency for pressure drops and glitches is comparable to or better than manual or targeted detection techniques proposed to date, noticeably with an unsupervised approach. Finally, here we discuss the origin of other clusters found, especially glitch sequences with stable time offsets that might generate artifacts in autocorrelation analyses. We conclude with presenting the potential of unsupervised learning for long-term space mission operations, in particular, for geophysical and environmental observatories.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

News and Notes: SSA Task Force on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Toward a Changing, Inclusive Future in Earthquake Science

In the United States, a wide variety of studies show that the geoscience community does not reflect the broader societal makeup (e.g., Velasco and Jaurrieta de Velasco, 2010; Dutt, 2020; Howley, 2020). In fact, only about 10% of all Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) Ph.D. degrees are awarded to people of color, although they represent more than a third of the population (Dutt, 2020). These numbers have changed little over the past 40 years (e.g., Bernard and Cooperdock, 2018; Dutt, 2020). Recent events in the United States have again raised awareness of this discrepancy in many fields; similar divergences may be present throughout the world. How this discrepancy represents a tremendous loss of talent and contributes to ongoing bias and racism is discussed.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

ORBITAL ANGULAR MOMENTUM BEAMS RESEARCH USING A FREE-ELECTRON LASER OSCILLATOR

Orbital angular momentum (OAM) photon beams are excellent tools for non-contact optical manipulation of mat- ter in a broad photon energy range. A free-electron laser (FEL) oscillator is well-suited for studying OAM beams with various features including a wide spectral coverage, wavelength tunability, two-color lasing, polarization control, etc. Here, we report the first experimental demonstration of superposed OAM beams from an oscillator FEL. Lasing at around 458 nm, we have generated superposed OAM beams up to the fourth order as a superposition of two pure OAM modes with opposite helicities. These generated beams have a good beam quality, a high degree of circular polarization, and high power. Using external rf modulation with frequen- cies from 1 to 30 Hz, we also developed a pulsed mode operation of the OAM beams with a highly reproducible temporal structure. FEL operation showcased in this work can be extended to higher photon energies, e.g. using a future x-ray FEL oscillator. The operation of such an OAM FEL also paves the way for the generation of OAM gamma-ray beams via Compton scattering.

Liu, P.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Molecular and morphological characterization of a first report of Cactodera torreyanae Cid del Prado Vera & Subbotin, 2014 (Nematoda: Heteroderidae) from Minnesota, the United States of America

Cactodera torreyanae Cid del Prado Vera & Subbotin, 2014 cysts were discovered during a Pale Potato Cyst Nematode (PCN) survey conducted by Minnesota Department of Agriculture as part of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) efforts to survey states for the presence of PCN. The soil samples were collected from a potato field, located in Karlstad, Kittson County, Minnesota, USA. Two out of 175 vials submitted for identification to the Mycology and Nematology Genetic Diversity and Biology Laboratory (MNGDBL) contained few cysts and juveniles of C. torreyanae. Cysts were dark brown in color, lemon-shaped to elongated with distinct vulval cone. Vulva with denticles present around fenestra, cyst length to width ratio between 1.6 and 2.3 and anus distinct. The juveniles had rounded stylet knobs, some sloping slightly posteriorly. The molecular analysis included sequence and phylogenetic analysis of ITS rRNA, D2-D3 expansion segments of 28S rRNA and COI of mtDNA genes. The nematode species was identified by both morphological and molecular means as Cactodera torreyanae. To the best of our knowledge this represents the first report of Cactodera torreyanae from the United States and first report of this cyst nematode species from potato fields. Definite host plant for this nematode remains unknown.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Spectroscopic evidence for the Fe3+ spin transition in iron-bearing δ-AlOOH at high pressure

δ-AlOOH has emerged as a promising candidate for water storage in the lower mantle and could have delivered water into the bottom of the mantle. To date, it still remains unclear how the presence of iron affects its elastic, rheological, vibrational, and transport properties, especially across the spin crossover. In this study, we conducted high-pressure X-ray emission spectroscopy experiments on a δ-(Al 0.85 Fe 0.15 ) OOH sample up to 53 GPa using silicone oil as the pressure transmitting medium in a diamond-anvil cell. We also carried out laser Raman measurements on δ-(Al 0.85 Fe 0.15 )OOH and δ-(Al 0.52 Fe 0.48 )OOH up to 57 and 62 GPa, respectively, using neon as the pressure-transmitting medium. Evolution of Raman spectra of δ-(Al 0.85 Fe 0.15 )OOH with pressure shows two new bands at 226 and 632 cm –1 at 6.0 GPa, in agreement with the transition from an ordered ( P 2 1 nm ) to a disordered hydrogen bonding structure ( Pnnm ) for δ-AlOOH. Similarly, the two new Raman bands at 155 and 539 cm –1 appear in δ-(Al 0.52 Fe 0.48 )OOH between 8.5 and 15.8 GPa, indicating that the incorporation of 48 mol% FeOOH could postpone the order-disorder transition upon compression. On the other hand, the satellite peak ( K β') intensity of δ-(Al 0.85 Fe 0.15 )OOH starts to decrease at ~30 GPa and it disappears completely at 42 GPa. That is, δ-(Al 0.85 Fe 0.15 )OOH undergoes a gradual electronic spin-pairing transition at 30–42 GPa. Furthermore, the pressure dependence of Raman shifts of δ-(Al 0.85 Fe 0.15 )OOH discontinuously decreases at 32–37 GPa, suggesting that the improved hydrostaticity by the use of neon pressure medium could lead to a relatively narrow spin crossover. Notably, the pressure dependence of Raman shifts and optical color of δ-(Al 0.52 Fe 0.48 )OOH dramatically change at 41–45 GPa, suggesting that it probably undergoes a relatively sharp spin transition in the neon pressure medium. Together with literature data on the solid solutions between δ-AlOOH and ε-FeOOH, we found that the onset pressure of the spin transition in δ-(Al,Fe)OOH increases with increasing FeOOH content. These results shed new insights into the effects of iron on the structural evolution and vibrational properties of δ-AlOOH. The presence of FeOOH in δ-AlOOH can substantially influence its high-pressure behavior and stability at the deep mantle conditions and play an important role in the deep-water cycle

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Higgs-confinement transitions in QCD from symmetry protected topological phases

In gauge theories with fundamental matter there is typically no sharp way to distinguish confining and Higgs regimes, e.g. using generalized global symmetries acting on loop order parameters. It is standard lore that these two regimes are continuously connected, as has been explicitly demonstrated in certain lattice and continuum models. We point out that Higgsing and confinement sometimes lead to distinct symmetry protected topological (SPT) phases -- necessarily separated by a phase transition -- for ordinary global symmetries. We present explicit examples in 3+1 dimensions, obtained by adding elementary Higgs fields and Yukawa couplings to QCD while preserving parity P and time reversal T. In a suitable scheme, the confining phases of these theories are trivial SPTs, while their Higgs phases are characterized by non-trivial P- and T-invariant theta-angles θ f , θ g = π for flavor or gravity background gauge fields, i.e. they are topological insulators or superconductors. Finally, we consider conventional three-flavor QCD (without elementary Higgs fields) at finite U(1) B baryon-number chemical potential μ B , which preserves P and T. At very large μ B , three-flavor QCD is known to be a completely Higgsed color superconductor that also spontaneously breaks U(1) B . We argue that this high-density phase is in fact a gapless SPT, with a gravitational theta-angle θ g = π that safely co-exists with the U(1) B Nambu-Goldstone boson. We explain why this SPT motivates unexpected transitions in the QCD phase diagram, as well as anomalous surface modes at the boundary of quark-matter cores inside neutron stars.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Octet scalars shaping LHC distributions in 4-jet final states

We study properties of a hypothetical scalar particle, Θ, which is a color octet and an electroweak singlet. At hadron colliders, Θ is pair produced through its QCD coupling to gluons, so that its mass determines the cross section. It decays at tree level into $q\bar{q}$ through dimension-5 operators, and at one loop into gluons. Thus, the main LHC signature of Θ is a pair of dijets of equal invariant mass. The CMS search in this channel shows a 3.6σ excess over the QCD background for a dijet mass M jj ≈ 0.95 TeV, which can be due to Θ : its production cross section (65 fb for a real scalar) and the acceptance of the CMS event selection applied to pp → ΘΘ → ($q\bar{q}$) ($q\bar{q}$) yield a rate consistent with the excess. Furthermore, the shape of the dσ/dM jj signal is in agreement with the CMS result. Given the data-driven background fit performed by CMS, we find that a complex scalar (whose production rate is twice as large) fits better the data than a real scalar. Besides the pair of dijets, testable LHC signals include a trijet-dijet topology, a $t\bar{t}$ pair plus a dijet resonance, as well as final states involving a Higgs, W or Z boson plus jets.

Dobrescu, Bogdan A. [Fermi National Accelerator La↗