SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “data infrastructures”

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.

At least 343 records · Page 19

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2020

FaceBase 3: analytical tools and FAIR resources for craniofacial and dental research

ABSTRACT The FaceBase Consortium was established by the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research in 2009 as a ‘big data’ resource for the craniofacial research community. Over the past decade, researchers have deposited hundreds of annotated and curated datasets on both normal and disordered craniofacial development in FaceBase, all freely available to the research community on the FaceBase Hub website. The Hub has developed numerous visualization and analysis tools designed to promote integration of multidisciplinary data while remaining dedicated to the FAIR principles of data management (findability, accessibility, interoperability and reusability) and providing a faceted search infrastructure for locating desired data efficiently. Summaries of the datasets generated by the FaceBase projects from 2014 to 2019 are provided here. FaceBase 3 now welcomes contributions of data on craniofacial and dental development in humans, model organisms and cell lines. Collectively, the FaceBase Consortium, along with other NIH-supported data resources, provide a continuously growing, dynamic and current resource for the scientific community while improving data reproducibility and fulfilling data sharing requirements.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Hybrid Analytics Solution to Improve Coal Power Plant Operations

This project focused on developing advanced methods for thermal performance monitoring of a coal-fueled power plant. The specific goal was to develop and demonstrate a new thermal performance monitoring approach using a hybrid model that integrates a physics-based heat balance model with a machine learning-based pattern recognition model. The hybrid model enables increased accuracy and scope of the thermal analysis and an improved ability to monitor and detect changes in plant operation. This new approach takes full advantage of the individual model capabilities and creates an important new set of capabilities not previously possible using the two types of models separately. Using the heat balance model, a rich set of derived parameters (virtual sensors) are calculated from the measured plant operating data at each time point. The combined measured and derived data values are used by machine learning algorithms to create pattern recognition models over the range of normal unit operation. To create the monitoring models, historical data from normal operation of the plant is first processed by the heat balance model to compute the derived parameter data. The result is a greatly expanded set of normal operating data that can be used as input to create the pattern recognition model. Once the models are calibrated for normal operation, the hybrid model is suitable for use in continuous online monitoring. During online monitoring, new plant operating data is processed first by the heat balance model and then by the pattern recognition model. Results from the pattern recognition model quantify the deviation of each measured or derived parameter from its expected value in normal operation. The hybrid models can detect abnormal changes in plant operating data with very high accuracy and sensitivity. When abnormal behavior is detected, alerts are generated automatically for evaluation by the plant monitoring staff. The new hybrid solution product was developed and verified in the performance of the project. The hybrid solution was tested first in a simulation environment that mimicked the plant data systems and infrastructure used by U.S. power generating plants and utilities. The hybrid solution was then deployed for real-time, online monitoring of an operating coal-fueled power plant at a field test site. Field testing demonstrated that all hybrid solution development objectives were accomplished. The project work was based on combining the capabilities of two existing software products to create the new hybrid solution product. One of these was the existing MapEx® heat balance product and the other was the existing SureSense® advanced pattern recognition product. Each of these separate products was assessed to be at a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 9 at the start of the effort. The hybrid solution product was assessed to be at a TRL of 2 at the start of the project based on early feasibility work by the project team. At completion of the field testing performed in the project, the hybrid solution product was assessed to be at a TRL of 7. The project team expects that the hybrid solution product will be deployed commercially and will achieve a TRL of 9 within one year after completion of the project.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2022

State Indicators for Advancing Demand Flexibility and Energy Efficiency in Buildings - Part I [Slides]

This slide deck report identifies objectives and key indicators for state activities that advance demand flexibility in buildings — legislation, utility regulatory proceedings, executive orders and programs. It also illustrates progress to date and identifies trends, gaps, and opportunities. Part I of the report focuses on (1) demand response and (2) energy efficiency targeted to reduce peak demand or integrate with demand response. This section covers building energy codes, appliance and equipment standards, resource standards, utility planning, utility programs, advanced metering infrastructure and meter data, rate design, state programs, state energy planning, and related state policies and regulations. Part II of the report addresses traditional energy efficiency indicators, including utility and state programs, codes, and standards that support annual energy savings. See the additional links for an infographic, library of cited state documents on demand flexibility, and presentation to the NASEO-NARUC Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings Working Group.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Research Directions on AI for Science, Energy, and Security: Report on Summer 2022 Workshops

Over the past decade, fundamental changes in artificial intelligence (AI)—from foundational to applied—have delivered dramatic insights across a wide breadth of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) mission space. AI is helping to augment and improve scientific and engineering workflows (e.g., for control, design, and dramatic performance gains through surrogate models) in national security, the Office of Science, and DOE’s applied energy programs. The progress and potential for AI in DOE science was captured in the 2020 “AI for Science” report from the DOE laboratory community in collaboration with academia and industry. Specific scientific areas ready to further leverage the power of AI ranged from the scale and performance of computational models to data analysis to creating new classes of observations using computer vision. Since that report, the scale and scope of scientific AI have accelerated, revealing new, emergent properties that yield insights that go beyond enabling opportunities to being potentially transformative in the way that scientific problems are posed and solved. Thus, under the guidance of both the Office of Science (SC) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the DOE national laboratories organized a series of workshops in 2022 to gather input on new and rapidly emerging opportunities and challenges of scientific AI. This 2023 report is a synthesis of those workshops. The scientific community believes AI can have a foundational impact on a broad range of DOE missions, including science, energy, and national security. Further, DOE has unique capabilities that enable the community to drive progress in scientific use of AI, building on long-standing DOE strengths and investments in computation, data, and communications infrastructure, spanning the Energy Sciences Network (ESnet), the Exascale Computing Project (ECP), and integrative programs such as the NNSA Office of Defense Programs Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) and the SC Scientific Discovery through Advanced Computing (SciDAC) programs.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Deploying a Publicly Available and Living National Oil and Gas Well Geodatabase: CO2-Locate: A Dynamic Database & Tool

Emission mitigation and safe geologic carbon storage require an understanding of local wellbore infrastructure, yet well data are siloed across many entities. Addressing this challenge, the National Energy Technology Laboratory published CO2-Locate, an integrated and dynamic national wellbore geodatabase. CO2-Locate offers up to date well data spanning more than 40 federal, state, and tribal entities, as well as spatially summarized insights designed to support commercial, regulatory, and research communities as they strive to curb climate change through a national energy transition.

Pfander, Isabelle↗

DOE OSTI2024

Cyber-Informed Engineering Research and Development Guide

This document provides guidance on incorporating Cyber Informed Engineering (CIE) principles into the research and development (R&D) of operational technology systems and tools, facilitating the creation and adoption of innovative technologies that are secure and resilient by design. As technological innovation and research are becoming pivotal for economic and national security, cybersecurity has emerged as a paramount concern across industries and sectors. The challenge of integrating robust cybersecurity measures is imperative to safeguard critical infrastructure, protect sensitive data, and preserve national security interests.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Initial User Study Insights Clarified Community Requirements & Early Feedback on Conceptual Design

The HPDF User Experience (UX) team conducted eight semi-structured interviews with twelve individuals leading data and computing infrastructure work at DOE Office of Science (SC) user facilities or projects. This report presents key takeaways synthesizing community perspectives and needs, along with recommendations for the project. These insights should be considered as conceptual design work continues, early partnerships begin, workflow readiness activities evaluate and enhance key scientific tools, and early access systems are made available to the Office of Science (SC) community. Vigilance in meeting community requirements and ensuring workflow readiness will be needed to ensure HPDF’s success.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2026

From Raw to Curated Data: A Lakehouse Approach for Scientific Workflows

This report provides a technical overview of how to go from raw to curated data in three stages using a lakehouse approach. We focus on the application of open source tools in scientific use cases (while noting parallels to enterprise and commercial alternatives). Our goal is to provide scientific data managers and infrastructure providers with a common frame of reference for understanding and applying modern lakehouse technologies and approaches.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

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↗

DOE OSTI2026

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. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. 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↗

NASA NTRS1991

SHARP: Spacecraft Health Automated Reasoning Prototype

The planetary spacecraft mission OPS as applied to SHARP is studied. Knowledge systems involved in this study are detailed. SHARP development task and Voyager telecom link analysis were examined. It was concluded that artificial intelligence has a proven capability to deliver useful functions in a real time space flight operations environment. SHARP has precipitated major change in acceptance of automation at JPL. The potential payoff from automation using AI is substantial. SHARP, and other AI technology is being transferred into systems in development including mission operations automation, science data systems, and infrastructure applications.

Atkinson, David J.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Aeronautical Situational Awareness - Airport Surface

This paper advocates for a specific design approach, based on simple principals, yet addresses challenges faced by the system engineers when designing complex data and information infrastructure. The document provides guidance for breaking out various work elements in the overall network architecture design, so that communication systems are conceived and effectively realized regardless of their location, size and local specifics. Although targeted at the Global Airspace System (GAS) and National Airspace System (NAS), this framework can be applied to any network-centric architecture.

networking↗

NASA NTRS2016

NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites: Tools for Software Based Validation and Verification of Small Satellites

The NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites (NOS3) is a suite of tools to aid in areas such as software development, integration test (IT), mission operations training, verification and validation (VV), and software systems check-out. NOS3 provides a software development environment, a multi-target build system, an operator interface-ground station, dynamics and environment simulations, and software-based hardware models. NOS3 enables the development of flight software (FSW) early in the project life cycle, when access to hardware is typically not available. For small satellites there are extensive lead times on many of the commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components as well as limited funding for engineering test units (ETU). Considering the difficulty of providing a hardware test-bed to each developer tester, hardware models are modeled based upon characteristic data or manufacturers data sheets for each individual component. The fidelity of each hardware models is such that FSW executes unaware that physical hardware is not present. This allows binaries to be compiled for both the simulation environment, and the flight computer, without changing the FSW source code. For hardware models that provide data dependent on the environment, such as a GPS receiver or magnetometer, an open-source tool from NASA GSFC (42 Spacecraft Simulation) is used to provide the necessary data. The underlying infrastructure used to transfer messages between FSW and the hardware models can also be used to monitor, intercept, and inject messages, which has proven to be beneficial for VV of larger missions such as James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). As hardware is procured, drivers can be added to the environment to enable hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) testing. When strict time synchronization is not vital, any number of combinations of hardware components and software-based models can be tested. The open-source operator interface used in NOS3 is COSMOS from Ball Aerospace. For testing, plug-ins are implemented in COSMOS to control the NOS3 simulations, while the command and telemetry tools available in COSMOS are used to communicate with FSW. NOS3 is actively being used for FSW development and component testing of the Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat. As NOS3 matures, hardware models have been added for common CubeSat components such as Novatel GPS receivers, ClydeSpace electrical power systems and batteries, ISISpace antenna systems, etc. In the future, NASA IVV plans to distribute NOS3 to other CubeSat developers and release the suite to the open-source community.

Verification↗

NASA NTRS2018

NOS3: NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites

The NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites (NOS3) is a suite of open-source software tools to aid in areas such as software development, integration & test (I&T), mission operations/training, verification and validation (V&V), and software systems check-out. NOS3 provides a software development environment, a multi-target build system, operational interface/ground software, dynamics and environment simulations, and software-based hardware models. NOS3 has just recently been open-sourced by NASA and is available for immediate use. It enables the development of flight software (FSW) early in the project life cycle when hardware availability is limited. Small satellite development suffers from extensive lead times on many of the commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components as well as limited funding for engineering test units (ETUs). To alleviate the need to provide a hardware test-bed for each developer/tester, NOS3 hardware models are based upon characteristic data or manufacturer's data sheets for each individual component. The NOS3 hardware models' fidelity is such that FSW executes unaware that physical hardware is not present. This allows FSW binaries to be compiled for both the simulation environment and the flight computer without changing the FSW source code. For hardware models that provide data which is dependent upon the environment and spacecraft dynamics, such as a GPS receiver or magnetometer, an open-source tool from NASA GSFC (42 Spacecraft Simulator) is used to provide the necessary data. The underlying infrastructure used to transfer messages between FSW and the hardware models can also be used to monitor, intercept, and inject messages, which has proven to be beneficial for V&V of larger missions such as James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). As hardware is selected and becomes available, drivers can be added to the NOS3 environment to enable hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) testing. When strict time synchronization is not vital, any number of combinations of hardware components and software-based models can be tested. NOS3 was actively used for FSW development and component testing of the Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat and the Lunar IceCube CubeSat. As NOS3 matures, hardware models have been added for common small satellite components such as GPS receivers, electrical power systems and batteries, and antenna systems.

Suder, Mark↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Zero Trust and Identity Access Management in Support of Service-Based Urban Air Mobility Applications

Urban Air Mobility environments will contain of a collection of service-based services, which will be typically hosted within cloud infrastructures. The underlying data for these UAM services will need to be secured. One approach to securing these UAM services would be to leverage the Zero Trust framework, that focuses on securing services and associated data, instead of securing the network. An early step in moving towards a Zero Trust framework is to standardize identity access manage support for an ever-widening set of services, where users must explicitly be granted access to each service.

UAM↗

DOE OSTI2025

Large Language Model Integration for Knowledge Retrieval and Interaction for the DUNE Experiment

The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) is a next-generation neutrino experiment that will generate an unprecedented volume of heterogeneous information-from documentation and technical notes to experimental data and reconstruction pipelines. Efficient knowledge retrieval and contextual understanding are increasingly critical for collaboration-wide productivity and onboarding. In this work, we present DUNE-GPT, a prototype framework that leverages large language models (LLMs) and retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to enable natural-language querying of DUNE's internal documentation and technical resources. The system provides an intelligent interface for DUNE collaborators to interact with experiment-specific knowledge while maintaining data privacy and infrastructure compliance within Fermilab computing resources.

Rafique, A. [Argonne (main)]↗

DOE OSTI2023

The Uniform Methods Project: Smart Thermostat Evaluation Protocol

A smart thermostat is an internet-connected device that controls home heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment and can automatically adjust temperature set points to optimize performance and achieve energy savings. Smart thermostat features often include two way communication, occupancy detection (such as geofencing and occupancy sensors), schedule learning, and seasonal optimization algorithms. Smart thermostats can control most conventional HVAC systems, including central air conditioners, heat pumps, and forced air furnaces. Several types of residential utility programs offer smart thermostats as replacements measures. Working with smart thermostat vendors, utilities can offer separate optimization programs to produce energy savings beyond those achieved by installing a smart thermostat. From an evaluation perspective, smart thermostat programs have several noteworthy features. First, the energy savings from a smart thermostat may change over the life of the device. As a smart thermostat is connected to the internet, original equipment manufacturers can update the thermostat software to improve the thermostat's energy efficiency. Likewise, users can adjust the thermostat settings and schedules over time in response to changes in weather, thermal comfort, energy prices, or preferences for energy efficiency. Additionally, many thermostat manufacturers offer seasonal optimization programs that recommend changes or make minor, automated adjustments to the thermostat settings to improve energy efficiency. These opt-in programs are now standard offerings for many smart thermostat manufacturers and provided at no additional cost to users. The potential for software updates and continuous optimization and the evolving nature of user interactions mean future energy savings may differ from first-year savings and the energy savings of smart thermostats may need to be evaluated more than once. Second, smart thermostats often have small unit energy savings relative to a home's total energy consumption, especially in comparison to whole- home retrofit programs. This can make it difficult to detect the smart thermostat savings in billing or advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) meter consumption data. For example, as cooling loads in many regions average about 20% of annual electricity consumption, smart thermostat savings of 10% of cooling energy use would equate to a 2% reduction in home electricity consumption. Evaluators should use regression analysis of whole-home billing consumption or advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) meter consumption data to evaluate smart thermostat savings because, as explained at greater length below , these data are usually available to evaluators and regression can control for the impacts of weather and other potentially confounding factors on a home's energy consumption. Finally, as with other energy efficiency programs, participation in smart thermostat programs is self-selective. As discussed at greater length below , smart thermostat participants tend to be, among other things, younger, higher-income, and more likely to adopt electric vehicles (EVs) and internet connected devices than nonparticipants. These differences are often unobservable to the evaluator and correlated with a home's energy consumption, creating the potential for bias in estimating savings. Due to the small unit savings of thermostats, errors and biases from self-selection that may not be very consequential when evaluating a whole- home retrofits (e.g., ±2% of home electricity consumption) can have a major impact when evaluating the savings and cost-effectiveness of smart thermostat programs. A percentage point change in the estimated savings could affect the cost-effectiveness of a program. This means it is important for evaluators to assess and to minimize the potential for error from selection bias in estimating smart thermostat program savings. The Uniform Methods Project provides model protocols for determining energy savings and demand reductions that result from specific energy efficiency measures implemented through state and utility programs. In most cases, the measure protocols are based on a particular option identified by the International Performance Verification and Measurement Protocol ; however, this work provides a more detailed approach to implementing that option. Each chapter is written by technical experts in collaboration with their peers, reviewed by industry experts, and subject to public review and comment. The UMP protocols can be used by utilities, program administrators, public utility commissions, evaluators, and other stakeholders for both program planning and evaluation.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Accelerating Advanced Light Source Science Through Multi-Facility HPC Workflows

Synchrotron light sources support a wide array of techniques to investigate materials, often producing complex, high-volume data that challenge traditional workflows. At the Advanced Light Source (ALS), we developed infrastructure to move microtomography data over ESnet to ALCF and NERSC, where CPU- and GPU-based algorithms generate 3D reconstructed volumes of experimental samples. We employ two data movement and reconstruction models: real-time processing as data streams directly to NERSC compute nodes, and automated file transfer to NERSC and ALCF file systems. The streaming pipeline provides users with feedback in under ten seconds, while the file-based workflow produces high-quality reconstructions suitable for deeper analysis in 20-30 minutes. This infrastructure enables users to utilize HPC resources without direct access to backend systems. We plan to extend this architecture to more endstations, supporting our beamline scientists and users.

Abramov, David↗