Hands-on with Progress Tracking Cards: A Lightweight Method for Improving Your Software Practices.
Abstract not provided.
Gonsiorowski, Elsa↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Tracking Progress”
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.
Scientific Software Development with User Stories and Progress Tracking Cards.
Abstract not provided.
Marques, Osni -ext↗
Hands-on Tutorial with PSIP Progress Tracking Cards: A Lightweight Method for Improving Software Practices.
Abstract not provided.
Raybourn, Elaine M.↗
Automating Software Productivity Planning: Lightweight Tools for Upgrading Team Practices
A lightweight iterative workflow, called Productivity and Sustainability Improvement Planning (PSIP) has been developed to assist software teams with employing good software engineering practices. Three PSIP tools automate practice summarization, self-assessment, and progress tracking to enhance team engagement around software process improvement: Reposcanner, RateYourProject (RYP) and Progress Tracking Cards (PTCs) respectively. Reposcanner is a data analysis tool. RYP is an interactive self-assessment tool that provides an easy-to-use entry point to the PSIP process. Once process improvements are identified, PTCs are created by teams to measure outcomes and progression toward their goals. We present an exemplifying case study with a software team where these tools have been put to use, along with a description of the tools, and future plans for further improvements.
Raybourn, Elaine↗
PSIP For HDF5 Pilot Project (Final Report)
Productivity and Sustainability Improvement Planning (PSIP) is a lightweight, incremental and iterative approach (much in the same spirit as Agile methodologies) for making routine software process improvements in software projects. It is designed to be easily applied in existing development workflows. Quoting from a November 2019 workshop paper describing PSIP. PSIP breaks from classic software process improvement approaches such as CMM(I), SPICE, ISO 9000 or Six Sigma, in that it trades comprehensive standards and certification-driven assessment for self-defined, internally driven goals. It does, however, carry forward such ideas as having staged models of improvement (like CMM(I)) in the form of progress tracking cards. Additionally, PSIP is more aligned with lean and agile methods; it adopts their emphasis on iterative improvement and continuous learning. At its core, PSIP is an instantiation of the Plan-Do-Check-Act management cycle (PDCA, also known as Plan-Do-Study-Adjust) which provides the foundation for much of the modern software process improvement literature. This situates PSIP within a constellation of bottom-up, inductive software process improvement methods. PSIP is designed around the notion that already overburdened teams can define and carry out a series of small, incremental steps of progression towards improvement goals without significant (there will be some, but the goal is to avoid significant) disruption to ongoing development activities. A key enabling tool in PSIP is the use of Progress Tracking Cards (PTCs) which define the steps of progression towards a given improvement goal. This is the theory of PSIP. The PSIP for HDF5 project was aimed at putting PSIP into practice with the purpose of evaluating its effectiveness in planning and facilitating quality and process improvements in a scientific software project as well as its associated artifacts. The HDF5 project was chosen as a use case to evaluate PSIP for several reasons. First, NNSA labs and LLNL in particular have a keen interest in how HDF5 quality impacts its uptake and sustainability as a community adopted and supported code. Next, HDF5 is a foundational library, a key substrate in the HPC/CSE software stack, and any improvements there realized through this contract will have benefits to many DOE applications depending on it. HDF5 also represents an older, legacy code with technical debts to pay down. These characteristics are similar to many NNSA and even some ECP code projects. But, because HDF5 is an I/O library, it represents a simpler use case within which to study PSIP than a full-fledged and significantly more complex PDE simulation code. We believe these attributes make HDF5 an ideal use case for evaluating PSIP.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
A comprehensive and synthetic dataset for global, regional, and national greenhouse gas emissions by sector 1970–2018 with an extension to 2019
To track progress towards keeping global warming well below 2 °C or even 1.5 °C, as agreed in the Paris Agreement, comprehensive up-to-date and reliable information on anthropogenic emissions and removals of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is required. Here we compile a new synthetic dataset on anthropogenic GHG emissions for 1970–2018 with a fast-track extension to 2019. Our dataset is global in coverage and includes CO 2 emissions, CH 4 emissions, N 2 O emissions, as well as those from fluorinated gases (F-gases: HFCs, PFCs, SF 6 , NF 3 ) and provides country and sector details. We build this dataset from the version 6 release of the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR v6) and three bookkeeping models for CO 2 emissions from land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF). We assess the uncertainties of global greenhouse gases at the 90 % confidence interval (5th–95th percentile range) by combining statistical analysis and comparisons of global emissions inventories and top-down atmospheric measurements with an expert judgement informed by the relevant scientific literature. We identify important data gaps for F-gas emissions. The agreement between our bottom-up inventory estimates and top-down atmospheric-based emissions estimates is relatively close for some F-gas species (~ 10 % or less), but estimates can differ by an order of magnitude or more for others. Our aggregated F-gas estimate is about 10 % lower than top-down estimates in recent years. However, emissions from excluded F-gas species such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) or hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) are cumulatively larger than the sum of the reported species. Using global warming potential values with a 100-year time horizon from the Sixth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), global GHG emissions in 2018 amounted to 58 ± 6.1 GtCO 2 eq. consisting of CO 2 from fossil fuel combustion and industry (FFI) 38 ± 3.0 GtCO 2 , CO 2 -LULUCF 5.7 ± 4.0 GtCO 2 , CH 4 10 ± 3.1 GtCO 2 eq., N2O 2.6 ± 1.6 GtCO 2 eq., and F-gases 1.3 ± 0.40 GtCO 2 eq. Initial estimates suggest further growth of 1.3 GtCO 2 eq. in GHG emissions to reach 59 ± 6.6 GtCO 2 eq. by 2019. Our analysis of global trends in anthropogenic GHG emissions over the past 5 decades (1970–2018) highlights a pattern of varied but sustained emissions growth. There is high confidence that global anthropogenic GHG emissions have increased every decade, and emissions growth has been persistent across the different (groups of) gases. There is also high confidence that global anthropogenic GHG emissions levels were higher in 2009–2018 than in any previous decade and that GHG emissions levels grew throughout the most recent decade. While the average annual GHG emissions growth rate slowed between 2009 and 2018 (1.2 % yr –1 ) compared to 2000–2009 (2.4 % yr –1 ), the absolute increase in average annual GHG emissions by decade was never larger than between 2000–2009 and 2009–2018. Our analysis further reveals that there are no global sectors that show sustained reductions in GHG emissions. There are a number of countries that have reduced GHG emissions over the past decade, but these reductions are comparatively modest and outgrown by much larger emissions growth in some developing countries such as China, India, and Indonesia. There is a need to further develop independent, robust, and timely emissions estimates across all gases. As such, tracking progress in climate policy requires substantial investments in independent GHG emissions accounting and monitoring as well as in national and international statistical infrastructures. The data associated with this article (Minx et al., 2021) can be found at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5566761.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
ECCE Tracking detector progress report
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Atomic, Nuclear and Particle Physics↗
Summary Analysis of Different Offshore Wind Capacity Density Drivers in Proposed U.S. Projects and Impacts on Progress Towards State and Federal Deployment Targets
Understanding the density of offshore wind development - or the "capacity density" - is important for state and federal offshore wind planning efforts and to track progress towards policy goals. NREL has traditionally assumed a capacity density of 3 megawatts per square kilometer (MW/km2) when estimating the U.S. project pipeline (Musial et al. 2022), but capacity densities for existing European offshore wind farms ranged from 2-19 MW/km2 (Borrmann et al. 2018). We track the expected capacity densities of the proposed U.S. projects in the East Coast and make an analysis by state and by developer to identify what are the capacity density norms in the industry and whether the state in which the development efforts are taking place has some impact on capacity density. We also analyze the effects of the area occupied by station keeping systems on capacity density for lease areas dedicated to floating projects and provide a list of main capacity density drivers. This summary analysis sets a baseline to study how different capacity density drivers could impact the progress towards state and federal deployment targets. Given the currently delineated Renewable Energy Areas in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) and the basis from the summary analysis, we estimate the expected offshore wind deployment over time federally and by state and compare it to the state and federal deployment targets. The proposed analysis helps identify gaps and needs to meet state and federal targets, which provides sufficient information to propose strategic supply chain and policy planning with the objective of meeting deployment goals.
capacity density↗
Long Beach Transit BEB Progress Report (Jan-Jun 2019)[Slides]
This report summarizes results of a battery electric bus (BEB) evaluation at Long Beach Transit, located in Southern California. Long Beach Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The focus of this evaluation is to compare the performance and the operating costs of the BEBs to that of conventional technology buses and to track progress over time. NREL completed a previous report funded by the Federal Transit Administration that documented results from January 2018 through December 2018. This report extends the data analysis through June 2019. The data period focus of this report is January 2019–June 2019. NREL plans to publish another written report on the Long Beach Transit fleet covering all of 2019.
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
Foothill Transit Battery Electric Bus Progress Report (Jul-Dec 2019)
This report summarizes results of a battery electric bus (BEB) evaluation at Foothill Transit, located in the San Gabriel Valley area of Los Angeles. Foothill Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The focus of this evaluation is to compare the performance and the operating costs of the BEBs to that of conventional technology buses and to track progress over time. Previous reports documented results from April 2014 through June 2019. This report extends the data analysis through December 2019. The data period focus of this report is July 2019–December 2019. NREL plans to publish progress reports on the Foothill Transit fleet every 6 months through 2020.
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
The Road to Useful Quantum Computers
Building a useful quantum computer is a grand science and engineering challenge, currently pursued intensely by teams around the world. In the 1980s, Richard Feynman and Yuri Manin observed independently that computers based on quantum mechanics might enable better simulations of quantum phenomena. Their vision remained an intellectual curiosity until Peter Shor published his famous quantum algorithm for integer factoring, and shortly thereafter a proof that errors in quantum computations can be corrected. Since then, quantum computing R&D has progressed rapidly, from small-scale experiments in university physics laboratories to well-funded industrial efforts and prototypes. Hype notwithstanding, quantum computers have yet to solve scientifically or practically important problems -- a target often called quantum utility. In this article, we describe the capabilities of contemporary quantum computers, compare them to the requirements of quantum utility, and illustrate how to track progress from today to utility. We highlight key science and engineering challenges on the road to quantum utility, touching on relevant aspects of our own research.
Emerging Technologies (cs.ET)↗
Foothill Transit Agency Battery Electric Bus Progress Report. Data Period Focus: Jan. 2020 through June 2020
This report summarizes results of a battery electric bus (BEB) evaluation at Foothill Transit, located in the San Gabriel Valley area of Los Angeles. Foothill Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The focus of this evaluation is to compare the performance and the operating costs of the BEBs to that of conventional technology buses and to track progress over time. Previous reports documented results from April 2014 through December 2019. This report extends the data analysis through June 2020. The data period focus of this report is January 2020-June 2020. NREL plans to publish progress reports on the Foothill Transit fleet every 6 months through 2020.
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
Foothill Transit Agency Battery Electric Bus Progress Report, Data Period Focus: Jan. 2019 through Jun. 2019 [Slides]
This report summarizes results of a battery electric bus (BEB) evaluation at Foothill Transit, located in the San Gabriel Valley area of Los Angeles. Foothill Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board and the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The focus of this evaluation is to compare the performance and the operating costs of the BEBs to that of conventional technology buses and to track progress over time. Previous reports documented results from April 2014 through December 2018. This report extends the data analysis through June 2019. The data period focus of this report is January 2019-June 2019. NREL plans to publish progress reports on the Foothill Transit fleet every 6 months through 2020.
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
Energy and Water Resilience Indicator Library
Energy and water resilience indicators provide a way to assess a site’s current energy and water resilience status relative to higher-level organizational goals. Using a consistent approach for evaluating the resilience posture of a portfolio of sites provides a mechanism for an organization to track progress over time. It also provides a mechanism for identifying opportunity areas across sites so that organizations can prioritize funding of measures that would benefit multiple sites. The information presented in this document provides an approach to defining energy and water resilience indicators that align with organizational goals, and a reference library of indicators that can help organizations create their own process of tracking the resilience performance of their sites over time.
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
Orange County Transportation Authority Fuel Cell Electric Bus Progress Report (Feb-Jul 2020) [Slides]
This report presents early results from a deployment of fuel cell electric buses (FCEBs) operated by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in Southern California. The ten FCEBs, produced by New Flyer, feature an electric drive propulsion system powered by a Ballard fuel cell system. The project team is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The goal of this evaluation is to compare the FCEB performance to that of conventional technology and to track progress over time toward meeting the technical targets set by DOE and the Department of Transportation (DOT). The FCEBs were delivered beginning in late-2019, and were placed in service on February 9, 2020. The data period covers February 2020 through July 2020. NREL collects data on ten 2016 model year compressed natural gas (CNG) buses as a baseline comparison at OCTA.
33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
Orange County Transportation Authority Fuel Cell Electric Bus Progress Report - Data Period Focus: Feb. 2020 through Jul. 2021 [Slides]
This report presents early results from a deployment of fuel cell electric buses (FCEBs) operated by Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in Southern California. The ten FCEBs, produced by New Flyer, feature an electric drive propulsion system powered by a Ballard fuel cell system. The project team is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The goal of this evaluation is to compare the FCEB performance to that of conventional technology and to track progress over time toward meeting the technical targets set by DOE and the Department of Transportation (DOT). The FCEBs were delivered beginning in late-2019, and were placed in service on February 9, 2020. The data period covers February 2020 through July 2021. NREL collects data on ten 2016 model year compressed natural gas (CNG) buses as a baseline comparison at OCTA.
30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
SunLine Transit Agency Fuel Cell Electric Bus Progress Report (Data Period Focus Jan-Jun 2020) [Slides]
This report presents early results from a deployment of fuel cell electric buses (FCEBs) operated by SunLine Transit Agency in the Coachella Valley area of California. The five FCEBs, produced by New Flyer, feature an electric drive propulsion system powered by a Ballard fuel cell system. The project team is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The goal of this evaluation is to compare the FCEB performance to that of conventional technology and to track progress over time toward meeting the technical targets set by DOE and the Department of Transportation (DOT). The FCEBs were delivered beginning in mid-2019. The data period covers January 2020 through July 2020. NREL collects data on five 2019 model year compressed natural gas (CNG) buses as a baseline comparison at SunLine. These new CNG buses were phased into service beginning in April 2020.
25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
SunLine Transit Agency Fuel Cell Electric Bus Progress Report - Data Period Focus: Jan. 2020 through Dec. 2021 [Slides]
This report presents early results from a deployment of fuel cell electric buses (FCEBs) operated by SunLine Transit Agency in the Coachella Valley area of California. The five FCEBs, produced by New Flyer, feature an electric drive propulsion system powered by a Ballard fuel cell system. The project team is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The goal of this evaluation is to compare the FCEB performance to that of conventional technology and to track progress over time toward meeting the technical targets set by DOE and the Department of Transportation (DOT). The FCEBs were delivered beginning in mid-2019. The data period covers January 2020 through December 2021. NREL collects data on five 2019 model year compressed natural gas (CNG) buses as a baseline comparison at SunLine. These new CNG buses were phased into service beginning in April 2020.
08 HYDROGEN↗