Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “density estimation”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Non-Gaussian estimates of tensions in cosmological parameters

We discuss how to efficiently and reliably estimate the level of agreement and disagreement on parameter determinations from different experiments, fully taking into account non-Gaussianities in the parameter posteriors. We develop two families of scalable algorithms that allow us to perform this type of calculations in increasing number of dimensions and for different levels of tensions. One family of algorithms rely on kernel density estimates of posterior distributions while the other relies on machine learning modeling of the posterior distribution with normalizing flows. We showcase their effectiveness and accuracy with a set of benchmark examples and find both methods agree with each other and the true tension within 0.5σ in difficult cases and generally to 0.2σ or better. This allows us to study the level of internal agreement between different measurements of the clustering of cosmological structures from the Dark Energy Survey and their agreement with measurements of the Cosmic Microwave Background from the Planck satellite.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Impact of Cosmic Filaments on Galaxy Morphological Evolution and Predictions of Early Cosmic Web Structure for Roman

We leverage the IllustrisTNG cosmological simulations to test how the large-scale cosmic web shapes galaxy morphology and to forecast the early cosmic web structure that the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope will reveal. In the hydrodynamic TNG50 and N-body TNG50-Dark runs, we reconstruct the cosmic web at redshifts z = 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, and 4 with the Monte Carlo Physarum Machine density estimator and the DisPerSE structure identification framework. We confirm that dark matter halos start out predominantly prolate (elongated), and their shapes are aligned with their nearest filaments; prolate galaxies retain strong shape alignment with their outer halos to later times. At z ≥ 1, the fraction of prolate (spheroidal) halos increases (decreases) toward lower stellar mass, higher redshift, and lower filament density. At z < 1, more spheroidal (oblate) stellar structures preferentially reside in higher-density (lower-density) filaments. We also find that higher-density filaments favor extended rotationally supported disks, whereas lower-density filaments more often host smaller dispersion-supported systems. Then, generating mock galaxy samples from TNG100 and TNG50, we predict the early cosmic web accessible to Roman. We find that the spectroscopic emission-line depth planned for the High-Latitude Wide-Area Survey (HLWAS) yields a highly incomplete galaxy sample that does not accurately trace the z = 1 cosmic web. A survey ≥2.5× deeper over a few square degrees would enable a proper reconstruction and reveal qualitatively correct filament–galaxy morphology relationships. Nevertheless, the planned HLWAS Deep field should still identify most galaxy overdensities; targeted deeper spectroscopy of these regions would efficiently and adequately map the early filamentary structure.

Hasan, Farhanul [Space Telescope Science Institute↗
NASA NTRS2013

Mars-GRAM 2010: Additions and Resulting Improvements

The Mars Global Reference Atmospheric Model (Mars-GRAM) is an engineering-level atmospheric model widely used for diverse mission applications. Mars-GRAM has been utilized during previous aerobraking operations in the atmosphere of Mars. Mars-GRAM has also been used in the prediction and validation of Mars Pathfinder hypersonic aerodynamics, the aerothermodynamic and entry dynamics studies for Mars Polar Lander, the landing site selection process for the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL), the Mars Aerocapture System Study (MASS) as well as the Aerocapture Technology Assessment Group (TAG). Most recently, Mars-GRAM 2010 was used to develop the onboard atmospheric density estimator that is part of the Autonomous Aerobraking Development Plan. The most recent release of Mars-GRAM 2010 contains several changes including an update to Fortran 90/95 and the addition of adjustment factors. Following the completion of a comparison analysis between Mars-GRAM, Thermal Emission Spectrometer (TES), as well as Mars Global Surveyor (MGS), Mars Odyssey (ODY), and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) aerobraking density data, adjustment factors were added to Mars-GRAM 2010 that alter the input data from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Ames Mars General Circulation Model (MGCM) and the University of Michigan Mars Thermospheric General Circulation Model (MTGCM) for the mapping year 0 user-controlled dust case. The addition of adjustment factors resolved the issue of previous versions of Mars-GRAM being less than realistic when used for sensitivity studies for mapping year 0 and large optical depth values, such as tau equal to 3. Mars-GRAM was evaluated at locations and times of TES limb observations and adjustment factors were determined. For altitudes above 80 km and below 135 km, Mars-GRAM (MTGCM) densities were compared to aerobraking densities measured by Mars Global Surveyor (MGS), Mars Odyssey (ODY), and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) to determine the adjustment factors. The adjustment factors generated by this process had to satisfy the gas law as well as the hydrostatic relation and are expressed as a function of height (z), Latitude (Lat) and areocentric solar longitude (Ls). The greatest adjustments are made at large optical depths such as tau greater than 1. The addition of the adjustment factors has led to better correspondence to TES Limb data from 0-60 km altitude as well as better agreement with MGS, ODY and MRO data at approximately 90-130 km altitude. Improved Mars-GRAM atmospheric simulations for various locations, times and dust conditions on Mars will be presented at the workshop session. The latest results validating Mars-GRAM 2010 versus Mars Climate Sounder data will also be presented. Mars-GRAM 2010 updates have resulted in improved atmospheric simulations which will be very important when beginning systems design, performance analysis, and operations planning for future aerocapture, aerobraking or landed missions to Mars.

Justh, Hilary L.↗
NASA NTRS1983

Inverting a dispersive scene's side-scanned image

Consideration is given to the problem of using a remotely sensed, side-scanned image of a time-variant scene, which changes according to a dispersion relation, to estimate the structure at a given moment. Additive thermal noise is neglected in the models considered in the formal treatment. It is shown that the dispersion relation is normalized by the scanning velocity, as is the group scanning velocity component. An inversion operation is defined for noise-free images generated by SAR. The method is extended to the inversion of noisy imagery, and a formulation is defined for spectral density estimation. Finally, the methods for a radar system are used for the case of sonar.

Harger, R. O.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Geostatistical Mapping of Salinity Conditioned on Borehole Logs, Montebello Oil Field, California

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.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Analyzing LF/VLF Lightning Waveforms to Estimate D-region Electron Density Profiles

Lightning waveforms in the low frequency (LF; 30-300 kHz) and the very low frequency (VLF; 3-30 kHz) bands can be exploited to produce data-driven ionospheric D-region electron density profile (EDP) estimates with significantly higher spatial and temporal coverage than previously available. The lightning waveforms used in this paper are signals detected in the LF/VLF of negative cloud-to-ground lightning by the Earth Networks Total Lightning Detection Network. Each waveform contains a ground wave and a time-delayed ionospheric reflection. The time delay between the ground wave and ionospheric reflection has previously been used to estimate a single specular reflection altitude, where LF/VLF emissions are reflected by the ionosphere. Here, we expand upon previous methods to include filtering and spectral analysis, and account for oblique propagation to produce higher-order estimates for reflection altitudes and corresponding electron densities. Once estimated, reflection altitudes and corresponding electron densities can be used to derive parameters β and h’, which define an EDP for the D-region. In this study, the lightning waveform (LW) analysis is demonstrated using a single representative 24-hour dataset over the Southeast United States, and then extended to a total of 10 separate datasets with varying locations and ionospheric conditions. The LW-derived D-region EDPs are in agreement with predictions made by the Faraday International Reference Ionosphere model, and the LW EDPs β and h’ values are consistent with previous LF/VLF-derived estimates.

D-region ionosphere↗
DOE OSTI2023

Stochastic multiscale modeling for quantifying statistical and model errors with application to composite materials

This paper provides a coherent and efficient computational framework for stochastic multiscale analysis of material systems in the presence of parametric uncertainties and modeling errors. Uncertainty in those model parameters that are not deduced as upscaled quantities is attributed to an uncertainty “germ”. While such parameters can appear at any scale, they are predominant at the finest analysis scale. Additional uncertainties stemming from statistical estimation, attributed to lack of data and model error, are associated with each submodel contributing to the multiscale system. Here, a robust and efficient framework based on a generalized extended polynomial chaos expansion (gEPCE) is proposed to simultaneously propagate all these uncertainties in order to provide a probabilistic representation of specific quantities of interest (QoI). We characterize the full probability distribution of the QoI and the uncertainty in the failure probability pertaining to its tails. By combining gEPCE with kernel density estimation (KDE) and directional derivatives, we construct sensitivity measures that connect these statistical metrics of QoI to the various sources of uncertainty to assess their individual and combined impacts. An illustrative problem featuring three-point bending of a composite beam is investigated to demonstrate the presented approach.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS1986

Voyager 2 radio science observations of the Uranian system Atmosphere, rings, and satellites

The results of preliminary analyses of radio occultation data obtained by Voyager 2 as it passed Uranus are described. The occultations took place between 2-7 deg S latitude and yielded atmospheric temperature profiles between pressure levels of 10-900 mbar, an altitude range of 100 km. The mole fractions of hydrogen and helium in the tropopause were estimated, in conjunction with IR data, to about 0.85 and 0.10-0.20, respectively. Radio signal intensity data indicated the presence of a cloud deck of CH4 ice at a pressure level of 1300 mbar and a temperature of 81 K, implying a CH4 mole fraction of 0.02 at very low altitudes. The ionosphere extended upward, in two levels, to more than 10,000 km altitude. The ring system was different than the one around Saturn and possessed cylindrical substructures. The radio data also permitted mass density estimates for the five major moons, i.e., about 1.40 gr/cu cm, a value which rules out cometary origins.

Tyler, G. L.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Mars-GRAM: Increasing the Precision of Sensitivity Studies at Large Optical Depths

The Mars Global Reference Atmospheric Model (Mars-GRAM) is an engineering-level atmospheric model widely used for diverse mission applications. Mars-GRAM's perturbation modeling capability is commonly used, in a Monte-Carlo mode, to perform high fidelity engineering end-to-end simulations for entry, descent, and landing (EDL). It has been discovered during the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) site selection process that Mars-GRAM, when used for sensitivity studies for MapYear=0 and large optical depth values such as tau=3, is less than realistic. A comparison study between Mars atmospheric density estimates from Mars-GRAM and measurements by Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) has been undertaken for locations of varying latitudes, Ls, and LTST on Mars. The preliminary results from this study have validated the Thermal Emission Spectrometer (TES) limb data. From the surface to 80 km altitude, Mars-GRAM is based on the NASA Ames Mars General Circulation Model (MGCM). MGCM results that were used for Mars-GRAM with MapYear=0 were from a MGCM run with a fixed value of tau=3 for the entire year at all locations. This has resulted in an imprecise atmospheric density at all altitudes. To solve this pressure-density problem, density factor values were determined for tau=.3, 1 and 3 that will adjust the input values of MGCM MapYear 0 pressure and density to achieve a better match of Mars-GRAM MapYear 0 with TES observations for MapYears 1 and 2 at comparable dust loading. The addition of these density factors to Mars-GRAM will improve the results of the sensitivity studies done for large optical depths.

Justh, Hilary L.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Operational Data Reduction Procedure for Determining Density and Vertical Structure of the Martian Upper Atmosphere from Mars Global Surveyor Accelerometer Measurements

The success of aerobraking by the Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) spacecraft was partly due to the analysis of MGS accelerometer data. Accelerometer data was used to determine the effect of the atmosphere on each orbit, to characterize the nature of the atmosphere, and to predict the atmosphere for future orbits. To interpret the accelerometer data, a data reduction procedure was developed to produce density estimations utilizing inputs from the spacecraft, the Navigation Team, and pre-mission aerothermodynamic studies. This data reduction procedure was based on the calculation of aerodynamic forces from the accelerometer data by considering acceleration due to gravity gradient, solar pressure, angular motion of the MGS, instrument bias, thruster activity, and a vibration component due to the motion of the damaged solar array. Methods were developed to calculate all of the acceleration components including a 4 degree of freedom dynamics model used to gain a greater understanding of the damaged solar array. The total error inherent to the data reduction procedure was calculated as a function of altitude and density considering contributions from ephemeris errors, errors in force coefficient, and instrument errors due to bias and digitization. Comparing the results from this procedure to the data of other MGS Teams has demonstrated that this procedure can quickly and accurately describe the density and vertical structure of the Martian upper atmosphere.

Cancro, George J.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Machine learning materials properties with accurate predictions, uncertainty estimates, domain guidance, and persistent online accessibility

One compelling vision of the future of materials discovery and design involves the use of machine learning (ML) models to predict materials properties and then rapidly find materials tailored for specific applications. However, realizing this vision requires both providing detailed uncertainty quantification (model prediction errors and domain of applicability) and making models readily usable. At present, it is common practice in the community to assess ML model performance only in terms of prediction accuracy (e.g. mean absolute error), while neglecting detailed uncertainty quantification and robust model accessibility and usability. Here, we demonstrate a practical method for realizing both uncertainty and accessibility features with a large set of models. We develop random forest ML models for 33 materials properties spanning an array of data sources (computational and experimental) and property types (electrical, mechanical, thermodynamic, etc). All models have calibrated ensemble error bars to quantify prediction uncertainty and domain of applicability guidance enabled by kernel-density-estimate-based feature distance measures. All data and models are publicly hosted on the Garden-AI infrastructure, which provides an easy-to-use, persistent interface for model dissemination that permits models to be invoked with only a few lines of Python code. We demonstrate the power of this approach by using our models to conduct a fully ML-based materials discovery exercise to search for new stable, highly active perovskite oxide catalyst materials.

domain of applicability↗
NASA NTRS1998

Tidal Disruption of Strengthless Rubble Piles: A Dimensional Analysis

A relatively simple prescription for estimating the number of debris clumps (n) that form after a catastrophic tidal disruption event is presented. Following the breakup event, it is assumed that the individual debris particles follow keplerian orbits about the planet until the debris' gravitational contraction timescale (t(sub c)) becomes shorter than its orbital spreading timescale (t(sub s)). When the two timescales become comparable, self-gravity breaks up the debris train into n = L/D clumps, which is the debris length/diameter ratio at that instant. The clumps subsequently orbit the planet independent of each other. The predicted number of clumps n is in good agreement with more sophisticated N-body treatments of tidal breakup for parabolic encounters, and the dependence of n upon the progenitor's density as well as its orbit is also mapped out for hyperbolic encounters. These findings may be used to further constrain both the orbits and densities of the tidally disrupted bodies that struck Callisto and Ganymede. A cursory analysis shows that the Gomul and Gipul crater chains on Callisto, which have the greatest number of craters among the known chains, were formed by projectiles having comet-like densities estimated at rho(sub o) < 1 gm/cc.

Hahn, Joseph M.↗
NASA NTRS1988

The stellar radiation field and the ionization of H and He in the local interstellar medium

Detailed photoionization calculations for the local interstellar medium (LISM) are presented based on constraints imposed by H I column density estimates derived from IUE and Copernicus data toward nearby B stars and hot white dwarfs. It is found that the nearby hot white dwarfs dominate the stellar contributions to the EUV radiation field. Considering stellar contribution to the EUV background alone, the resulting lower limits to the hydrogen and helium fractional ionization in the local diffuse cloud, at the sun, are 0.091 and 0.089, respectively. This result is insensitive to the absorbing geometry of the local cloud. The comparable ionizations of H and He near the sun are due to the lack of absorption from photospheric helium in the hot DA white dwarfs, to the difference in optical depths at wavelengths shortward of the H I and He I ionization edges, and to the fact that the hydrogen ionization controls the electron number density. The derived H and He ionization limits have important implications for the interpretation of the He I and H I backscattering results, for which uncertainties in charge-exchange interactions occurring in or near the heliopause reflect additional significant uncertainties in determining the ionization in the LISM.

Bruhweiler, Frederick C.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Strategies to Improve the Accuracy of Mars-GRAM Sensitivity Studies at Large Optical Depths

The Mars Global Reference Atmospheric Model (Mars-GRAM) is an engineering-level atmospheric model widely used for diverse mission applications. Mars-GRAM s perturbation modeling capability is commonly used, in a Monte-Carlo mode, to perform high fidelity engineering end-to-end simulations for entry, descent, and landing (EDL). It has been discovered during the Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) site selection process that Mars-GRAM when used for sensitivity studies for MapYear=0 and large optical depth values such as tau=3 is less than realistic. A comparison study between Mars atmospheric density estimates from Mars- GRAM and measurements by Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) has been undertaken for locations of varying latitudes, Ls, and LTST on Mars. The preliminary results from this study have validated the Thermal Emission Spectrometer (TES) limb data. From the surface to 80 km altitude, Mars- GRAM is based on the NASA Ames Mars General Circulation Model (MGCM). MGCM results that were used for Mars-GRAM with MapYear=0 were from a MGCM run with a fixed value of tau=3 for the entire year at all locations. Unrealistic energy absorption by uniform atmospheric dust leads to an unrealistic thermal energy balance on the polar caps. The outcome is an inaccurate cycle of condensation/sublimation of the polar caps and, as a consequence, an inaccurate cycle of total atmospheric mass and global-average surface pressure. Under an assumption of unchanged temperature profile and hydrostatic equilibrium, a given percentage change in surface pressure would produce a corresponding percentage change in density at all altitudes. Consequently, the final result of a change in surface pressure is an imprecise atmospheric density at all altitudes. To solve this pressure-density problem, a density factor value was determined for tau=.3, 1 and 3 that will adjust the input values of MGCM MapYear 0 pressure and density to achieve a better match of Mars-GRAM MapYear=0 with MapYears 1 and 2 MGCM output at comparable dust loading. Currently, these density factors are fixed values for all latitudes and Ls. Results will be presented of the work underway to derive better multipliers by including possible variation with latitude and/or Ls. This is achieved by comparison of Mars-GRAM MapYear=0 output with TES limb data. The addition of these density factors to Mars-GRAM will improve the results of the sensitivity studies done for large optical depths. Answers may also be provided to the issues raised in a recent study by Desai(2008). Desai has shown that the actual landing sites of Mars Pathfinder, the Mars Exploration Rovers and the Phoenix Mars Lander have been further downrange than predicted by models prior to landing. Desai s reconstruction of their entries into the Martian atmosphere showed that the models consistently predicted higher densities than those found upon EDL. The solution of this problem would be important to the Mars Program since future exploration of Mars by landers and rovers will require more accurate landing capabilities, especially for the proposed Mars Sample Return mission.

Justh, Hilary L.↗
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 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 OSTI2024

Non-uniform active learning for Gaussian process models with applications to trajectory informed aerodynamic databases

The ability to non-uniformly weight the input space is desirable for many applications, and has been explored for space-filling approaches. Increased interests in linking models, such as in a digital twinning framework, increases the need for sampling emulators where they are most likely to be evaluated. In particular, here we apply non-uniform sampling methods for the construction of aerodynamic databases. This paper combines non-uniform weighting with active learning for Gaussian Processes (GPs) to develop a closed-form solution to a non-uniform active learning criterion. We accomplish this by utilizing a kernel density estimator as the weight function. We demonstrate the need and efficacy of this approach with an atmospheric entry example that accounts for both model uncertainty as well as the practical state space of the vehicle, as determined by forward modeling within the active learning loop.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Target Detection via Cognitive Radars Using Change-Point Detection, Learning, and Adaptation

Many radar detection algorithms that assume a stationary environment (clutter) have been proposed and analyzed over the years. However, in practice, changes in the nonstationary environment can perturb the parameters of the clutter distribution, or even alter the clutter distribution family, which can greatly deteriorate the target detection capability. To avoid such potential performance degradation, cognitive radar systems are envisioned which are required to rapidly realize the nonstationarity, accurately learn the new characteristics of the environments, and adaptively update the detector. In this paper, aiming to develop a fully cognitive radar for target detection in nonstationary environments, we propose a unifying framework that integrates (i) change-point detection of clutter distributions by using a data-driven cumulative sum (CUSUM) algorithm and its extended version, (ii) learning/identification of clutter distribution by applying sparse theory and kernel density estimation methods, and (iii) adaptive target detection by automatically modifying the likelihood-ratio test and corresponding detection threshold. Further, with extensive numerical examples, we demonstrate the achieved improvements in detection performance due to the proposed framework in comparison to a nonadaptive case, an adaptive matched filter (AMF) method, and the clairvoyant case. Herein, we also use Wilcoxon rank-sum tests to evaluate the statistical significance of the performance improvements

42 ENGINEERING↗