SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “adaptive weights”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

220 records · Page 13

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Multi-Source Machine Learning and Thermoplastics Enhanced Aerostructure Manufacturing (mTEAM)

RTX Technology Research Center (RTRC), together with Collins Aerospace (Collins) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed an Artificial Intelligence (AI) / Machine Learning (ML) guided solution to advance the manufacturing and assembly of high performance and lightweight thermoplastic composite (TPC) aerospace products. The solution aims to lower risk, cost and lead time for induction heating based welding and consolidation processes for TPC structure. The cost and lead time of part and material specific process development for induction welding (IW) and induction consolidation will be reduced by replacing traditional empirical methods with optimization methods that merge AI/ML and physics-based process simulations and process experiments with sensing and controls. TPC-IW process development is empirical in nature, and uncertainties in material & process behavior exist near & far from the induction coil. Physics-based simulations can be leveraged directly for process optimization but can be too computationally expensive to run in high fidelity and real time to do robust process optimization. The key impact of successful TPC induction consolidation and welding is cost & lead time reduction for part & material specific consolidation and welding recipes. This is an enabler for more rapid deployment of TPC structures via joining assembly, which can reduce energy & cost intensive usage of autoclaves & ovens. The solution aimed to advance the U.S. Department of Energy’s interests in using thermoplastics and automation in composite manufacturing for improvement of products for existing markets via increased production speeds, reduced costs, and lowered use of energy. Welded TPC structures can offer significant weight & energy savings for high-value commercial aerospace & industrial applications compared to metal & thermoset composite structures assembled by mechanical fastening and/or adhesive bonding. The project was organized into two Budget Periods. Budget Period 1 (BP1) was 15 months and its goal was to perform ML process optimization framework development & deployment on lab-coupon aerostructure components. A Go/No-Go Review was performed at the end of BP1 to verify fulfilment of key tasks & milestones to justify a Go Decision to move into the next Budget Period. Budget Period 2 (BP2) was 12 months and its goal was the deployment of the ML framework for ML process optimization of pilot industrial scale aerostructure components. The overall project aim was to develop & demonstrate ML-enhanced modeling framework that learns process-property mapping from multiple data sources at different fidelities. During BP1, the team accomplished key tasks & milestones to demonstrate the concept of multi-source ML for TPC aerostructure consolidation and assembly. First, the team completed documentation of induction based TPC heating requirements including baseline metrics to compare measured results against. Next the team completed demonstration of data generation from physics-based simulations for ML surrogate model generation and demonstrated the integration of physics-based simulation data into multi-source AI/ML algorithms. In parallel, the team established the lab-coupon scale induction welding system and completed a process to label and reduce generated data from physics-based simulation and experiments for ML surrogate models to enable multi-source ML model training & testing. To complete BP1, the team integrated physics-based simulation data and experimental data into multi-source ML algorithms. This was based on the team completing ML deployment of the induction welding on a lab system at RTRC and AI/ML deployment on existing induction welding line at Collins. ORNL visited both Collins and RTRC sites to witness the TPC induction welding process. Then, ORNL designed and constructed a new version of their vision-based sensing system better adapted to acquire process signals of the TPC induction welding process for process anomaly and defect detection. In BP2, the team accomplished key tasks & milestones to scale up multi-source ML for TPC aerostructure consolidation and assembly from the lab-coupon scale to the pilot-industrial scale. In BP2, the team demonstrated real time anomaly & defect detection via experiments performed by ORNL & RTRC. The team completed ML-optimization heating trials for TPC induction consolidation at Collins, and the team confirmed pilot industrial scale experimental data from Collins was compatible with the developed ML pipeline from RTRC. The team completed sub-element scale ML process optimization demonstration at RTRC, where the team leveraged RTRC’s robotic TPC welding setup to de-risk the ML process optimization by performing ML analysis of recorded temperatures to account for complex part features. Then, the team applied its ML-derived control strategies and ML process optimization framework at Collins to the pilot-industrial scale on a demo skin-stiffener part representative of a nacelle aerostructure fan cowl section. The key innovation is the AI/ML framework enabling effective process development of high performance, lightweight, energy efficient TPCs for composite aircraft structures.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2023

Synchronization of Alternative Models in a Supermodel and the Learning of Critical Behavior

“Supermodeling” climate by allowing different models to assimilate data from one another in run time has been shown to give results superior to those of any one model and superior to any weighted average of model outputs. The only free parameters, connection strengths between corresponding variables in each pair of models, are determined using some form of machine learning. It is demonstrated that supermodeling succeeds because near critical states, interscale interactions are important but unresolved processes cannot be effectively represented diagnostically in any single parameterization scheme. In two examples, a pair of toy quasigeostrophic (QG) channel models of the midlatitudes and a pair of ECHAM5 models of the tropical Pacific atmosphere with a common ocean, supermodels dynamically combine parameterization schemes so as to capture criticality, associated critical structures, and the supporting scale interactions. The QG supermodeling scheme extends a previous configuration in which two such models synchronize with intermodel connections only between medium-scale components of the flow; here the connections are trained against a third “real” model. Intermittent blocking patterns characterize the critical behavior thus obtained, even where such patterns are missing in the constituent models. In the ECHAM-based climate supermodel, the corresponding critical structure is the single ITCZ pattern, a pattern that occurs in neither of the constituent models. In conclusion, for supermodels of both types, power spectra indicate enhanced interscale interactions in frequency or energy ranges of physical interest, in agreement with observed data, and supporting a generalized form of the self-organized criticality hypothesis.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Online transfer learning strategy for enhancing the scalability and deployment of deep reinforcement learning control in smart buildings

In recent years, advanced control strategies based on Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) proved to be effective in optimizing the management of integrated energy systems in buildings, reducing energy costs and improving indoor comfort conditions when compared to traditional reactive controllers. However, the scalability and implementation of DRL controllers are still limited since they require a considerable amount of time before converging to a near-optimal solution. This issue is currently addressed in literature through the offline pre-training of the DRL agent. However this solution results in two main critical issues: (1) the need to develop a building surrogate model to perform the training task, and (2) the need to perform a fine-tuning process over several training episodes to obtain a near-optimal control policy. In this context, this paper introduces an Online Transfer Learning (OTL) strategy that exploits two knowledge-sharing techniques, weight-initialization and imitation learning, to transfer a DRL control policy from a source office building to various target buildings in a simulation environment coupling EnergyPlus and Python. A DRL controller based on discrete Soft Actor–Critic (SAC) is trained on the source building to manage the operation of a cooling system consisting of a chiller and a thermal storage. Several target buildings are defined to benchmark the performance of the OTL strategy with that of a Rule-Based Controller (RBC) and two DRL-based control strategies, deployed in offline and online fashion. The strategy adopted for OTL emulates the real world implementation with a simulation process by implementing the transferred DRL agent for a single episode in the target buildings. Target buildings have the same geometrical features and are served by the same energy system as the source building, but differ in terms of weather conditions, electricity price schedules, occupancy patterns, and building envelope efficiency levels. The results show that the OTL strategy can reduce the cumulated sum of temperature violations on average by 50% and 80% respectively when compared to RBC and online DRL while enhancing the energy system operation with electricity cost savings ranging between 20% and 40%. Furthermore, the OTL agent performs slightly worse than the offline DRL controller but it does not require any modeling effort and can be implemented directly on target buildings emulating a real-world implementation.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2026

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗