Engineering topics
Michaud, Isaac
Publications and source records attributed to Michaud, Isaac.
Impact of Higher Fidelity Design Iterations on Critical System Criteria
Nuclear criticality experiments are effective at informing the performance of nuclear data libraries across many applications. This work explores the implications of refining critical experiment MCNP models from their low fidelity optimization phase to penultimate neutronic models. Specifically, this work is focused on two series of plutonium fueled experiments funded through internal programs at Los Alamos National Laboratory building off previous efforts under the EUCLID (Experiments Underpinned by Computational Learning for Improvements in Nuclear Data) collaboration. Thales, the first of the two collaborations, is a fast spectrum Ta-reflected plutonium experiment to support operations at PF-4. The second experiment are twin configurations designed to target the intermediate energy cross sections in 239 Pu. Motivation for this experiment stems from the PARallel Approach of Differential and InteGral Measurements (PARADIGM) collaboration which hopes to achieve a significant reduction in 239 Pu cross section uncertainties in the intermediate region.
Challenges of COVID-19 Case Forecasting in the US, 2020–2021
During the COVID-19 pandemic, forecasting COVID-19 trends to support planning and response was a priority for scientists and decision makers alike. In the United States, COVID-19 forecasting was coordinated by a large group of universities, companies, and government entities led by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US COVID-19 Forecast Hub ( https://covid19forecasthub.org ). We evaluated approximately 9.7 million forecasts of weekly state-level COVID-19 cases for predictions 1–4 weeks into the future submitted by 24 teams from August 2020 to December 2021. We assessed coverage of central prediction intervals and weighted interval scores (WIS), adjusting for missing forecasts relative to a baseline forecast, and used a Gaussian generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to evaluate differences in skill across epidemic phases that were defined by the effective reproduction number. Overall, we found high variation in skill across individual models, with ensemble-based forecasts outperforming other approaches. Forecast skill relative to the baseline was generally higher for larger jurisdictions (e.g., states compared to counties). Over time, forecasts generally performed worst in periods of rapid changes in reported cases (either in increasing or decreasing epidemic phases) with 95% prediction interval coverage dropping below 50% during the growth phases of the winter 2020, Delta, and Omicron waves. Ideally, case forecasts could serve as a leading indicator of changes in transmission dynamics. However, while most COVID-19 case forecasts outperformed a naïve baseline model, even the most accurate case forecasts were unreliable in key phases. Further research could improve forecasts of leading indicators, like COVID-19 cases, by leveraging additional real-time data, addressing performance across phases, improving the characterization of forecast confidence, and ensuring that forecasts were coherent across spatial scales. In the meantime, it is critical for forecast users to appreciate current limitations and use a broad set of indicators to inform pandemic-related decision making.
Expert‐in‐the‐loop design of integral nuclear data experiments
Abstract Nuclear data are fundamental inputs to radiation transport codes used for reactor design and criticality safety. The design of experiments to reduce nuclear data uncertainty has been a challenge for many years, but advances in the sensitivity calculations of radiation transport codes within the last two decades have made optimal experimental design possible. The design of integral nuclear experiments poses numerous challenges not emphasized in classical optimal design, in particular, constrained design spaces (in both a statistical and engineering sense), severely under‐determined systems, and optimality uncertainty. We present a design pipeline to optimize critical experiments that uses constrained Bayesian optimization within an iterative expert‐in‐the‐loop framework. We show a successfully completed experiment campaign designed with this framework that involved two critical configurations and multiple measurements that targeted compensating errors in 239 Pu nuclear data.
The EUCLID Experiment and Nuclear Data Library Comparisons
The EUCLID (Experiments Underpinned by Computational Learning for Improvements in Nuclear Data) project at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) was a Laboratory Directed Research and Development project which aimed to reduce compensating errors in nuclear data. One major component of the project was a series of critical experiments, both measuring k eff and various other observables with the goal of using these experiments to constrain 239 Pu nuclear data uncertainties and identify compensating errors. This paper details some of the experiment design and how various nuclear data libraries simulate the EUCLID system, including sensitivities compared to Jezebel.
Predictive performance of multi-model ensemble forecasts of COVID-19 across European nations
Background: Short-term forecasts of infectious disease burden can contribute to situational awareness and aid capacity planning. Based on best practice in other fields and recent insights in infectious disease epidemiology, one can maximise the predictive performance of such forecasts if multiple models are combined into an ensemble. Here, we report on the performance of ensembles in predicting COVID-19 cases and deaths across Europe between 08 March 2021 and 07 March 2022. Methods: We used open-source tools to develop a public European COVID-19 Forecast Hub. We invited groups globally to contribute weekly forecasts for COVID-19 cases and deaths reported by a standardised source for 32 countries over the next 1–4 weeks. Teams submitted forecasts from March 2021 using standardised quantiles of the predictive distribution. Each week we created an ensemble forecast, where each predictive quantile was calculated as the equally-weighted average (initially the mean and then from 26th July the median) of all individual models’ predictive quantiles. We measured the performance of each model using the relative Weighted Interval Score (WIS), comparing models’ forecast accuracy relative to all other models. We retrospectively explored alternative methods for ensemble forecasts, including weighted averages based on models’ past predictive performance. Results: Over 52 weeks, we collected forecasts from 48 unique models. We evaluated 29 models’ forecast scores in comparison to the ensemble model. We found a weekly ensemble had a consistently strong performance across countries over time. Across all horizons and locations, the ensemble performed better on relative WIS than 83% of participating models’ forecasts of incident cases (with a total N=886 predictions from 23 unique models), and 91% of participating models’ forecasts of deaths (N=763 predictions from 20 models). Across a 1–4 week time horizon, ensemble performance declined with longer forecast periods when forecasting cases, but remained stable over 4 weeks for incident death forecasts. In every forecast across 32 countries, the ensemble outperformed most contributing models when forecasting either cases or deaths, frequently outperforming all of its individual component models. Among several choices of ensemble methods we found that the most influential and best choice was to use a median average of models instead of using the mean, regardless of methods of weighting component forecast models. Conclusions: Our results support the use of combining forecasts from individual models into an ensemble in order to improve predictive performance across epidemiological targets and populations during infectious disease epidemics. Our findings further suggest that median ensemble methods yield better predictive performance more than ones based on means. Our findings also highlight that forecast consumers should place more weight on incident death forecasts than incident case forecasts at forecast horizons greater than 2 weeks. Funding: AA, BH, BL, LWa, MMa, PP, SV funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant 1R01GM109718, NSF BIG DATA Grant IIS-1633028, NSF Grant No.: OAC-1916805, NSF Expeditions in Computing Grant CCF-1918656, CCF-1917819, NSF RAPID CNS-2028004, NSF RAPID OAC-2027541, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 75D30119C05935, a grant from Google, University of Virginia Strategic Investment Fund award number SIF160, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under Contract No. HDTRA1-19-D-0007, and respectively Virginia Dept of Health Grant VDH-21-501-0141, VDH-21-501-0143, VDH-21-501-0147, VDH-21-501-0145, VDH-21-501-0146, VDH-21-501-0142, VDH-21-501-0148. AF, AMa, GL funded by SMIGE - Modelli statistici inferenziali per governare l'epidemia, FISR 2020-Covid-19 I Fase, FISR2020IP-00156, Codice Progetto: PRJ-0695. AM, BK, FD, FR, JK, JN, JZ, KN, MG, MR, MS, RB funded by Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland with grant 28/WFSN/2021 to the University of Warsaw. BRe, CPe, JLAz funded by Ministerio de Sanidad/ISCIII. BT, PG funded by PERISCOPE European H2020 project, contract number 101016233. CP, DL, EA, MC, SA funded by European Commission - Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology through the contract LC-01485746, and Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades and FEDER, with the project PGC2018-095456-B-I00. DE., MGu funded by Spanish Ministry of Health / REACT-UE (FEDER). DO, GF, IMi, LC funded by Laboratory Directed Research and Development program of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) under project number 20200700ER. DS, ELR, GG, NGR, NW, YW funded by National Institutes of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119582; the content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS or the National Institutes of Health). FB, FP funded by InPresa, Lombardy Region, Italy. HG, KS funded by European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. IV funded by Agencia de Qualitat i Avaluacio Sanitaries de Catalunya (AQuAS) through contract 2021-021OE. JDe, SMo, VP funded by Netzwerk Universitatsmedizin (NUM) project egePan (01KX2021). JPB, SH, TH funded by Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; grant 05M18SIA). KH, MSc, YKh funded by Project SaxoCOV, funded by the German Free State of Saxony. Presentation of data, model results and simulations also funded by the NFDI4Health Task Force COVID-19 ( https://www.nfdi4health.de/task-force-covid-19-2 ) within the framework of a DFG-project (LO-342/17-1). LP, VE funded by Mathematical and Statistical modelling project (MUNI/A/1615/2020), Online platform for real-time monitoring, analysis and management of epidemic situations (MUNI/11/02202001/2020); VE also supported by RECETOX research infrastructure (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic: LM2018121), the CETOCOEN EXCELLENCE (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17-043/0009632), RECETOX RI project (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16-013/0001761). NIB funded by Health Protection Research Unit (grant code NIHR200908). SAb, SF funded by Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z).
Designing Critical Experiments Using Gaussian Process Optimization
New nuclear applications may lack similarity between the application and existing ICSBEP benchmarks. Without accurate benchmark data, predictive simulations will have high uncertainty in the estimate of a parameter of interest (such as k eff ). The design of critical experiments tuned for specific applications of interest is one solution to reducing uncertainty in the necessarily nuclear data. We propose an optimization technique to design critical experiments that match the cross-section sensitivities of an application model while minimizing the number of simulation runs in the optimization. The optimization of a critical experiment is slow because the potential design space covers many qualitative variables (types of material and geometries) and corresponding quantitative variables (e.g., material dimensions) and the evaluation of any specific design requires running an expensive code like MCNP1 and Whisper. The optimization of expensive black-box computer codes with quantitative variables has been extensively explored in the literature of design of computer experiments. We propose a modified version of standard Gaussian process (GP) optimization that optimizes over multiple discrete configurations of qualitative variables in parallel which reduces the computational cost of the entire optimization. The goal of this work is to minimize the number of MCNP evaluations while still exploring many different design configurations in parallel.