SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CS6 Central Sands Irrigated Agricultural Field. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CS6 Central Sands Irrigated Agricultural Field produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Worzella Farms Center-Pivot Irrigated Potato Field
This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CS8 Central Sands Irrigated Agricultural Field. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CS8 Central Sands Irrigated Agricultural Field produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Worzella Farms Center-Pivot Irrigated Potato Field
This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Dk1 Duke Forest-open field. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Dk1 Duke Forest-open field produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - The Duke Forest grass field is approximately 480×305 m, dominated by the C3 grass Festuca arundinacea Shreb. (tall fescue) includes minor components of C3 herbs and the C4 grass Schizachyrium scoparium (Michx.) Nash, not considered here. The site was burned in 1979 and is mowed annually during the summer for hay according to local practices. Lai, C.T. and G.G. Katul, 2000, "The dynamic role of root-water uptake in coupling potential to actual transpiration" , Advances in Water Resources, 23, 427-439; Novick , K.A., P. C. Stoy, G. G. Katul, D. S. Ellsworth, M. B. S. Siqueira, J. Juang, R. Oren, 2004, Carbon dioxide and water vapor exchange in a warm temperate grassland, Oecologia, 138, 259-274; Stoy PC, Katul GG, Siqueira MBS, Juang J-Y, McCarthy HR, Oishi AC, Uebelherr JM, Kim H-S, Oren R (2006). Separating the effects of climate and vegetation on evapotranspiration along a successional chronosequence in the southeastern U.S. Global Change Biology 12:2115-2135
This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.
This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-xDC NEON Dakota Coteau Field School (DCFS). This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-xDC NEON Dakota Coteau Field School (DCFS) produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - The Dakota Coteau Field School (DCFS) and Prairie Lake (PRLA) field sites are co-located in an agricultural area used primarily for cattle grazing, just a few miles east of the Woodworth and Prairie Pothole sites at the Chase Lake National Wildlife Refuge. DCFS covers 7.8 km2 (3 square miles) of grazing land in Stutsman County, ND, between the tiny communities of Pingree and Woodworth. The population here is sparse, but the land has been transformed by agricultural activities over the last 150 years. The field site has been used only for grazing, but other land in the surrounding area has been converted to corn and soybean production. DCFS is located in an area known as the "Prairie Pothole Region," a band of tall and mixed prairie that stretches across parts of North and South Dakota, Minnesota and the Canadian provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Historically, this area supported tall to mid-height prairie grasses, including blue gamma and green needlegrass. The land here is pocked by thousands of depressions left behind by glaciers 10,000 years ago, resulting in a series of small lakes and wetland areas known as prairie potholes. These potholes receive most of their water from spring snowmelt and are a primary source of groundwater recharge for the region. NEON data will help researchers monitor the effects of climate change on the Northern Plains ecosystem. Over the last 30 years, the hydrological cycle in the plains has changed dramatically, trending wetter overall and diverging from the historical ten-year cycles. Temperatures are also rising, leading to changes in plant phenology cycles and species distribution that could negatively impact migratory bird populations and other animal species.
We present a geostatistics-based stochastic salinity estimation framework for the Montebello Oil Field that capitalizes on available total dissolved solids (TDS) data from groundwater samples as well as electrical resistivity (ER) data from borehole logging. Data from TDS samples (n = 4924) was coded into an indicator framework based on falling below four selected thresholds (500, 1000, 3000, and 10,000 mg/L). Collocated TDS-ER data from the surrounding groundwater basin were then employed to produce a kernel density estimator to establish conditional probabilities for ER data (n = 8 boreholes) falling below the selected TDS thresholds within the Montebello Oil Field area. Directional variograms were estimated from these indicator coded data, and 500 TDS realizations from conditional indicator simulation were generated for the subsurface region above the Montebello Oil Field reservoir. Simulations were summarized as 3D maps of median TDS, most likely salinity class, and probability for exceeding each of the specified TDS thresholds. Results suggested TDS was below 500 mg/L in most of the study area, with a trend toward higher values (500 to 1000 mg/L) to the southwest; consistent with the average regional groundwater flow direction. Discrete localized zones of TDS greater than 1000 mg/L were observed, with one of these zones in the greater than 10,000 mg/L range; however, these areas were not prevalent. The probabilistic approach used here is adaptable and is readily modified to include additional data and types and can be employed in time-lapse salinity modeling through Bayesian updating.
This dataset is associated with the “River Monitoring Photos” (RMP) study and subsequent manuscript (Bao et al. 2025. Monitoring river flow status using low-cost wildlife camera and image segmentation artificial intelligence doi: 10.1016/j.envsoft.2025.106715). Game camera timeseries photos were collected to evaluate stream variable inundation via changes in width. A subset of photos was labeled for training the YOLOv8 and Mask2Former models and used to segment water surface fractions from all the game camera photos.This data package was originally published in March 2024. It was updated in October 2025 (v2) to add additional photos and files associated with the manuscript (i.e., processed data, labeled photos, and trained models). For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About.In addition to a readme, this data package also includes two file-level metadata (FLMD) files that describes each file and two data dictionaries (DD) that describe all column/row headers and variable definitions. This dataset is comprised of (1) file-level metadata; (2) data dictionary; (3) readme; (4) field metadata; and (5) folders containing game camera photos and manuscript-associated files. Each Yakima River Basin site has a folder that contains subfolders for each month photos were collected. There is also a folder for files associated with the manuscript which has subfolders for labeled data, trained models, Yakima River Basin site water surface fractions, and USGS site water surface fractions. All files are .csv, .json, .txt, .yaml, .pth, .pt, or .pdf. We thank the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation Tribal Council and Yakama Nation Fisheries for working with us to facilitate sample collection and optimization of data usage according to their values and worldview.
The MicroBooNE continuous readout stream is a parallel readout of the MicroBooNE liquid argon time projection chamber (LArTPC) which enables detection of non-beam events such as those from a supernova neutrino burst. The low energies of the supernova neutrinos and the intense cosmic-ray background flux due to the near-surface detector location makes triggering on these events very challenging. Instead, MicroBooNE relies on a delayed trigger generated by SNEWS (the Supernova Early Warning System) for detecting supernova neutrinos. The continuous readout of the LArTPC generates large data volumes, and requires the use of real-time compression algorithms (zero suppression and Huffman compression) implemented in an FPGA (field-programmable gate array) in the readout electronics. In this paper we present the results of the optimization of the data reduction algorithms, and their operational performance. To demonstrate the capability of the continuous stream to detect low-energy electrons, a sample of Michel electrons from stopping cosmic-ray muons is reconstructed and compared to a similar sample from the lossless triggered readout stream.
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mo1 LTAR CMRB Field 1 (CMRB ASP). Site Description - Site is in a 36 ha agricultural research field near Centralia, MO on a broad, slightly sloped landscape. Currently farmed in a corn-soybean-wheat-hay rotation. Used for research since 1991; prior to that was managed for commercial crop production.
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mo3 LTAR CMRB Field 3 (CMRB BAU). Site Description - Site is in a 20 ha agricultural field near Centralia, MO on a broad, slightly sloped landscape. Currently managed in a corn-soybean rotation for commercial crop production
In recent years, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has conducted a series of research studies to validate energy efficient building technologies in the field. Much of the work has focused on single-family construction, and some has also addressed commercial energy codes. The work detailed in this DOE-funded study (EE0007616) focuses on low-rise multifamily buildings (three stories or fewer above grade) in various regions of the United States, and reports on how state-level building codes are being implemented, both in terms of observed characteristics and also in terms of estimated energy impacts. Nearly 100 buildings across four states—Illinois, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington—were sampled, which represent a range of climate types from mild temperature to very cold continental. Both common entry and outdoor entry buildings were included, and a parallel research project evaluated envelope air tightness and current still-evolving air tightness testing methods. Finally, a set of structured interviews of building designers and other relevant professionals was carried to out to gain more insight into this market. To the greatest extent possible, the methodology developed under the project for low-rise multifamily buildings mirrored the approach established by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for single-family residential buildings (https://www.energy.gov/eere/buildings/downloads/residential-building-energy-code-field-study). This included the general approach to sampling, recruitment, and data collection, as well as data analysis and presentation. The range of permitting dates for the sites encompassed two energy code cycles in most regions. All states in the study had adopted a variation of the International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) for the structure of their state code. The low-rise multifamily occupancy presents a hybrid building type: most of the building’s conditioned floor area was covered by the residential chapter of the code while portions of the building (such as corridors and common spaces) fell under the commercial code chapter. The key items assessed in this work were: Building Shell—exterior wall insulation, ceiling insulation, foundation insulation, windows. Common Areas—HVAC and lighting. Living Units—lighting, ventilation. A few items were not assessed in detail, given their relative paucity in this occupancy type; these included duct leakage, pipe insulation, and hot water circulation controls. Building characteristics were collected via a combination of architectural, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing plan reviews and field inspections, and entered into a spreadsheet-based tool that was later queried to build a database. Data went through quality control both upon arrival and via a later semi-automated review and assurance process. Most of the data are presented graphically so that the reader can quickly assess compliance with the applicable energy codes (both by state and by code year). As a final step, EnergyPlus™ simulations were created for all buildings in the study to estimate both the as-found energy use intensity (EUI) and the energy and CO 2 that could be saved if features that were found to not meet code minimums were brought up to code. The savings estimates were tabulated for each of the four states in the study. The research team found that the single-family approach was largely applicable to low-rise multifamily buildings. This applies to both the data collection and the prototype EUI analysis. Most of the occupied space is living units and falls under residential energy codes, and many characteristics use similar envelope construction and relatively straightforward mechanical systems and lighting. One of the most challenging aspects of this work was to build an effective spreadsheet-based data collection instrument that could allow efficient collection of both building plan and field data. The research team is of the view that other methods could be equally effective if the work is done carefully with diligent quality control. The primary findings for the work center around the thermal envelope and mechanical systems and lighting at the sites: For thermal envelope components, the majority of buildings met or were better than the prescriptive code.This suggests that building designers and builders are aware of code requirements. In some cases, surveyed buildings were designed to qualify for energy efficiency certification programs. These buildings made up at least 20% of sampled buildings in each state. Almost all buildings met mechanical system efficiency requirements (for both living units and common areas). In some cases, sites employed systems that were considerably more efficient than required by the applicable energy code. Dwelling units had a majority of high-efficacy lighting, often in excess of the state’s residential code requirements. While high-efficacy fixtures were also typical in common areas (corridors and stairwells), lighting power densities (LPDs) in these areas were sometimes higher than levels dictated by the applicable part of the state commercial energy code. The simulation models run on a series of low-rise multifamily prototypes, informed by a composite of the field data collected, calculated annual EUIs of between 20 and 50 kBtu/ft2-yr, with the range representing the effects of both building characteristics and building location (climate zone). A detailed process (based on simulations of prototype buildings) was used to estimate the amount of avoided energy use that would occur if 100% adherence to energy codes were attained. The results indicated modest savings are attainable for items such as window thermal performance and common area lighting. The result is overall only a modest potential for additional energy savings, averaging about 10% of EUI.
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-BFS Robert J. Bernard Biological Field Station. Site Description - The Bernard Field Station (BFS), an 86-acre academic resource of the Claremont University Consortium, is situated within the campus of The Claremont Colleges in Claremont, CA. Its principal habitats comprise coastal sage scrub, Riversidian alluvial fan scrub, live oak forest, and grassland. The eddy covariance tower is located in the 'neck' of the field station, home to a protected area of Coastal Sage Scrub, dominated by Artemisia californica. BFS is within walking distance of Harvey Mudd College, serving as an invaluable outdoor laboratory resource for the students. With extensive flora and fauna, including over 170 species of birds, 27 species of mammals, and more than 700 species of insects, it embodies a significant ecological haven in the region that is otherwise Southern California suburbs.
ABSTRACT In astronomy and cosmology significant effort is devoted to characterizing and understanding spatial cross-correlations between points – e.g galaxy positions, high energy neutrino arrival directions, X-ray and AGN sources, and continuous fields – e.g. weak lensing meiand Cosmic Microwave Background maps. Recently, we introduced the k-nearest neighbour (kNN) formalism to better characterize the clustering of discrete (point) data sets. Here, we extend it to the point – field cross-correlations analysis. It combines kNN measurements of the point data set with measurements of the field smoothed at many scales. The resulting statistics are sensitive to all orders in the joint clustering of the points and the field. We demonstrate that this approach, unlike the 2-pt cross-correlation, can measure the statistical dependence of two data sets even when there are no linear (Gaussian) correlations between them. We further demonstrate that this framework is far more effective than the two point function in detecting cross-correlations when the continuous field is contaminated by high levels of noise. For a particularly high level of noise, the cross-correlation between haloes and the underlying matter field in a cosmological simulation, between 10 h−1 Mpc and 30 h−1 Mpc, is detected at >5σ significance using the technique presented here, when the two-point cross-correlation significance is ∼1σ. Finally, we show that kNN cross-correlations of haloes and the matter field can be well modelled on quasi-linear scales using the Hybrid Effective Field Theory (HEFT) framework, with the same set of bias parameters as are used for 2-pt cross-correlations. The substantial improvement in the statistical power of detecting cross-correlations using this method makes it a promising tool for various cosmological applications.
Supply chain risk management (SCRM) is an area of research that addresses both logistics concepts to maximize efficiency, reliability, and revenue as well as risk features, such as potential weak points, break points, and vulnerabilities within the supply chain. SCRM is used to find risks introduced at each node in a supply chain and how these risks can impact a company’s products, individuals, customers, and reputation. SCRM is a relatively new field, so standardized processes including data structuring are not fully documented. This paper explains the importance of a standard data structuring methodology and how it can enhance current SCRM efforts. Data ingest, structuring, and analysis are predominantly managed by humans. Automating some of the less complex steps can positively impact SCRM by allowing human analysts to focus on more strategic analyses. Types of data to be collected and structured are collected via publicly available information related to hardware, software, and corporate entities. After the data has been collected, the information is formatted in a specific manner, conforming to a schema, to allow for more effective and efficient ingest for further analysis. This paper outlines data structures used by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory for SCRM research and analysis purposes. These structures have been used for hundreds of analyses and have been successful in developing a common baseline. Data structuring is one of the first steps in data standardization, which will further mature and enhance the SCRM research area.
ABSTRACT Most cosmic shear analyses to date have relied on summary statistics (e.g. ξ+ and ξ−). These types of analyses are necessarily suboptimal, as the use of summary statistics is lossy. In this paper, we forward-model the convergence field of the Universe as a lognormal random field conditioned on the observed shear data. This new map-based inference framework enables us to recover the joint posterior of the cosmological parameters and the convergence field of the Universe. Our analysis properly accounts for the covariance in the mass maps across tomographic bins, which significantly improves the fidelity of the maps relative to single-bin reconstructions. We verify that applying our inference pipeline to Gaussian random fields recovers posteriors that are in excellent agreement with their analytical counterparts. At the resolution of our maps – and to the extent that the convergence field can be described by the lognormal model – our map posteriors allow us to reconstruct all summary statistics (including non-Gaussian statistics). We forecast that a map-based inference analysis of LSST-Y10 data can improve cosmological constraints in the σ8–Ωm plane by $\approx\!{30}{{\ \rm per\ cent}}$ relative to the currently standard cosmic shear analysis. This improvement happens almost entirely along the $S_8=\sigma _8\Omega _{\rm m}^{1/2}$ directions, meaning map-based inference fails to significantly improve constraints on S8.
This is the FLUXNET-CH4 version of the carbon flux data for the site JP-Mse Mase rice paddy field.
This is the FLUXNET-CH4 version of the carbon flux data for the site US-HRA Humnoke Farm Rice Field – Field A.
As phenomics data volume and dimensionality increase due to advancements in sensor technology, there is an urgent need to develop and implement scalable data processing pipelines. Current phenomics data processing pipelines lack modularity, extensibility, and processing distribution across sensor modalities and phenotyping platforms. To address these challenges, we developed PhytoOracle (PO), a suite of modular, scalable pipelines for processing large volumes of field phenomics RGB, thermal, PSII chlorophyll fluorescence 2D images, and 3D point clouds. PhytoOracle aims to ( i ) improve data processing efficiency; ( ii ) provide an extensible, reproducible computing framework; and ( iii ) enable data fusion of multi-modal phenomics data. PhytoOracle integrates open-source distributed computing frameworks for parallel processing on high-performance computing, cloud, and local computing environments. Each pipeline component is available as a standalone container, providing transferability, extensibility, and reproducibility. The PO pipeline extracts and associates individual plant traits across sensor modalities and collection time points, representing a unique multi-system approach to addressing the genotype-phenotype gap. To date, PO supports lettuce and sorghum phenotypic trait extraction, with a goal of widening the range of supported species in the future. At the maximum number of cores tested in this study (1,024 cores), PO processing times were: 235 minutes for 9,270 RGB images (140.7 GB), 235 minutes for 9,270 thermal images (5.4 GB), and 13 minutes for 39,678 PSII images (86.2 GB). These processing times represent end-to-end processing, from raw data to fully processed numerical phenotypic trait data. Repeatability values of 0.39-0.95 (bounding area), 0.81-0.95 (axis-aligned bounding volume), 0.79-0.94 (oriented bounding volume), 0.83-0.95 (plant height), and 0.81-0.95 (number of points) were observed in Field Scanalyzer data. We also show the ability of PO to process drone data with a repeatability of 0.55-0.95 (bounding area).