Comparison of source-location algorithms for atmospheric samplers

Abstract

Numerous algorithms have been developed to determine the source characteristics for an atmospheric release, e.g., (Bieringer et al., 2017). This study compares three models that have been applied to the data collected by the International Monitoring System operated by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Preparatory Commission to estimate source event parameters. Each model uses a different approach to estimate the parameters. A deterministic model uses a possible source region (PSR) approach (Ringbom et al., 2014) that is based on the correlation between predicted and measured sample values. An unnamed model developed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (herein called BAYEST) uses a Bayesian formulation (Eslinger et al., 2019; Eslinger et al., 2020; Eslinger and Schrom, 2016). The FREAR model uses a different Bayesian formulation (De Meutter and Hoffman, 2020; De Meutter et al., 2021; Pieter De Meutter, 2021). The performance of the three source-location models is evaluated with 100 synthetic release cases for the single xenon isotope, 133 Xe. The release cases resulted in detections in a fictitious network with 120 noble gas samplers. All three source-location models use the same sampling data. The two Bayesian models yield more accurate location estimates than the deterministic PSR model, with FREAR having slightly better location performance than BAYEST. Samplers with collection periods of 3, 6, 8, 12, and 24-h were used. Results from BAYEST show that location accuracy improves with each reduction in sample collection length. The BAYEST model is slightly better for estimating the start time of the release. The PSR model has about the same spread in start times as the FREAR model, but the PSR results have a better average start time. The Bayesian source-location algorithms give more accurate results than the PSR approach, and provide release magnitude estimates, while the base PSR model does not estimate the release magnitude. This investigation demonstrates that a reasonably dense sampling grid will sometimes yield poor location and time estimates regardless of the model. The poor estimates generally coincide with cases where there is a much larger distance between the release point and the first detecting sampler than the average sampler spacing.