Engineering topics

Malof, Jordan M.

Publications and source records attributed to Malof, Jordan M..

3 records

DOE OSTI2023

Automated Extraction of Energy Systems Information from Remotely Sensed Data: A Review and Analysis

We report high quality energy systems information is a crucial input to energy systems research, modeling, and decision-making. Unfortunately, actionable information about energy systems is often of limited availability, incomplete, or only accessible for a substantial fee or through a non-disclosure agreement. Recently, remotely sensed data (e.g., satellite imagery, aerial photography) have emerged as a potentially rich source of energy systems information. However, the use of these data is frequently challenged by its sheer volume and complexity, precluding manual analysis. Recent breakthroughs in machine learning have enabled automated and rapid extraction of useful information from remotely sensed data, facilitating large-scale acquisition of critical energy system variables. Here we present a systematic review of the literature on this emerging topic, providing an in-depth survey and review of papers published within the past two decades. We first taxonomize the existing literature into ten major areas, spanning the energy value chain. Within each research area, we distill and critically discuss major features that are relevant to energy researchers, including, for example, key challenges regarding the accessibility and reliability of the methods. We then synthesize our findings to identify limitations and trends in the literature as a whole, and discuss opportunities for innovation. These include the opportunity to extend the methods beyond electricity to broader energy systems and wider geographic areas; and the ability to expand the use of these methods in research and decision making as satellite data become cheaper and easier to access. We also find that there are persistent challenges: limited standardization and rigor of performance assessments; limited sharing of code, which would improve replicability; and a limited consideration of the ethics and privacy of data.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

What you get is not always what you see—pitfalls in solar array assessment using overhead imagery

Effective integration planning for small, distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) arrays into electric power grids requires access to high quality data: the location and power capacity of individual solar PV arrays. Unfortunately, national databases of small-scale solar PV do not exist; those that do are limited in their spatial resolution, typically aggregated up to state or national levels. While several promising approaches for solar PV detection have been published, strategies for evaluating the performance of these models are often highly heterogeneous from study to study. The resulting comparison of these methods for practical applications for energy assessments becomes challenging and may imply that the reported performance evaluations overly optimistic. The heterogeneity comes in many forms, each of which we explore in this work: the degree of diversity of the locations and sensors (e.g. different satellites, aerial photography) from which the training and validation data originate, the validation of ground truth (manual annotation of imagery vs known solar PV locations), the level of spatial aggregation (e.g. array-level vs regional estimates), and inconsistencies in the training and validation datasets (e.g. different datasets are used for each study and those data are not always made accessible). For each, we discuss emerging practices from the literature to address them or suggest directions of future research. As part of our investigation, we evaluate solar PV identification performance in two large regions: the entire state of Connecticut and the city of San Diego, CA. In Connecticut, we also use 33,114 known parcel-level solar PV installations from Berkeley Lab’s Tracking the Sun dataset to evaluate parcel-level performance and evaluate capacity estimates using 169 municipalities. We also make our code (which we call SolarMapper), pre-trained models, training data, and predictions publicly available and provide a web portal for interactively inspecting each prediction that was made. Here our findings suggest that traditional performance evaluation of the automated identification of solar PV from satellite imagery may be optimistic due to common limitations in the validation process. The takeaways from this work are intended to inform and catalyze the large-scale practical application of automated solar PV assessment techniques by energy researchers and professionals.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Inverse deep learning methods and benchmarks for artificial electromagnetic material design

In this work we investigate the use of deep inverse models (DIMs) for designing artificial electromagnetic materials (AEMs) – such as metamaterials, photonic crystals, and plasmonics – to achieve some desired scattering properties (e.g., transmission or reflection spectrum). DIMs are deep neural networks (i.e., deep learning models) that are specially-designed to solve ill-posed inverse problems. There has recently been tremendous growth in the use of DIMs for solving AEM design problems however there has been little comparison of these approaches to examine their absolute and relative performance capabilities. In this work we compare eight state-of-the-art DIMs on three unique AEM design problems, including two models that are novel to the AEM community. Our results indicate that DIMs can rapidly produce accurate designs to achieve a custom desired scattering on all three problems. Although no single model always performs best, the Neural-Adjoint approach achieves the best overall performance across all problem settings. As a final contribution we show that not all AEM design problems are ill-posed, and in such cases a conventional deep neural network can perform better than DIMs. We recommend that a deep neural network is always employed as a simple baseline approach when addressing AEM design problems. Furthermore, we publish python code for our AEM simulators and our DIMs to enable easy replication of our results, and benchmarking of new DIMs by the AEM community.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗