Results for “Random Forest” | Engineering Papers

NASA NTRS2026

Benchmarking Bayesian Optimization Frameworks and Acquisition Strategies for Materials Discovery and Autonomous Laboratories

Bayesian optimization (BO) can accelerate materials discovery by guiding expensive experiments toward the most promising processing conditions. We systematically compare five BO surrogate and framework combinations (Gaussian processes in Ax, Gaussian processes and Monte-Carlo neural networks in BayBE, random forests in Lolopy, and tree-structured Parzen (TPE) estimators in Hyperopt) on three benchmarks that mimic common materials design tasks (a discrete solid-electrolyte composition space, a hybrid discrete/continuous laminate-composite design problem solved with micromechanics modeling, and the continuous Ishigami analytic function which is a standard optimization benchmark). Each BO surrogate is paired with posterior mean, probability of improvement, and expected improvement acquisition functions and run for 100 trials from randomized initial samples with uniform random search providing a control. Across five random seeds per setting, BayBE’s Gaussian-process surrogate with expected improvement consistently reached ≥95 % of the known optimum in the fewest evaluations, while Lolopy’s random forest matched or exceeded GP performance on purely categorical or mixed spaces at a higher computational cost. Posterior mean alone often stagnated at local optima, underscoring the need for exploration, whereas probability and expected improvement balanced exploration and exploitation leading to better optimization in fewer trials. Execution times ranged from milliseconds for TPE to minutes for neural-network and random-forest surrogates. These results establish baseline expectations for BO in automated materials laboratories and highlight expected improvement with Gaussian processes as a reliable first choice, with random forests offering a strong alternative when categorical variables dominate. The benchmark suite and code are released to facilitate future surrogate, acquisition, and constraint-handling research in data-driven materials optimization.

Bayesian optimization↗

NASA NTRS2026

Machine Learning for Predicting Team Functioning in HERA Missions

Team functioning is integral to success in future long term space exploration missions. Proactively detecting declines in team functioning can mitigate conflict and ensure mission success. This project developed a speech-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that unobtrusively predicts degradation in team functioning, including performance and cohesion, in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaigns 4 and 5. The AI system conducted automated analysis of the prosodic (tone of voice) and linguistic (language content) components of speech, modeling interpersonal dynamics at both the turn-taking and day-wide levels. We investigated team functioning via observing structured interactions (i.e., multi-mission space exploration vehicle-extra vehicular activity [MMSEV-EVA], team interaction battery [TIB]) and unstructured interactions before the MMSEV-EVA task. We developed machine learning models to predict team functioning (objective task accuracy, self reported team efficacy and self reported team cohesion) by analyzing OpenSmile acoustic features, linguistic descriptors extracted via the linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC) dictionary, and semantic embeddings. In the TIB, static models using logistic regression and random forests were not able to predict task accuracy, but predicted team efficacy and cohesion during both the decision making and relational tasks to a moderate level (60-70%). Majority voting on the individual turns to predict day long team efficacy further increased accuracies (70-80%). Finally, long short-term memory (LSTM) models showed the best performance across all variables (80-91%), including task performance. In the MMSEV-EVA, static models achieved an accuracy of 60% with majority voting, which increased to 80% through the incorporation of mission day as a variable, accounting for the learning effect. A key finding across both tasks was the "team-dependent" nature of these interactions; models achieved much higher accuracy when trained on prior days of the same team's data rather than attempting to generalize across entirely different teams, with even 1-2 days of prior data per team achieving 5-15% improvement over team-independent models. In addition, the incorporation of pre-task data from the same team also improves model performance, e.g., incorporating data from the decision-making task of the TIB, which preceded the relational task, improved the prediction of team efficacy and cohesion during the latter. We compared model performance when trained on machine-generated data compared to data that had been further corrected by human annotators. Overall, models trained on human-corrected data exhibited a modest improvement in performance, particularly when acoustic features were used. We found no significant correlation between word error rate (WER) and model accuracy (r(55) = -0.08, p = 0.51), but model’s accuracy was significantly higher for medium/high quality transcription (0.74 (SD = 0.48)) compared to the low-quality group (0.64 (SD = 0.36)) (t(63)=2.82, p = 0.006). Based on these, several design recommendation emerge, that could inform Standards at NASA. Models predicting team functioning should incorporate at least one to two days of historical interaction data, include brief pre-task discussions, and explicitly model temporal learning effects, especially for longer operational tasks. Minimum quality standards for automated speech-processing pipelines are needed, given the performance gains observed with manually corrected acoustic data. Finally, systems should leverage both acoustic features and language embeddings in complementary ways, with modality choices and fusion strategies tailored to mission context, task demands, and data quality requirements.

Shrivatsa Mishra↗