Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Programming model”

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.

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

At least 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Compendium of Material Composition Data for Radiation Transport Modeling

In 2011, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) produced a document known as the Materials Compendium, or Compendium of Material Composition Data for Radiation Transport Modeling, PNNL 15870, Rev. 1, that contains material information useable for modeling purposes for properties of 372 materials. This information is used in several modeling programs used by the radiological/nuclear community, though it is primarily tailored for the Monte-Carlo-N-Particle code produced by Los Alamos National Laboratory. This new document Revision 2 includes a complete review and update of all materials data and references, addressing discrepancies and changes in materials data or references that have occurred since the first revision, an additional 40 materials have been added, primarily newer detector materials developed since the last revision, and isotopic specificity.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

VTK-m User's Guide (V.1.6)

High-performance computing relies on ever finer threading. Advances in processor technology include ever greater numbers of cores, hyperthreading, accelerators with integrated blocks of cores, and special vectorized instructions, all of which require more software parallelism to achieve peak performance. Traditional visualization solutions cannot support this extreme level of concurrency. Extreme scale systems require a new programming model and a fundamental change in how we design algorithms. To address these issues we created VTK-m: the visualization toolkit for multi-/many-core architectures.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Position Papers for the ASCR Workshop on Reimagining Codesign

On behalf of the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program in the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science, we are organizing a Workshop on Reimagining Codesign (ReCoDe). Codesign is the process of jointly designing interoperating components of a computing system—in particular: applications, algorithms, system software, programming models, and the hardware on which they run. The goal is to maximize the overall performance, efficiency, and other desirable qualities of the system as a whole. Codesign is a standard methodology in the embedded-systems community, where space, power, and cost constraints are commonly pitted against execution speed for a tightly constrained feature set. Over the last decade, the DOE has invested in codesign efforts to foster the development of exascale computing systems for broad classes of scientific and engineering applications. The ReCoDe workshop hopes to explore how scientific applications of interest to the DOE can be accelerated through close interactions with hardware designers and software-stack developers, in which all components adapt to each other’s requirements and constraints. We want to answer the question of what are the key tools and methodologies for accomplishing codesign in today’s computing landscape, and what will be the highest impact targets for meeting DOE’s emerging mission requirements. This workshop aims to bring together DOE, industry, and academia to identify opportunities to build on past codesign successes and identify new areas that are either emerging or that may need reimagining for the future. We want to continue to find opportunities that can be pursued as a joint effort and continue to break down the traditional customer/vendor dichotomy with true partnerships. From this work, DOE will benefit from increased application performance relative to what stock hardware or existing general-purpose roadmaps can provide, and vendors will benefit from expanding their hardware’s capabilities to address needs they might have not otherwise anticipated and thereby create more widespread interest in their products. The workshop will be structured around a set of breakout sessions, with every attendee expected to participate actively in the discussions. Afterward, workshop attendees—from DOE, industry, and academia—will produce a report for ASCR that summarizes the findings made during the workshop.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Carbon Intensities of Refining Products in Petroleum Refineries with Co-Processed Biofeedstocks

Petroleum refineries increasingly seek to generate fuels with lower carbon intensities (CIs; a measure of life cycle greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions per unit of energy of fuel; well-to-wheel [WTW]) to meet growing demand. Co-processing refers to a process that adds biomass-derived feedstocks to the fossil-based feedstocks of existing petroleum refinery process units. With the use of biofeedstocks, it is expected that co-processed fuels would have lower CIs than their petroleum counterparts without requiring changes in the existing infrastructure for producing, transporting, and using fuels. To quantify the GHG emissions reduction benefits of co-processing, this study uses a linear programming model to simulate petroleum refinery conditions with and without co-processing. The co-processing cases include three biofeedstocks (soy oil, tallow, and used cooking oil or UCO) used as 10 vol.% of the feedstock to a hydrotreater or hydrocracker since these lipid-based feedstocks have favorable properties to be treated in a hydrotreater or hydrocracker. In addition, we considered pyrolysis oil used as 10 vol.% of the feedstock to a fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) unit in the modeled refinery due to its higher oxygen content compared to other lipid-based feedstocks. Life cycle analysis (LCA) using two distinct approaches—process-level energy allocation and a refinery-level marginal approach—has been conducted for each case. The LCA results using process-level allocation show that there are no noticeable changes in emissions or energy use impacts at the facility level. The life cycle GHG emission reductions of co-processing cases are mainly related to the fraction of biogenic carbon embedded in each fuel product. For example, co-processed jet fuels (a mixture of fossil and biogenic fuels) made via hydrotreating or hydrocracking have higher biogenic carbon, which results in jet fuel CI reductions of 3.9%–8.6% compared to the CI of baseline petroleum jet fuels on a WTW basis. However, analysis of co-processed pyrolysis oil in an FCC shows that a higher fraction of biofeedstocks (29%) becomes process emissions (i.e., CO and CO 2 ), mainly due to the oxygenates in pyrolysis oil, and so it generates less renewable fuel than biofeedstocks co-processed via hydrotreating or hydrocracking. Using the refinery-level marginal approach, the changes in energy use and emissions of co-processing cases compared to the petroleum-only baseline case are allocated to the changes in fuel production (assuming renewable fuels). This approach generates the life cycle GHG emission values of co-processed renewable fuels, which are comparable to the CIs of standalone biofuel production pathways. However, as this approach relies on a rough assumption that product yields and emissions from co-processing units on fossil feedstocks remain the same with and without biofeedstock inputs, co-processing cases like FCC pyrolysis oil may generate quite skewed results.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2022

Multi-Fidelity Stochastic Economic Dispatch for Operating Low Carbon Power Grids

Grid operators can address the inherently stochastic nature of renewables by solving a two-stage stochastic programming model that minimizes the cost of dispatch decisions while accounting for the complex grid dynamics. It is common to use a sample average approximation to estimate the expectation of the second stage costs in this model. However, the large sample count needed for numerical accuracy makes effective modeling large-scale electric grids computationally intractable. We introduce a control variate multi-fidelity estimator for the second-stage recourse that enables high quality dispatch decisions in real-time with a reduced computational burden. We obtain a hierarchy of model fidelities by linearizing the AC power flow system representation to DC power flow, and by relaxing transmission and voltage network constraints. We evaluate the performance of our proposed method on a synthetic grid with 73 buses against a deterministic baseline with persistence forecast and a high-fidelity reference. Our analysis shows a computational speed-up of 7.62x with a minimal loss in accuracy. The multi-fidelity method is well suited to fidelity combinations that use a simplified network topology in their lower fidelity model and is an attractive option for applications where accurate grid modeling needed on a limited computational budget.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2022

The Importance of Scientific Visualization on Novel Hardware

Innovation in HPC hardware and adoption of heterogeneous systems has led to a variety of unique programming models. This has led to a challenge for scientific visualization software (and indeed all HPC software) to take full advantage of recent generations of supercomputing. Edge computing, where hardware is specialized for the needs of the particular application, exacerbates the problem. VTK-m has had many successes on this front by providing device-agnostic algorithms that compare favorably to implementations written to specific devices as shown in Table 1. However, VTK-m has focused mostly on GPU and traditional CPU multicore technology. There are numerous processor technologies, both existing and potential future, that are not being addressed by current R&D efforts.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

MPI nuts and bolts and more [Slides]

MPI (Message-Passing Interface) is a message-passing library interface specification. All parts of this definition are significant. MPI addresses primarily the message-passing parallel programming model, in which data is moved from the address space of one process to that of another process through cooperative operations on each process. . . MPI is a specification, not an implementation; there are multiple implementations of MPI. This specification is for a library interface; MPI is not a language, and all MPI operations are expressed as functions, subroutines, or methods, according to the appropriate language bindings that, for C and Fortran, are part of the MPI standard. MPI Forum is the organization which is responsible for the MPI Specification.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluating Operators in Deep Neural Networks for Improving Performance Portability of SYCL

SYCL is a portable programming model for heterogeneous computing, so it is important to obtain reasonable performance portability of SYCL. Towards the goal of better understanding and improving performance portability of SYCL for machine learning workloads, we have been developing benchmarks for basic operators in deep neural networks (DNNs). These operators could be offloaded to heterogeneous computing devices such as graphics processing units (GPUs) to speed up computation. In this work, we introduce the benchmarks, evaluate the performance of the operators on GPU-based systems, and describe the causes of the performance gap between the SYCL and Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) kernels. We find that the causes are related to the utilization of the texture cache for read-only data, optimization of the memory accesses with strength reduction, shared local memory accesses, and register usage per thread. We hope that the efforts of developing benchmarks for studying performance portability will stimulate discussion and interactions within the community.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

AI-Enhanced Co-Design for Next-Generation Microelectronics: Innovating Innovation (Workshop Report)

The Artificial Intelligence Enhanced Co-Design for Next Generation Microelectronics virtual workshop was held April 4-5, 2023, and attended by subject matter experts from universities, industry, and national laboratories. This was the third in a series of workshops to motivate the research community to identify and address major challenges facing microelectronics research and production. The 2023 workshop focused on a set of topics from materials to computing algorithms, and included discussions on relevant federal legislation and such as the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act (CHIPS Act) which was signed into law in the summer of 2022. Talks at the workshop included edge computing in radiation environments, new materials for neuromorphic computing, advanced packaging for microelectronics, and new AI techniques. We also received project updates from several of the Department of Energy (DOE) microelectronics co-design projects funded in the fall of 2021, and from three of the Energy Frontier Research Centers (EFRCs) that had been funded in the fall of 2022. The workshop also conducted a set of breakout discussions around the five principal research directions (PRDs) from the 2018 Department of Energy workshop report: 1) define innovative material, device, and architecture requirements driven by applications, algorithms, and software; 2) revolutionize memory and data storage; 3) re-imagine information flow unconstrained by interconnects; 4) redefine computing by leveraging unexploited physical phenomena; 5) reinvent the electricity grid through new materials, devices, and architectures. We tasked each breakout group to consider one primary PRD (and other PRDs as relevant topics arose during discussions) and to address questions such as whether the research community has embraced co-design as a methodology and whether new developments at any level of innovation from materials to programming models requires the research community to reevaluate the PRDs developed back in 2018.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Position Papers for the 2024 ASCR Workshop on Energy-Efficient Computing for Science

On behalf of the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program in the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science, we are organizing a Workshop on Energy-Efficient Computing for Science (EECS). Energy efficiency involves coordination across all the interoperating components of a computing system—in particular, applications, algorithms, system software, programming models, data management, and the hardware on which they run. Looking 10-15 years into the future, the goal is to dramatically lower the energy costs of the computational platforms (from the data center to the edge) serving DOE science while expanding the capabilities of these systems, broadening their applicability to science challenges of interest to DOE and the nation.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Electrifying Terminal Trucks To optimize freight yards

The objectives of this project were to demonstrate the feasibility of electrification for freight yards’ diesel terminal fleets through pilot projects with two or more fleets, and to generate outreach material that can be used regionally and nationally to promote electrification in other terminal fleets. We planned to leverage the data into a model program for adoption of zero emissions freight handling and make information about this project, its outcomes, and the business case for zero emission deployments available to the larger freight marketplace.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Improved Air-Conditioning Demand Response of Connected Communities over Individually Optimized Buildings

Connected communities potentially offer much greater demand response capabilities over singular building energy management systems (BEMS) through an increase of connectivity. The potential increase in benefits from this next step in connectivity is still under investigation, especially when applied to existing buildings. This work utilizes EnergyPlus simulation results on eight different commercial prototype buildings to estimate the potential savings on peak demand and energy costs using a mixed-integer linear programming model. This model is used in two cases: a fully connected community and eight separate buildings with BEMS. The connected community is optimized using all zones as variables, while the individual buildings are optimized separately and then aggregated. These optimization problems are run for a range of individual zone flexibility values. The results indicate that a connected community offered 60.0% and 24.8% more peak demand savings for low and high flexibility scenarios, relative to individually optimized buildings. Energy cost optimization results show only marginally better savings of 2.9% and 6.1% for low and high flexibility, respectively.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

AthenaK: A Performance-portable Version of the Athena++ Adaptive Mesh Refinement Framework

We describe AthenaK: a new implementation of the Athena++ block-based adaptive mesh refinement framework using the Kokkos programming model. Finite volume methods for Newtonian, special relativistic, and general relativistic (GR) hydrodynamics and magnetohydrodynamics (MHD), and GR-radiation hydrodynamics and MHD, as well as a module for evolving Lagrangian tracer or charged test particles (e.g., cosmic rays) are implemented using the framework. In two companion papers, we describe (1) a new solver for the Einstein equations based on the Z4c formalism, and (2) a GRMHD solver in dynamical spacetimes also implemented using the framework, enabling new applications in numerical relativity. By adopting Kokkos, the code can be run on virtually any hardware, including CPUs, GPUs from multiple vendors, and emerging Advanced RISC Machine processors. AthenaK shows excellent performance and weak scaling, achieving over 1 billion cell updates per second for hydrodynamics in three dimensions on a single NVIDIA Grace Hopper processor. It does this with a typical parallel efficiency of 80% on 65,536 AMD GPUs on the OLCF Frontier system. Such performance portability enables AthenaK to leverage modern exascale computing systems for challenging applications in astrophysical fluid dynamics, numerical relativity, and multimessenger astrophysics.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2026

TChem-atm (v2.0.0): scalable performance-portable multiphase atmospheric chemistry

We present TChem-atm, a performance-portable approach that enables efficient simulation of chemically detailed and multiphase atmospheric chemistry on modern heterogeneous computing architectures. Unlike previous efforts that rely on architecture-specific code or focus exclusively on gas-phase chemistry, TChem-atm supports fully coupled gas–aerosol systems with execution across CPUs, NVIDIA GPUs, and AMD GPUs through the Kokkos programming model. It integrates the flexible multiphase capabilities of the Community Atmospheric Model Chemistry Package (CAMP) with the high-performance kinetic routines of TChem, and includes automatic Jacobian construction with support for a range of stiff ODE solvers. In a proof-of-concept integration with the particle-resolved model PartMC, TChem-atm reproduces the existing PartMC–CAMP implementation within solver tolerances and delivers substantial GPU speedups, especially for large particle populations. Performance benchmarks reveal substantial speedups on GPU platforms, particularly for large particle populations, with consistent results across hardware backends. TChem-atm enables performance-portable execution across CPUs and GPUs, though optimal efficiency may require modest architecture-specific tuning (e.g., team and vector sizes), with up to a twofold improvement on the NVIDIA H100. It directly supports sectional and particle-resolved host models, while modal aerosol schemes require minor adaptation to provide particle-scale quantities such as representative diameters. By enabling chemically detailed, multiphase simulations with performance portability and host-model flexibility, TChem-atm facilitates the incorporation of advanced chemistry into atmospheric models.

Díaz-Ibarra, Oscar Homero [Sandia National Laborat↗
DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

CERF↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) Model: High-Resolution Power Plant Siting

Abstract This presentation gives an overview of the geospatial power plant siting model CERF. CERF (Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility) is an open source Python package developed under the Integrated Multisector Multiscale Modeling (IM3) Project at PNNL. This presentation covers an overview of how the CERF model works, walks through various power plant siting analyses, and discusses future research opportunities for the model. The CERF model can be accessed at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf. PNNL Information Release Number: PNNL-SA-207336 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

TRAILS Output Files

Overview This data repository contains ZIP files that store compressed versions of the output of running the WaterPaths utility planning and management tool in the DU Re-Evaluation mode (to download the tool, please see this GitHub repository). The tool was used to simulate the six-utility North Carolina Research Triangle problem. Details on the contents of each ZIP file can be seen below. Data details Temporal range: Weekly data for 2,344 weeks from 2015 to 2060 (45 years). Spatial range: Six water utilities in the North Carolina Research Triangle region (0: Chapel Hil/OWASA, 1: Durham, 2: Cary, 3: Raleigh, 4: Pittsboro, and 5: Chatham) File types: CSV and OUT Different solutions available The solution numbers correspond to the different pathway strategies (henceforth referred to as "solutions") discussed in paper's main and supporting text (abstract and link to the paper here). They are as follows: Sol92: The Durham-focused pathway strategy Sol132: The Raleigh-focused pathway strategy Sol140: The regionally-robust pathway strategy Objectives files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Objectives_RDMXX_solsXX_to_XX.csv files. Each CSV file will consist of a row representing all the objective values for that specific solution, while every six columns represents the reliability, restriction frequency, infrastructure net present value ($ mil), peak financial cost, worst-case cost, and unit cost ($ per MG; in that order) for each of the six utilities. There will be 1,000 such files, denoting the performance of the six utilities across the 1,000 deeply uncertain states of the world (DU SOWs). Pathway files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Pathways_sXX_RDMXX.out file. Each OUT corresponds to the set of infrastructure being triggered in a specific DU SOW, and each file will have the name file will consist of four tab-delimited columns that are described as follows: Realization: The realization in which an infrastructure options being triggered utility: The utility currently triggering infrastructure week: The week in which a specific infrastructure option is being triggered infra.: The infrastructure option being triggered If the OUT file contains only the header line, no infrastructure was triggered for that specific DU SOW. Policies files These files can be obtained by unzipping Policies.zip. Each of the 1,000 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly water use restriction policies for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: 0rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 0 (values between 0 and 1) 1rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 1 (values between 0 and 1) 2rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 2 (values between 0 and 1) 3rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 3 (values between 0 and 1) 4rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 4 (values between 0 and 1) 5rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 5 (values between 0 and 1) 0transf: transfer volume for utility 0 (in MGD) 1transf: transfer volume for utility 1 (in MGD) 2transf: transfer volume for utility 2 (in MGD) 3transf: transfer volume for utility 3 (in MGD) 4transf: transfer volume for utility 4 (in MGD) 5transf: transfer volume for utility 5 (in MGD) Water Sources files These files can be obtained by unzipping WaterSources_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each water source for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xvolume: available water volume from source X (in MGD) Xs_area: surface area of source X (in ACF) Xdemand: demand drawn from a water source from source X (in MGD) Xup_spill: upstream spillage from source X (in MGD) Xww_inflow: wastewater inflow from source X (in MGD) Xcatch_inflow: upstream catchment inflow to source X (in MGD) Xevap: evaporation multiplier for source X (values between 0 and 1) Xds_spill: downstream spillage from source X (in MGD) X_Y_alloc_cap: the allocated capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) X_Y_alloc_dem: the allocated demand from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Xtrmt_alloc_Y: the allocated treatment capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Utilities files These files can be obtained by unzipping Utilities_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each utility for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xcapacity: total storage capacity of utility X (in MG) Xnet_inf: : net inflow for all storage infrastructure for utility X (in MGD) Xst_rof: short term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_stor_rof: short-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_trmt_rof: short-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_rof: long-term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_stor_rof: long-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_trmt_rof: long-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xrest_demand: restricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunrest_demand: unrestricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunfulf_demand: unfulfilled demand for utility X (in MGD) Xwastewater: wastewater return for utility X (in MGD) Xtreat_capacity: total treatment capacity for utility X (in MG) Xcont_fund: reserve (contingency) fund balance for utility X Xins_pout: insurance payout for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xins_price: insurance price for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xinfra_npv: infrastructure net present value for utility ($mil) Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xdebt_serv: debt service for utility X (usually once per year if the infrastructure is triggered; % annual volumetric revenue) Xstor_vol: total stored volume (in MGD) Xobs_ann_dem: observed annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xproj_dem: projected annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xpv_debt_serv: present value of debt service payments for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xgross_rev: gross revenue for utility X ($mil) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

Artificial Intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗