Results for “Task Force” — Page 12

DOE OSTI2014

Comparing Resource Adequacy Metrics and Their Influence on Capacity Value: Preprint

Traditional probabilistic methods have been used to evaluate resource adequacy. The increasing presence of variable renewable generation in power systems presents a challenge to these methods because, unlike thermal units, variable renewable generation levels change over time because they are driven by meteorological events. Thus, capacity value calculations for these resources are often performed to simple rules of thumb. This paper follows the recommendations of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation?s Integration of Variable Generation Task Force to include variable generation in the calculation of resource adequacy and compares different reliability metrics. Examples are provided using the Western Interconnection footprint under different variable generation penetrations.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Composite Power System Reliability with Renewables and Customer Flexibility

Composite Power System Reliability is defined as the computational procedure that quantifies the probability that the power system will perform the function of delivering electric power to customers adequately, on a continuous basis and with an acceptable quality. This definition leaves many details undefined and exemplifies the ambiguity in reliability analysis. The increasing deployment of wind and PV creates additional uncertainties that make reliability analysis a rather complex issue. Because of increased uncertainty the need for composite reliability analysis and utilization of results in power system planning is critical. New approaches are emerging for dealing with these problems from the operational point of view, including demand response programs, tapping on customer and distributed resource flexibility and new control approaches. The key question to be addressed is: how the new operational paradigms affect composite power system reliability. Here, this paper presents the ongoing work of the IEEE Composite System Reliability Task Force of the IEEE PES Reliability, Risk, Probability Application (RRPA) Subcommittee.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Microgrid Stability Definitions, Analysis, and Examples

This document is a summary of a report prepared by the IEEE PES Task Force (TF) on Microgrid Stability Definitions, Analysis, and Modeling [1], which defines concepts and identifies relevant issues related to stability in microgrids. In this paper, definitions and classification of microgrid stability are presented and discussed, considering pertinent microgrid features such as voltage-frequency dependency, unbalancing, low inertia, and generation intermittency. A few examples are also presented, highlighting some of the stability classes defined in the paper. Further examples, along with discussions on microgrid components modeling and stability analysis tools can be found in the TF report.

Farrokhabadi, Mostafa↗

DOE OSTI2023

Methods for Analysis and Quantification of Power System Resilience

This paper summarizes the report prepared by an IEEE PES Task Force. Resilience is a fairly new technical concept for power systems, and it is important to precisely delineate this concept for actual applications. As a critical infrastructure, power systems have to be prepared to survive rare but extreme incidents (natural catastrophes, extreme weather events, physical/cyber-attacks, equipment failure cascades, etc.) to guarantee power supply to the electricity-dependent economy and society. Thus, resilience needs to be integrated into planning and operational assessment to design and operate adequately resilient power systems. Quantification of resilience as a key performance indicator is important, together with costs and reliability. Quantification can analyze existing power systems and identify resilience improvements in future power systems. Given that a 100% resilient system is not economic (or even technically achievable), the degree of resilience should be transparent and comprehensible. Several gaps are identified to indicate further needs for research and development.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Distribution System Behind-the-Meter DERs: Estimation, Uncertainty Quantification, and Control

This paper summarizes the three-year technical activities of the IEEE Task Force (TF) on behind-the-meter (BTM) distributed energy resources (DERs): estimation, uncertainty quantification, and control. The potential grid services from BTM DERs are discussed in detail. The paper also reviews the state-of-the-art for BTM DERs visibility, uncertainty quantification, and, optimization and control. Furthermore, different aspects of the market structures associated with BTM DERs are covered, including emerging market and business models. Finally, needs and recommendations are provided for additional areas such as system protection, computing capabilities, algorithm development, market structure design, cyberinfrastructure and security, and hardware and software developments.

behind-the-meter↗

DOE OSTI2020

Real-Time Coupling of Geographically Distributed Research Infrastructures: Taxonomy, Overview, and Real-World Smart Grid Applications

Novel concepts enabling a resilient future power system and their subsequent experimental evaluation are experiencing a steadily growing challenge: large scale complexity and questionable scalability. The requirements on a research infrastructure (RI) to cope with the trends of such a dynamic system therefore grow in size, diversity and costs, making the feasibility of rigorous advancements questionable by a single RI. Analysis of large scale system complexity has been made possible by the real-time coupling of geographically separated RIs undertaking geographically distributed simulations (GDS), the concept of which brings the equipment, models and expertise of independent RIs, in combination, to optimally address the challenge. This article presents the outputs of IEEE PES Task Force on Interfacing Techniques for Simulation Tools towards standardization of GDS as a concept. First, the taxonomy for setups utilized for GDS is established followed by a comprehensive overview of the advancements in real-time couplings reported in literature. The overview encompasses fundamental technological design considerations for GDS. The article further presents four application oriented case studies (real-world implementations) where GDS setups have been utilized, demonstrating their practicality and potential in enabling the analysis of future complex power systems.

distributed laboratories↗

DOE OSTI2023

Microgrid Modeling for Stability Analysis

Here this document is a summary of a report prepared by the IEEE PES Task Force (TF) on Microgrid (MG) Dynamic Modeling, IEEE Power and Energy Society, Tech. Rep. PES-TR106, 2023. In this paper, the major issues and challenges in microgrid modeling for stability analysis are discussed, and a review of state-of-the-art modeling approaches and trends is presented. In the context of the IEEE 1547 standard, the document covers issues associated with component models for MG dynamic studies and simulations, including generator and grid modeling, full and average converter models, unbalanced and balanced system conditions, dynamic and static loads, protection requirements, and detailed and simplified controls considering communications delays, packet losses, and security issues. Considering the future integration of grids and MGs to form broad integrated networks, a discussion is presented of the use of phasor vis-à-vis electromagnetic transient simulation tools for MG dynamic stability studies, as well as modeling scale-up issues and MG equivalent models. Specifically white-, grey-, and black-box models, are presented. This TF paper and companion report constitute a modeling guide for R&D groups working on developments and standards of MGs with a focus on stability issues.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2018

Dark energy survey operations: years 4 and 5

The Dark Energy Survey is a “stage III” dark energy experiment, performing an optical imaging survey to measure cos-mological equation of state parameters using four independent methods. The scope and complexity of the survey, originallyscheduled for 525 nights of observing spread over five years and combining a 5000 degree wide survey with a 10 field weeklytime-domain survey, introduced complex strategic and tactical scheduling problems that needed to be addressed. We beginwith an overview of the process used to develop DES strategy and tactics, from the inception of the project, to task forces thatstudied and developed strategy changes over the course of the survey, to the nightly pre-observing meeting in which imme-diate tactical issues were addressed. We then summarize the strategic choices made for each sub-survey, including metrics,scheduling considerations, choice of time domain fields and their sequences of exposures, and wide survey footprint andpointing layout choices. We go on to describe the detailed process that determined which specific exposures were taken atwhich specific times. We give a chronology of the strategic and tactical peculiarities of each year of observing, including theproposal and execution of a sixth year. We give an overview ofobstac, the implementation of the DES scheduler used to sim-ulate and evaluate strategic and tactical options, and automate exposure scheduling; and describe developments inobstacfor use after DES. Appendices describe further details of data quality evaluation,τ, andteff; airmass calculation; and model-ing of the seeing and sky brightness. The significant corpus of DES data indicates that the simple scaling relations for seeingas a function of wavelength and airmass derived from the Kolmogorov turbulence model work adequately for exposureplanning purposes: deviations from these relations are modest in comparison with short time-scale seeing variations

Gruendl, Robert A.↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-B-207-00: CT Lung Cancer Screening Part 1

The US National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) was a multi-center randomized, controlled trial comparing a low-dose CT (LDCT) to posterior-anterior (PA) chest x-ray (CXR) in screening older, current and former heavy smokers for early detection of lung cancer. Recruitment was launched in September 2002 and ended in April 2004 when 53,454 participants had been randomized at 33 screening sites in equal proportions. Funded by the National Cancer Institute this trial demonstrated that LDCT screening reduced lung cancer mortality. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) cited NLST findings and conclusions in its deliberations and analysis of lung cancer screening. Under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the USPSTF favorable recommendation regarding lung cancer CT screening assisted in obtaining third-party payers coverage for screening. The objective of this session is to provide an introduction to the NLST and the trial findings, in addition to a comprehensive review of the dosimetry investigations and assessments completed using individual NLST participant CT and CXR examinations. Session presentations will review and discuss the findings of two independent assessments, a CXR assessment and the findings of a CT investigation calculating individual organ dosimetry values. The CXR assessment reviewed a total of 73,733 chest x-ray exams that were performed on 92 chest imaging systems of which 66,157 participant examinations were used. The CT organ dosimetry investigation collected scan parameters from 23,773 CT examinations; a subset of the 75,133 CT examinations performed using 97 multi-detector CT scanners. Organ dose conversion coefficients were calculated using a Monte Carlo code. An experimentally-validated CT scanner simulation was coupled with 193 adult hybrid computational phantoms representing the height and weight of the current U.S. population. The dose to selected organs was calculated using the organ dose library and the abstracted scan parameters. This session will review the results and summarize the individualized doses to major organs and the mean effective dose and CTDIvol estimate for 66,157 PA chest and 23,773 CT examinations respectively, using size-dependent computational phantoms coupled with Monte Carlo calculations. Learning Objectives: Review and summarize relevant NLST findings and conclusions. Understand the scope and scale of the NLST specific to participant dosimetry. Provide a comprehensive review of NLST participant dosimetry assessments. Summarize the results of an investigation providing individualized organ dose estimates for NLST participant cohorts.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-B-207-01: CT Lung Cancer Screening and the Medical Physicist: Background, Findings and Participant Dosimetry Summary of the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST)

The US National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) was a multi-center randomized, controlled trial comparing a low-dose CT (LDCT) to posterior-anterior (PA) chest x-ray (CXR) in screening older, current and former heavy smokers for early detection of lung cancer. Recruitment was launched in September 2002 and ended in April 2004 when 53,454 participants had been randomized at 33 screening sites in equal proportions. Funded by the National Cancer Institute this trial demonstrated that LDCT screening reduced lung cancer mortality. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) cited NLST findings and conclusions in its deliberations and analysis of lung cancer screening. Under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the USPSTF favorable recommendation regarding lung cancer CT screening assisted in obtaining third-party payers coverage for screening. The objective of this session is to provide an introduction to the NLST and the trial findings, in addition to a comprehensive review of the dosimetry investigations and assessments completed using individual NLST participant CT and CXR examinations. Session presentations will review and discuss the findings of two independent assessments, a CXR assessment and the findings of a CT investigation calculating individual organ dosimetry values. The CXR assessment reviewed a total of 73,733 chest x-ray exams that were performed on 92 chest imaging systems of which 66,157 participant examinations were used. The CT organ dosimetry investigation collected scan parameters from 23,773 CT examinations; a subset of the 75,133 CT examinations performed using 97 multi-detector CT scanners. Organ dose conversion coefficients were calculated using a Monte Carlo code. An experimentally-validated CT scanner simulation was coupled with 193 adult hybrid computational phantoms representing the height and weight of the current U.S. population. The dose to selected organs was calculated using the organ dose library and the abstracted scan parameters. This session will review the results and summarize the individualized doses to major organs and the mean effective dose and CTDIvol estimate for 66,157 PA chest and 23,773 CT examinations respectively, using size-dependent computational phantoms coupled with Monte Carlo calculations. Learning Objectives: Review and summarize relevant NLST findings and conclusions. Understand the scope and scale of the NLST specific to participant dosimetry. Provide a comprehensive review of NLST participant dosimetry assessments. Summarize the results of an investigation providing individualized organ dose estimates for NLST participant cohorts.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-B-207-02: CT Lung Cancer Screening and the Medical Physicist: A Dosimetry Summary of CT Participants in the National Lung Cancer Screening Trial (NLST)

The US National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) was a multi-center randomized, controlled trial comparing a low-dose CT (LDCT) to posterior-anterior (PA) chest x-ray (CXR) in screening older, current and former heavy smokers for early detection of lung cancer. Recruitment was launched in September 2002 and ended in April 2004 when 53,454 participants had been randomized at 33 screening sites in equal proportions. Funded by the National Cancer Institute this trial demonstrated that LDCT screening reduced lung cancer mortality. The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) cited NLST findings and conclusions in its deliberations and analysis of lung cancer screening. Under the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the USPSTF favorable recommendation regarding lung cancer CT screening assisted in obtaining third-party payers coverage for screening. The objective of this session is to provide an introduction to the NLST and the trial findings, in addition to a comprehensive review of the dosimetry investigations and assessments completed using individual NLST participant CT and CXR examinations. Session presentations will review and discuss the findings of two independent assessments, a CXR assessment and the findings of a CT investigation calculating individual organ dosimetry values. The CXR assessment reviewed a total of 73,733 chest x-ray exams that were performed on 92 chest imaging systems of which 66,157 participant examinations were used. The CT organ dosimetry investigation collected scan parameters from 23,773 CT examinations; a subset of the 75,133 CT examinations performed using 97 multi-detector CT scanners. Organ dose conversion coefficients were calculated using a Monte Carlo code. An experimentally-validated CT scanner simulation was coupled with 193 adult hybrid computational phantoms representing the height and weight of the current U.S. population. The dose to selected organs was calculated using the organ dose library and the abstracted scan parameters. This session will review the results and summarize the individualized doses to major organs and the mean effective dose and CTDIvol estimate for 66,157 PA chest and 23,773 CT examinations respectively, using size-dependent computational phantoms coupled with Monte Carlo calculations. Learning Objectives: Review and summarize relevant NLST findings and conclusions. Understand the scope and scale of the NLST specific to participant dosimetry. Provide a comprehensive review of NLST participant dosimetry assessments. Summarize the results of an investigation providing individualized organ dose estimates for NLST participant cohorts.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-207-00: CT Lung Cancer Screening and the Medical Physicist: Moving Forward

In the United States, Lung Cancer is responsible for more cancer deaths than the next four cancers combined. In addition, the 5 year survival rate for lung cancer patients has not improved over the past 40 to 50 years. To combat this deadly disease, in 2002 the National Cancer Institute launched a very large Randomized Control Trial called the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). This trial would randomize subjects who had substantial risk of lung cancer (due to age and smoking history) into either a Chest X-ray arm or a low dose CT arm. In November 2010, the National Cancer Institute announced that the NLST had demonstrated 20% fewer lung cancer deaths among those who were screened with low-dose CT than with chest X-ray. In December 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended the use of Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT and a little over a year later (Feb. 2015), CMS announced that Medicare would also cover Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT. Thus private and public insurers are required to provide Lung Cancer Screening programs using CT to the appropriate population(s). The purpose of this Symposium is to inform medical physicists and prepare them to support the implementation of Lung Screening programs. This Symposium will focus on the clinical aspects of lung cancer screening, requirements of a screening registry for systematically capturing and tracking screening patients and results (such as required Medicare data elements) as well as the role of the medical physicist in screening programs, including the development of low dose CT screening protocols. Learning Objectives: To understand the clinical basis and clinical components of a lung cancer screening program, including eligibility criteria and other requirements. To understand the data collection requirements, workflow, and informatics infrastructure needed to support the tracking and reporting components of a screening program. To understand the role of the medical physicist in implementing Lung Cancer Screening protocols for CT, including utilizing resources such as the AAPM Protocols and the ACR Designated Lung Screening Center program. UCLA Department of Radiology has an Institutional research agreement with Siemens Healthcare; Dr. McNitt-Gray has been a recipient of Research Support from Siemens Healthcare in the past. Dr. Aberle has been a Member of Advisory Boards for the LUNGevity Foundation (2011-present) and Siemens Medical Solutions. (2013)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-207-01: Background and Clinical Implementation of a Screening Program

In the United States, Lung Cancer is responsible for more cancer deaths than the next four cancers combined. In addition, the 5 year survival rate for lung cancer patients has not improved over the past 40 to 50 years. To combat this deadly disease, in 2002 the National Cancer Institute launched a very large Randomized Control Trial called the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). This trial would randomize subjects who had substantial risk of lung cancer (due to age and smoking history) into either a Chest X-ray arm or a low dose CT arm. In November 2010, the National Cancer Institute announced that the NLST had demonstrated 20% fewer lung cancer deaths among those who were screened with low-dose CT than with chest X-ray. In December 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended the use of Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT and a little over a year later (Feb. 2015), CMS announced that Medicare would also cover Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT. Thus private and public insurers are required to provide Lung Cancer Screening programs using CT to the appropriate population(s). The purpose of this Symposium is to inform medical physicists and prepare them to support the implementation of Lung Screening programs. This Symposium will focus on the clinical aspects of lung cancer screening, requirements of a screening registry for systematically capturing and tracking screening patients and results (such as required Medicare data elements) as well as the role of the medical physicist in screening programs, including the development of low dose CT screening protocols. Learning Objectives: To understand the clinical basis and clinical components of a lung cancer screening program, including eligibility criteria and other requirements. To understand the data collection requirements, workflow, and informatics infrastructure needed to support the tracking and reporting components of a screening program. To understand the role of the medical physicist in implementing Lung Cancer Screening protocols for CT, including utilizing resources such as the AAPM Protocols and the ACR Designated Lung Screening Center program. UCLA Department of Radiology has an Institutional research agreement with Siemens Healthcare; Dr. McNitt-Gray has been a recipient of Research Support from Siemens Healthcare in the past. Dr. Aberle has been a Member of Advisory Boards for the LUNGevity Foundation (2011-present) and Siemens Medical Solutions. (2013)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-207-02: Capturing Data Elements and the Role of Imaging Informatics

In the United States, Lung Cancer is responsible for more cancer deaths than the next four cancers combined. In addition, the 5 year survival rate for lung cancer patients has not improved over the past 40 to 50 years. To combat this deadly disease, in 2002 the National Cancer Institute launched a very large Randomized Control Trial called the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). This trial would randomize subjects who had substantial risk of lung cancer (due to age and smoking history) into either a Chest X-ray arm or a low dose CT arm. In November 2010, the National Cancer Institute announced that the NLST had demonstrated 20% fewer lung cancer deaths among those who were screened with low-dose CT than with chest X-ray. In December 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended the use of Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT and a little over a year later (Feb. 2015), CMS announced that Medicare would also cover Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT. Thus private and public insurers are required to provide Lung Cancer Screening programs using CT to the appropriate population(s). The purpose of this Symposium is to inform medical physicists and prepare them to support the implementation of Lung Screening programs. This Symposium will focus on the clinical aspects of lung cancer screening, requirements of a screening registry for systematically capturing and tracking screening patients and results (such as required Medicare data elements) as well as the role of the medical physicist in screening programs, including the development of low dose CT screening protocols. Learning Objectives: To understand the clinical basis and clinical components of a lung cancer screening program, including eligibility criteria and other requirements. To understand the data collection requirements, workflow, and informatics infrastructure needed to support the tracking and reporting components of a screening program. To understand the role of the medical physicist in implementing Lung Cancer Screening protocols for CT, including utilizing resources such as the AAPM Protocols and the ACR Designated Lung Screening Center program. UCLA Department of Radiology has an Institutional research agreement with Siemens Healthcare; Dr. McNitt-Gray has been a recipient of Research Support from Siemens Healthcare in the past. Dr. Aberle has been a Member of Advisory Boards for the LUNGevity Foundation (2011-present) and Siemens Medical Solutions. (2013)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

WE-D-207-03: CT Protocols for Screening and the ACR Designated Lung Screening Program

In the United States, Lung Cancer is responsible for more cancer deaths than the next four cancers combined. In addition, the 5 year survival rate for lung cancer patients has not improved over the past 40 to 50 years. To combat this deadly disease, in 2002 the National Cancer Institute launched a very large Randomized Control Trial called the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST). This trial would randomize subjects who had substantial risk of lung cancer (due to age and smoking history) into either a Chest X-ray arm or a low dose CT arm. In November 2010, the National Cancer Institute announced that the NLST had demonstrated 20% fewer lung cancer deaths among those who were screened with low-dose CT than with chest X-ray. In December 2013, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended the use of Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT and a little over a year later (Feb. 2015), CMS announced that Medicare would also cover Lung Cancer Screening using low dose CT. Thus private and public insurers are required to provide Lung Cancer Screening programs using CT to the appropriate population(s). The purpose of this Symposium is to inform medical physicists and prepare them to support the implementation of Lung Screening programs. This Symposium will focus on the clinical aspects of lung cancer screening, requirements of a screening registry for systematically capturing and tracking screening patients and results (such as required Medicare data elements) as well as the role of the medical physicist in screening programs, including the development of low dose CT screening protocols. Learning Objectives: To understand the clinical basis and clinical components of a lung cancer screening program, including eligibility criteria and other requirements. To understand the data collection requirements, workflow, and informatics infrastructure needed to support the tracking and reporting components of a screening program. To understand the role of the medical physicist in implementing Lung Cancer Screening protocols for CT, including utilizing resources such as the AAPM Protocols and the ACR Designated Lung Screening Center program. UCLA Department of Radiology has an Institutional research agreement with Siemens Healthcare; Dr. McNitt-Gray has been a recipient of Research Support from Siemens Healthcare in the past. Dr. Aberle has been a Member of Advisory Boards for the LUNGevity Foundation (2011-present) and Siemens Medical Solutions. (2013)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Lung cancer mortality among construction workers: implications for early detection

Objectives This study examined predictors of lung cancer mortality, beyond age and smoking, among construction workers employed at US Department of Energy (DOE) sites to better define eligibility for low-dose CT (LDCT) lung cancer screening. Methods Predictive models were based on 17 069 workers and 352 lung cancer deaths. Risk factors included age, gender, race/ethnicity, cigarette smoking, years of trade or DOE work, body mass index (BMI), chest X-ray results, spirometry results, respiratory symptoms, beryllium sensitisation and personal history of cancer. Competing risk Cox models were used to obtain HRs and to predict 5-year risks. Results Factors beyond age and smoking included in the final predictive model were chest X-ray changes, abnormal lung function, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), respiratory symptoms, BMI, personal history of cancer and having worked 5 or more years at a DOE site or in construction. Risk-based LDCT eligibility demonstrated improved sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value compared with current US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. The risk of lung cancer death from 5 years of work in the construction industry or at a DOE site was comparable with the risk from a personal cancer history, a family history of cancer or a diagnosis of COPD. LDCT eligibility criteria used for DOE construction workers, which includes factors beyond age and smoking, identified 86% of participants who eventually would die from lung cancer compared with 51% based on age and smoking alone. Conclusions Results support inclusion of risk from occupational exposures and non-malignant respiratory clinical findings in LDCT clinical guidelines.

Public, Environmental & Occupational Health↗

DOE OSTI2024

Comparative study of quarkonium transport in hot QCD matter

This document summarizes the efforts of the EMMI Rapid Reaction Task Force on “Suppression and (re)generation of quarkonium in heavy-ion collisions at the LHC”, centered around their 2019 and 2022 meetings. It provides a review of existing experimental results and theoretical approaches, including lattice QCD calculations and semiclassical and quantum approaches for the dynamical evolution of quarkonia in the quark-gluon plasma as probed in high-energy heavy-ion collisions. The key ingredients of the transport models are itemized to facilitate comparisons of calculated quantities such as reaction rates, binding energies, and nuclear modification factors. A diagnostic assessment of the various results is attempted and coupled with an outlook for the future.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Few is different: deciphering many-body dynamics in mesoscopic quantum gases

Emergent macroscopic descriptions of matter, such as hydrodynamics, are central to our description of complex physical systems across a wide spectrum of energy scales. The conventional understanding of these many-body phenomena has recently been shaken by a number of experimental findings. Collective behavior of matter has been observed in mesoscopic systems, such as high-energy hadron–hadron collisions, or ultracold gases with only a few strongly interacting fermions. In such systems, the separation of scales between macroscopic and microscopic dynamics (at the heart of any effective theory) is inapplicable. To address the conceptual challenges that arise from these observations and explore the universality of emergent descriptions of matter, the EMMI Rapid Reaction Task Force was assembled. This document summarizes the RRTF discussions on recent theoretical and experimental advances in this rapidly developing field. Leveraging technological breakthroughs in the control of quantum systems, we can now quantitatively explore what it means for a system to exhibit behavior beyond the sum of its individual parts. In particular, the report highlights how the (in)applicability of hydrodynamics and other effective theories can be probed across three principal frontiers: the size frontier, the equilibrium frontier, and the interaction frontier.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗