Results for “CUTTING” — Page 79

DOE OSTI2016

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↗

DOE OSTI2016

TH-C-204-01: Vision for Medical Physics and Status of Current Initiatives

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↗

DOE OSTI2016

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↗

DOE OSTI2016

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↗

DOE OSTI2017

Control of the clustering process in molecular beams using IR lasers

The control of clustering in molecular beams with the help of IR lasers is experimentally studied. Studies were performed with a molecular CF{sub 3}I gas diluted with argon or xenon using a cw CO{sub 2} laser. The control of clustering is based on the resonance vibrational excitation of molecules or clusters by the IR laser radiation near the nozzle exit. Depending on the distance from the excitation region to the nozzle cut, the irradiation of the molecular beam either suppresses the clustering of resonantly excited molecules (when the beam is irradiated near the nozzle exit where clustering occurs) or causes the dissociation of small clusters (when the beam is irradiated away from the nozzle where clustering is at the growth stage). The suppression of molecular clustering and the dissociation of clusters in beams were studied by measuring and analyzing the integrated intensities of ion peaks of cluster fragments with a time-of-flight spectrometer. The efficiencies of clustering suppression and cluster dissociation were studied as functions of exciting laser radiation parameters, the beam irradiation geometry, gas parameters over the nozzle, and the nozzle construction. It is shown that the efficiencies of clustering suppression and cluster dissociation strongly depend on the exciting laser radiation intensity, the nozzle construction, and the distance from the irradiation region to the nozzle cut. Parameters providing the most efficient control of clustering suppression and cluster dissociation are found.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

DOE OSTI2017

Surfatron accelerator in the local interstellar cloud

Taking into account results of numerous experiments, the variability of the energy spectra of cosmic rays (protons and helium nuclei) in the energy range of 10 GeV to ~10{sup 7} GeV is explained on the basis of a hypothesis of the existence of two variable sources close to the Sun. The first (soft) surfatron source (with a size of ~100 AU) is located at the periphery of the heliosphere. The second (hard) surfatron source (with a size of ~1 pc) is situated in the Local Interstellar Cloud (LIC) at a distance of <1 pc. The constant background is described by a power-law spectrum with a slope of ~2.75. The variable heliospheric surfatron source is described by a power-law spectrum with a variable amplitude, slope, and cutoff energy, the maximum cutoff energy being in the range of E{sub CH}/Z < 1000 GeV. The variable surfatron source in the LIC is described by a power-law spectrum with a variable amplitude, slope, and cut-off energy, the maximum cut-off energy being E{sub Ð}¡{sub L}/Z ≤ 3 × 10{sup 6} GeV. The proposed model is used to approximate data from several experiments performed at close times. The energy of each cosmic-ray component is calculated. The possibility of surfatron acceleration of Fe nuclei (Z = 26) in the LIC up to an energy of E{sub CL} ~ 10{sup 17} eV and electron and positrons to the “knee” in the energy spectrum is predicted. By numerically solving a system of nonlinear equations describing the interaction between an electromagnetic wave and a charged particle with an energy of up to E/Z ~ 3 × 10{sup 6} GeV, the possibility of trapping, confinement, and acceleration of charged cosmic-ray particles by a quasi-longitudinal plasma wave is demonstrated.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Potential Images of Ferroelectric Domain Structures Formed by Electron Beam in Lithium Niobate Crystals

Ferroelectric domain structures formed by an electron beam in lithium niobate crystals are studied using low-voltage SEM microscopy. The structures are formed in crystals with different conductivity, including samples with high-resistance congruent composition (CLN) and samples with conductivity increased by reductive annealing (RLN). The potential nature of the contrast of the domain structures observed in the secondary electron mode depending on the conductivity of the samples and the direction of spontaneous polarization of the domains is analyzed. It is assumed that the domain contrast in CLN crystals is associated with long-lived charges localized near domain walls and in the irradiated areas. The recorded domain structures in the CLN crystals are visualized on polar and nonpolar cuts. In the RLN crystals with improved conductivity compared to CLN, the potential contrast of the periodic domain structures is found only on the polar cuts, where vector P{sub s} of the domains is perpendicular to the irradiated surface. This contrast is likely because the field of the spontaneous electric polarization charges influences the secondary electrons.

75 CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS, SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND↗

DOE OSTI2023

Multi-body entanglement and information rearrangement in nuclear many-body systems: a study of the Lipkin–Meshkov–Glick model

Here, we examine how effective-model-space (EMS) calculations of nuclear many-body systems rearrange and converge multi-particle entanglement. The generalized Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick (LMG) model is used to motivate and provide insight for future developments of entanglement-driven descriptions of nuclei. The effective approach is based on a truncation of the Hilbert space together with a variational rotation of the qubits (spins), which constitute the relevant elementary degrees of freedom. The non-commutivity of the rotation and truncation allows for an exponential improvement of the energy convergence throughout much of the model space. Our analysis examines measures of correlations and entanglement, and quantifies their convergence with increasing cut-off. We focus on one- and two-spin entanglement entropies, mutual information, and $n$-tangles for $n=2,4$ to estimate multi-body entanglement. The effective description strongly suppresses entropies and mutual information of the rotated spins, while being able to recover the exact results to a large extent with low cut-offs. Naive truncations of the bare Hamiltonian, on the other hand, artificially underestimate these measures. The $n$-tangles in the present model provide a basis-independent measures of $n$-particle entanglement. While these are more difficult to capture with the EMS description, the improvement in convergence, compared to truncations of the bare Hamiltonian, is significantly more dramatic. We conclude that the low-energy EMS techniques, that successfully provide predictive capabilities for low-lying observables in many-body systems, exhibit analogous efficacy for quantum correlations and multi-body entanglement in the LMG model, motivating future studies in nuclear many-body systems and effective field theories relevant to high-energy physics and nuclear physics.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2025

A Grassroots Network and Community Roadmap for Interconnected Autonomous Science Laboratories for Accelerated Discovery

Scientific discovery is being revolutionized by AI and autonomous systems, yet current autonomous laboratories remain isolated islands unable to collaborate across institutions. We present the Autonomous Interconnected Science Lab Ecosystem (AISLE), a grassroots network transforming fragmented capabilities into a unified system that shorten the path from ideation to innovation to impact and accelerates discovery from decades to months. AISLE addresses five critical dimensions: (1) cross-institutional equipment orchestration, (2) intelligent data management with FAIR compliance, (3) AI-agent driven orchestration grounded in scientific principles, (4) interoperable agent communication interfaces, and (5) AI/ML-integrated scientific education. By connecting autonomous agents across institutional boundaries, autonomous science can unlock research spaces inaccessible to traditional approaches while democratizing cutting-edge technologies. This paradigm shift toward collaborative autonomous science promises breakthroughs in sustainable energy, materials development, and public health.

Ferreira da Silva, Rafael [Oak Ridge National Labo↗

DOE OSTI2022

Perspective—Potential Benefit of Li-Rich Cathode Materials: Reduction of Co and Ni Content Rather than Achievement of Ultra-High Capacities

In the conventional cycling protocol for lithium and manganese rich NMC layered oxides (LMRNMC), the upper cutoff voltage V cut is extended to ~ 4.8, to achieve capacities of similar to 250 mAh g -1 . With this mode of operation, structural rearrangements result in voltage fade upon cycling. Herein, a strategy is proposed to avoid these structural rearrangements based on (a) restricting V cut to values < ~ 4.6 to shut down the bulk instabilities, and (b) application of a (preferably) semi-coherent coating that protects the surface oxygen. The potential benefit of this strategy would be to minimize Co and Ni content, compared to Ni-rich NMC.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2014

Switchgrass Cultivar/Ecotype Selection and Management for Biofuels in the Upper Southeast USA

Switchgrass ( Panicum virgatum L.), a perennial warm-season grass indigenous to the eastern USA, has potential as a biofuels feedstock. The objective of this study was to investigate the performance of upland and lowland switchgrass cultivars under different environments and management treatments. Four cultivars of switchgrass were evaluated from 2000 to 2001 under two management regimes in plots established in 1992 at eight locations in the upper southeastern USA. Two management treatments included 1) a single annual harvest (in late October to early November) and a single application of 50 kg N/ha/yr and 2) two annual harvests (in midsummer and November) and a split application of 100 kg N/ha/yr. Biomass yields averaged 15 Mg/ha/yr and ranged from 10 to 22 Mg/ha/yr across cultivars, managements, locations, and years. There was no yield advantage in taking two harvests of the lowland cultivars (Alamo and Kanlow). When harvested twice, upland cultivars (Cave-in-Rock and Shelter) provided yields equivalent to the lowland ecotypes. Tiller density was 36% lower in stands cutting only once per year, but the stands appeared vigorous after nine years of such management. Lowland cultivars and a one-cutting management (after the tops have senesced) using low rates of applied N (50 kg/ha) are recommended.

Lemus, Rocky↗

DOE OSTI2016

λ-augmented tree for robust data collection in Advanced Metering Infrastructure

In this study, tree multicast configuration of smart meters (SMs) can maintain the connectivity and meet the latency requirements for the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). However, such topology is extremely weak as any single failure suffices to break its connectivity. On the other hand, the impact of a SM node failure can be more or less significant: a noncut SM node will have a limited local impact compared to a cut SM node that will break the network connectivity. In this work, we design a highly connected tree with a set of backup links to minimize the weakness of tree topology of SMs. A topology repair scheme is proposed to address the impact of a SM node failure on the connectivity of the augmented tree network. It relies on a loop detection scheme to define the criticality of a SM node and specifically targets cut SM node by selecting backup parent SM to cover its children. Detailed algorithms to create such AMI tree and related theoretical and complexity analysis are provided with insightful simulation results: sufficient redundancy is provided to alleviate data loss at the cost of signaling overhead. It is however observed that biconnected tree provides the best compromise between the two entities.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2023

American Heart Association Protein Atlas Portal for Accelerated Drug Discovery

The American Heart Association's Protein Atlas Data Portal is a cutting-edge, open-source atlas of the structural determinants of the binding of drugs to (all of) their target proteins as an unbiased means to accelerate drug discovery. The portal will provide researchers with access to comprehensive data that can help increase the selection of effective drugs and cut the time-to-market of new drugs by half.

drug targets↗

DOE OSTI2025

viral_fam_classifier

This code applies publicly available Hidden Markov Model (HMM) profiles to publicly available reference genomes of viruses. It parses the output of these searches to determine bitscore cut-offs for viral taxonomic lineages that may be represented by each HMM. Subsequently, the code will allow the user to classify novel viral sequences using these bitscore cut-offs. This code is a work-in-progress.

Kantor, Rose [Lawrence Livermore National Laborato↗

DOE OSTI2020

Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing-based multigene assay to predict the prognosis of estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer

Purpose: Multigene assays provide useful prognostic information regarding hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer. Next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based platforms have numerous advantages including reproducibility and adaptability in local laboratories. Here we aimed to develop and validate an NGS-based multigene assay to predict the distant recurrence risk. Experimental Design: In total, 179 genes including 30 reference genes highly correlated with the 21-gene recurrence score (RS) algorithm were selected from public databases. Targeted RNA-sequencing was performed using 250 and 93 archived breast cancer samples with a known RS in the training and verification sets, respectively, to develop the algorithm and NGS–Prognostic Score (NGS-PS). The assay was validated in 413 independent samples with long-term follow-up data on distant metastasis. Results: In the verification set, the NGS-PS and 21-gene RS displayed 91.4% concurrence (85/93 samples). In the validation cohort of 413 samples, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve plotted using NGS-PS values classified for distant recurrence was 0.76. The best NGS-PS cut-off value predicting distant metastasis was 20. Furthermore, 269 and 144 patients were classified as low- and high-risk patients in accordance with the cut-off. Five- and 10-year estimates of distant metastasis–free survival (DMFS) for low- versus high-risk groups were 97.0% versus 77.8% and 93.2% versus 64.4%, respectively. The age-related HR for distant recurrence without chemotherapy was 9.73 (95% CI, 3.59–26.40) and 3.19 (95% CI, 1.40–7.29) for patients aged ≤50 and >50 years, respectively. Conclusions: The newly developed and validated NGS-based multigene assay can predict the distant recurrence risk in ER-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2017

Piston geometry effects in a light-duty, swirl-supported diesel engine: Flow structure characterization

This work studied how in-cylinder flow structure is affected in a light-duty, swirl-supported diesel engine when equipped with three different piston geometries: the first two featuring a conventional re-entrant bowl, either with or without valve cut-outs on the piston surface and the third featuring a stepped-lip bowl. Particle image velocimetry experiments were conducted inside an optical engine to measure swirl vortex intensity and structure during the intake and compression strokes. A full computational model of the optical diesel engine was built using the FRESCO code, a recently developed object-oriented parallel computational fluid dynamics platform for engine simulations. The model was first validated against the measured swirl-plane velocity fields, and the simulation convergence for multiple cycles was assessed. Flow topology was studied by addressing bulk flow and turbulence quantities, including swirl structure, squish flux, plus geometric and operating parameters, such as the presence of valve cut-outs on the piston surface, compression ratio and engine speed. The results demonstrated that conventional re-entrant bowls have stronger flow separation at intake, hampering bowl swirl, but higher global swirl than for stepped-lip bowls thanks to a stronger and more axisymmetric squish mechanism and less tilted swirl. Stepped-lip bowls have larger inhomogeneities (tilt and axisymmetry) and higher turbulence levels, but also faster turbulence dissipation toward top dead center. They have weaker squish flux but larger squish inversion momentum as a result of the smaller inertia.

Perini, Federico↗

DOE OSTI2016

An ensemble model of QSAR tools for regulatory risk assessment

Quantitative structure activity relationships (QSARs) are theoretical models that relate a quantitative measure of chemical structure to a physical property or a biological effect. QSAR predictions can be used for chemical risk assessment for protection of human and environmental health, which makes them interesting to regulators, especially in the absence of experimental data. For compatibility with regulatory use, QSAR models should be transparent, reproducible and optimized to minimize the number of false negatives. In silico QSAR tools are gaining wide acceptance as a faster alternative to otherwise time-consuming clinical and animal testing methods. However, different QSAR tools often make conflicting predictions for a given chemical and may also vary in their predictive performance across different chemical datasets. In a regulatory context, conflicting predictions raise interpretation, validation and adequacy concerns. To address these concerns, ensemble learning techniques in the machine learning paradigm can be used to integrate predictions from multiple tools. By leveraging various underlying QSAR algorithms and training datasets, the resulting consensus prediction should yield better overall predictive ability. We present a novel ensemble QSAR model using Bayesian classification. The model allows for varying a cut-off parameter that allows for a selection in the desirable trade-off between model sensitivity and specificity. The predictive performance of the ensemble model is compared with four in silico tools (Toxtree, Lazar, OECD Toolbox, and Danish QSAR) to predict carcinogenicity for a dataset of air toxins (332 chemicals) and a subset of the gold carcinogenic potency database (480 chemicals). Leave-one-out cross validation results show that the ensemble model achieves the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity (accuracy: 83.8 % and 80.4 %, and balanced accuracy: 80.6 % and 80.8 %) and highest inter-rater agreement [kappa (κ): 0.63 and 0.62] for both the datasets. The ROC curves demonstrate the utility of the cut-off feature in the predictive ability of the ensemble model. In conclusion, this feature provides an additional control to the regulators in grading a chemical based on the severity of the toxic endpoint under study.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2019

Laparoscopic Isolated Total Caudate Lobectomy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Located in the Paracaval Portion of the Cirrhotic Liver

Background: Despite the widespread use of laparoscopic hepatectomies in past decades, laparoscopic isolated total caudate lobectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains challenging,{sup 1,2} especially for patients with cirrhosis. Moreover, a laparoscopic isolated total caudate lobectomy for HCC originating in the paracaval portion of the caudate lobe is very rare. We herein present a video showing laparoscopic total caudate lobectomy for a cirrhotic patient with HCC located in the paracaval portion of the caudate lobe. Methods: A 58-year-old woman who suffered from hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis was admitted to our institution. The preoperative computed tomography showed a 2.5 × 2.0 cm liver mass located in segment I that was very close to the right hepatic pedicle. Although her liver function was Child–Pugh A, the indocyanine green (ICG)-15 test was high at 10.9%. Right hepatectomy plus caudate lobectomy was not adopted because of the severe cirrhosis and the elevated ICG-15. Thus, laparoscopic isolated total caudate lobectomy was contemplated. Results: The patient was placed in the supine position. After full mobilization, the caudate lobe was exposed. The third porta of the liver was then dissected and the short hepatic veins were controlled with clips and LigaSure. The dissection was finished when the whole third porta of the liver was freed. Subsequently, the portal branches to the caudate lobe were ligated and cut. The combination between the left- and right-sided laparoscopic approaches was used to transect liver parenchyma. The superficial parenchyma was divided using an harmonic scalpel, while the deeper tissue was divided using a Cavitron ultrasonic aspirator (CUSA). The Pringle maneuver was used intermittently during the parenchymal transection as necessary. In the left-sided approach, the caudate lobe was resected along the left and middle hepatic vein toward the right side, to expose the dorsal semicircle of the right hepatic vein. In the right-sided approach, the resection started from the right border of the process portion to the root of the right hepatic vein in the cranial direction. Finally, the whole caudate lobe was resected and the three main hepatic veins were exposed on the cutting plane. The specimen was removed from suprapubic incision. The operative time was 300 min and the total Pringle time was 50 min. The postoperative course was uneventful. Conclusions: A laparoscopic isolated total caudate lobectomy for HCC located in the paracaval portion of the cirrhotic liver seems to be feasible and safe in selected patients.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗