Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “pair distribution function”

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 343 records · Page 19
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2001

A role for chromosomal instability in the development of and selection for radioresistant cell variants

Chromosome instability is a common occurrence in tumour cells. We examined the hypothesis that the elevated rate of mutation formation in unstable cells can lead to the development of clones of cells that are resistant to the cancer therapy. To test this hypothesis, we compared chromosome instability to radiation sensitivity in 30 independently isolated clones of GM10115 human-hamster hybrid cells. There was a broader distribution of radiosensitivity and a higher mean SF(2)in chromosomally unstable clones. Cytogenetic and DNA double-strand break rejoining assays suggest that sensitivity was a function of DNA repair efficiency. In the unstable population, the more radioresistant clones also had significantly lower plating efficiencies. These observations suggest that chromosome instability in GM10115 cells can lead to the development of cell variants that are more resistant to radiation. In addition, these results suggest that the process of chromosome breakage and recombination that accompanies chromosome instability might provide some selective pressure for more radioresistant variants. Copyright 2001 Cancer Research Campaign.

NASA Discipline Radiation Health↗
DOE OSTI2026

Generation of random geological models using multi-randomization for machine learning

Generating high-fidelity geological models is essential for advancing machine learning (ML) methods in automated seismic interpretation. For instance, seismic images paired with corresponding fault labels are foundational for ML-based fault detection from seismic migration sections. While several open-access datasets of random geological models exist, open-source tools specifically designed to produce large volumes of such models for ML applications remain scarce. To address this gap, we present RGM (Random Geological Model), an open-source software package for efficiently generating 2D and 3D synthetic geological models tailored for ML workflows. RGM supports the creation of diverse model components, including medium property distributions (P-/S-wave velocities and density), seismic reflectivity images (i.e., synthetic migration sections), relative geological time, and discrete fault attributes such as probability, dip, strike, rake, and displacement. It also accommodates the creation of complex geological features such as salt bodies and unconformities. The model generation algorithm employs a multi-randomization strategy, yielding an effectively infinite-dimensional model space that encompasses a wide range of geological scenarios and associated seismic features. Furthermore, RGM incorporates a method to generate synthetic elastic migration images using analytical elastic reflection coefficients combined with frequency-dependent scaling. This functionality enables the creation of training datasets for ML models that leverage elastic seismic images. RGM is implemented in modern object-oriented Fortran, allowing users to flexibly control statistical parameters governing model variability. We demonstrate the capability, performance, and geological realism of the package through comprehensive 2D and 3D examples.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Thermodynamic Paradigm for Studying Disease Vector’s Habitats & Life Cycles Using NASA’s NextGen Remote Sensing Instruments

Global public health is entering a new informational age through the use of spatial models of disease vector/host ecologies driven by the use of remotely sensed data to measure environmental and structural factors critical in determining disease vector habitats, distributions, life cycles, and host interactions. The vector habitat microclimates can be quantified in terms of the surface energy budget measured by satellites. The epidemiological equations (processes) can be adapted and modified to explicitly incorporate environmental factors and interfaces required by a specific disease and its vector/host cycle. Remote sensing can be used to measure or evaluate or estimate both environment (state functions) and interface (process functions). Remote sensing can be used to measure or evaluate or estimate both environment (state functions) and interface (process functions) defining vector habitats. The products of remote sensing can be integrated directly into the epidemiological equations to significantly enhance our understanding of disease vector’s life cycles and habitats. The next generation of NASA’s remote sensing instruments recently operational will provide a significant enhancement in our ability to study disease vector’s life cycles and habitats. Three new instruments have become operational on the International Space Station (ISS) In June 2018, ECOSTRESS (The ECOsystem Spaceborne Thermal Radiometer Experiment on Space Station), a five channel, thermal IR instrument with 70 m resolution and approximately 4-5 day repeat cycle of day/night pairs along with DESISa hyperspectral sensor system 235 channels (between 400 and 1000 nanometers), 30 m resolution, and data only being acquired on demand. In November 2018. GEDI (Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation). GEDI is a high-resolution laser ranging of Earth’s forests and topography. These instruments set the stage for NASA’s new global designated observables set of remote sensing measurements collecting hyperspectral and multispectral thermal data called SBG (Surface Biology Geology). The SBG is currently in the planning stage. The availability and use of level 1-4 data products generated from these ISS instruments will be discussed.

thermodynamics↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Accelerating Embedding Potential Optimization by Reconstructing the Pseudo-Valence Electron Density

Density functional embedding theory (DFET) enables use of electronic structure methods with higher accuracy than density functional theory in a local region, with applications thus far ranging from (photo/electro)catalysis to reactions in solution. DFET partitions a large collection of atoms into smaller groups that interact via a shared embedding (interaction) potential V emb , determined via functional optimization. The optimized effective potential (OEP) process used to optimize V emb is time-consuming and becomes a computational bottleneck due to sharp, oscillating features of V emb near nuclei. Here, similar to pseudopotential theory, by reconstructing electron densities used in the OEP process from smoother pseudo-valence-only (PVO) electron densities as proxies for total densities of the full system and subsystems, we can retain accuracy in the embedded electronic structure calculations while potentially reducing the overhead of V emb construction, within the projector augmented-wave (PAW) formalism. We explore three different chemical reactions as exemplars to test PVO–DFET, namely, H 2 dissociative adsorption on a Cu(111) surface, H 2 O adsorption on a Pt(111) surface, and aqueous [Ca 2+ –SO 4 2– ] ion-pair formation. The PVO approximation works well for all three systems with minimal loss of accuracy (∼10–70 meV error relative to the original exact-derivative (ED) approach) while accelerating V emb generation for the Cu and Pt systems respectively by 20× and 5×. Given proper numerical convergence parameters, the spatial distributions of differences between PVO- and ED-based V emb outside the core regions are small, explaining the exceptional agreement between the two approaches. Finally, we anticipate that this more efficient PVO–DFET approximation will be useful whenever computation of V emb is much more expensive than subsequent embedded high-level electron correlation calculations.

approximation↗
NASA NTRS2017

Monitoring Land Surface Albedo and Vegetation Dynamics Using High Spatial and Temporal Resolution Synthetic Time Series from Landsat and the MODIS BRDF/NBAR/Albedo Product

Seasonal vegetation phenology can significantly alter surface albedo which in turn affects the global energy balance and the albedo warmingcooling feedbacks that impact climate change. To monitor and quantify the surface dynamics of heterogeneous landscapes, high temporal and spatial resolution synthetic time series of albedo and the enhanced vegetation index (EVI) were generated from the 500-meter Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) operational Collection V006 daily BRDF (Bidirectional Reflectance Distribution Function) / NBAR (Nadir BRDF-Adjusted Reflectance) / albedo products and 30-meter Landsat 5 albedo and near-nadir reflectance data through the use of the Spatial and Temporal Adaptive Reflectance Fusion Model (STARFM). The traditional Landsat Albedo (Shuai et al., 2011) makes use of the MODIS BRDFAlbedo products (MCD43) by assigning appropriate BRDFs from coincident MODIS products to each Landsat image to generate a 30-meter Landsat albedo product for that acquisition date. The available cloud free Landsat 5 albedos (due to clouds, generated every 16 days at best) were used in conjunction with the daily MODIS albedos to determine the appropriate 30-meter albedos for the intervening daily time steps in this study. These enhanced daily 30-meter spatial resolution synthetic time series were then used to track albedo and vegetation phenology dynamics over three Ameriflux tower sites (Harvard Forest in 2007, Santa Rita in 2011 and Walker Branch in 2005). These Ameriflux sites were chosen as they are all quite nearby new towers coming on line for the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), and thus represent locations which will be served by spatially paired albedo measures in the near future. The availability of data from the NEON towers will greatly expand the sources of tower albedometer data available for evaluation of satellite products. At these three Ameriflux tower sites the synthetic time series of broadband shortwave albedos were evaluated using the tower albedo measurements with a Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) less than 0.013 and a bias within the range of 0.006. These synthetic time series provide much greater spatial detail than the 500 meter gridded MODIS data, especially over more heterogeneous surfaces, which improves the efforts to characterize and monitor the spatial variation across species and communities. The mean of the difference between maximum and minimum synthetic time series of albedo within the MODIS pixels over a subset of satellite data of Harvard Forest (16 kilometers by 14 kilometers) was as high as 0.2 during the snow-covered period and reduced to around 0.1 during the snow-free period. Similarly, we have used STARFM to also couple MODIS Nadir BRDF-Adjusted Reflectances (NBAR) values with Landsat 5 reflectances to generate daily synthetic times series of NBAR and thus Enhanced Vegetation Index (NBAR-EVI) at a 30-meter resolution. While normally STARFM is used with directional reflectances, the use of the view angle corrected daily MODIS NBAR values will provide more consistent time series. These synthetic times series of EVI are shown to capture seasonal vegetation dynamics with finer spatial and temporal details, especially over heterogeneous land surfaces.

Vegetation Index↗
DOE OSTI2024

Enhancing Cloud Cybersecurity: Prescriptive Controls for Operational Technology

This whitepaper provides strategic insights and recommendations into security cloud-based solutions for electric utilities, encompassing operational technology (OT), virtual power plants (VPP), distributed energy resources (DERs), applications, networks, and data storage as they transition to and leverage cloud infrastructure through managed service providers (MSPs) and cloud service providers (CSPs). Principles derived from established frameworks serve as a foundation for best practices across cybersecurity projects and remove the constraints of settling on a single framework. For organizations that prefer not to integrate a specific framework altogether, elements of the proposed approach could be adopted or tailored to best fit defined requirements and expected functionalities. The Cirrus assessment, a utility cloud feasibility tool, and the roadmap it provides serve as a precursor to this paper, which seeks to be a valuable resource for defining next steps following cloud technology integration feasibility appraisal. With its comprehensive approach to adoption, the Cirrus framework offers strategic guidance on responsibly preparing for or deploying a utility cloud solution. The previously published whitepaper, “Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration,” details the guiding strategy, research, and deployment of cloud solutions within electric and interconnected grid systems. Before implementing the controls suggested in this document, it is recommended that stakeholders complete Cirrus's cloud integration assessment and pair the results with their unique cybersecurity controls to form a comprehensive cloud-based utility cybersecurity plan. The Cirrus outcome will consider a series of future architectures for the grid before and after the energy transition and evaluate the arguments for and against cloud applications for each electric and interconnected grid layer. This document is a companion to the original whitepaper, "Use Case-Informed Framework for Utility Cloud Migration" to further identify and recommend security controls based on Cirrus’s cloud integration assessment output. The following whitepaper outlines the cybersecurity controls that secure cloud-service models pertinent to the electric sector using the predefined categories identify, protect, detect, and respond and recover. The objective is to outline prescriptive security controls based on the type of architecture and data stored in the cloud. The focus includes dissecting the shared responsibility model and elucidating what on-premises Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS), Platform as a Service (PaaS), and Software as a Service (SaaS) entail. A pivotal consideration in this context is allocating responsibility for foundational cybersecurity aspects—having used Cirrus for the cloud integration assessment. The ensuing controls detailed herein also represent a checklist of controls necessary for a secure cloud transition, equipping utilities with the knowledge to navigate this digital transformation with confidence and strategic foresight in a safe and responsible manner.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Evaluation of Spectral Band Adjustment Factors for Cross-Calibration of Visible Imagers

The CERES EBAF dataset provides TOA SW and LW fluxes for long-term monitoring of the Earth’s energy balance and to validate climate models. The EBAF products, based on the Terra and Aqua CERES instrument observed radiances, rely on coincident measurements from the onboard MODIS imagers to determine cloud properties that are used in the angular distribution model scene selection required to convert the CERES observed radiances into flux values. Once the Terra and Aqua orbits start drifting outside of their 15-minute window, the CERES project will rely solely on the NOAA-20 CERES observations. A seamless transition of fluxes and clouds can only occur if the analogous MODIS and VIIRS channels are properly inter-calibrated. The visible band (0.65 µm) in MODIS (band 1) and VIIRS (M5 or I1) is critical for retrieving the cloud mask and optical depth. The spectral response functions (SRF) of these bands differ noticeably and will require scene dependent spectral band adjustment factors (SBAF) for proper radiometric scaling between them. Fortunately, the VIIRS I1 and M5 bands are calibrated using the same solar diffuser as a reference, which implies that band reflectance differences must be due to the spectral disparity. The coincident I1 and M5 TOA reflectance measurements provide the optimal opportunity to validate SBAFs over many surface and cloud conditions. The CERES project maintains SCIAMACHY, GOME-2, Hyperion, and radiative transfer model-based scene-stratified hyper-spectral reflectance measurements that can be convolved with sensor pair SRFs to compute the corresponding SBAF. This study will evaluate the SCIAMACHY, GOME-2, Hyperion, and RTM based SBAFs over tropical ocean targets used in SNO inter-calibration of MODIS and VIIRS, including clear-sky ocean, deep convective clouds (DCC), and liquid cloud targets in terms of their applicability to absolute intercomparison of visible imagers. The large SCIAMACHY and GOME-2 footprints and the lack of Hyperion cloudy scenes will impact the resulting SBAFs and necessitates the need for future CLARREO hyper-spectral reflectances to decrease SBAF uncertainties Preliminary results indicate that the SCIAMACHY and GOME-2 based SBAFs for the VIIRS I1 and M5 band pairs may differ by 1.5% for some ATO scene types. Because most of the modern GEOs visible band SRFs encompass the VIIRS I1 band SRF, these evaluations are critical to ensure that the MODIS, VIIRS, and GEO clouds and fluxes are consistent. SBAFs for Libya-4, Dome-C and other Earth invariant target will also be evaluated.

D. R. Doelling↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Precise measurement of the tt¯ production cross-section and lepton differential distributions in eμ dilepton events from s=13TeVpp collisions with the ATLAS detector

The inclusive top quark pair (tt¯$$t\bar{t}$$) cross-section σtt¯$$\sigma _{t\bar{t}}$$ has been measured in proton–proton collisions at s=13TeV$$\sqrt{s}=13\,\text {TeV}$$, using 140fb-1$$140\,{\text {fb}^{-1}} $$ of data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. Using events with an opposite-charge eμ$$e\mu $$ pair and b-tagged jets, the cross-section is measured to be: σtt¯=829.3±1.3(stat)±8.0(syst)±7.3(lumi)±1.9(beam)pb,$$\begin{aligned} \sigma _{t\bar{t}} & = 829.3\pm 1.3\,\mathrm {(stat)}\ \pm 8.0\,\mathrm {(syst)}\ \pm 7.3\,\mathrm {(lumi)}\ \\ & \quad \pm 1.9\,\mathrm {(beam)}\,\textrm{pb}, \end{aligned}$$where the uncertainties reflect the limited size of the data sample, experimental and theoretical systematic effects, the integrated luminosity, and the proton beam energy, giving a total uncertainty of 1.3%. The result is used to determine the top quark pole mass via the dependence of the predicted cross-section on mtpole$${m_{t}^\textrm{pole}}$$, giving mtpole=172.8-1.7+1.5$${m_{t}^\textrm{pole}}=172.8^{+1.5}_{-1.7}$$ GeV$$\text {GeV}$$. The same event sample is used to measure absolute and normalised differential cross-sections for the tt¯→eμνν¯bb¯$$t\bar{t} \rightarrow e\mu u \bar{ u }b\bar{b} $$ process as a function of single-lepton and dilepton kinematic variables. Complementary measurements of eμbb¯$$e\mu b\bar{b} $$ production, treating both tt¯$$t\bar{t}$$ and Wt events as signal, are also provided. Both sets of differential cross-sections are compared to the predictions of various Monte Carlo event generators, demonstrating that the state-of-the-art generators Powheg MiNNLO and Powhegbb4l describe the data better than Powheghvq.

Aad, G↗
NASA NTRS2015

Interphase Chromosome Conformation and Chromatin-Chromatin Interactions in Human Epithelial Cells Cultured Under Different Gravity Conditions

Microgravity has been shown to alter global gene expression patterns and protein levels both in cultured cells and animal models. It has been suggested that the packaging of chromatin fibers in the interphase nucleus is closely related to genome function, and the changes in transcriptional activity are tightly correlated with changes in chromatin folding. This study explores the changes of chromatin conformation and chromatin-chromatin interactions in the simulated microgravity environment, and investigates their correlation to the expression of genes located at different regions of the chromosome. To investigate the folding of chromatin in interphase under various culture conditions, human epithelial cells, fibroblasts, and lymphocytes were fixed in the G1 phase. Interphase chromosomes were hybridized with a multicolor banding in situ hybridization (mBAND) probe for chromosome 3 which distinguishes six regions of the chromosome as separate colors. After images were captured with a laser scanning confocal microscope, the 3-dimensional structure of interphase chromosome 3 was reconstructed at multi-mega base pair scale. In order to determine the effects of microgravity on chromosome conformation and orientation, measures such as distance between homologous pairs, relative orientation of chromosome arms about a shared midpoint, and orientation of arms within individual chromosomes were all considered as potentially impacted by simulated microgravity conditions. The studies revealed non-random folding of chromatin in interphase, and suggested an association of interphase chromatin folding with radiation-induced chromosome aberration hotspots. Interestingly, the distributions of genes with expression changes over chromosome 3 in cells cultured under microgravity environment are apparently clustered on specific loci and chromosomes. This data provides important insights into how mammalian cells respond to microgravity at molecular level.

International Space Station↗
NASA NTRS2011

A Sub-Hertz, Low-Frequency Vibration Isolation Platform

One of the major technical problems deep-space optical communication (DSOC) systems need to solve is the isolation of the optical terminal from vibrations produced by the spacecraft navigational control system and by the moving parts of onboard instruments. Even under these vibration perturbations, the DSOC transceivers (telescopes) need to be pointed l000 fs of times more accurately than an RF communication system (parabolic antennas). Mechanical resonators have been extensively used to provide vibration isolation for groundbased, airborne, and spaceborne payloads. The effectiveness of these isolation systems is determined mainly by the ability of designing a mechanical oscillator with the lowest possible resonant frequency. The Low-Frequency Vibration Isolation Platform (LFVIP), developed during this effort, aims to reduce the resonant frequency of the mechanical oscillators into the sub-Hertz region in order to maximize the passive isolation afforded by the 40 dB/decade roll-off response of the resonator. The LFVIP also provides tip/tilt functionality for acquisition and tracking of a beacon signal. An active control system is used for platform positioning and for dampening of the mechanical oscillator. The basic idea in the design of the isolation platform is to use a passive isolation strut with an approximately equal to 100-mHz resonance frequency. This will extend the isolation range to lower frequencies. The harmonic oscillator is a second-order lowpass filter for mechanical disturbances. The resonance quality depends on the dissipation mechanisms, which are mainly hysteretic because of the low resonant frequency and the absence of any viscous medium. The LFVIP system is configured using the well-established Stewart Platform, which consists of a top platform connected to a base with six extensible struts (see figure). The struts are attached to the base and to the platform via universal joints, which permit the extension and contraction of the struts. The struts ends are connected in pairs to the base and to the platform, forming an octahedron. The six struts provide the vibration isolation due to the properties of mechanical oscillators that behave as second-order lowpass filters for frequencies above the resonance. At high frequency, the ideal second-order low-pass filter response is spoiled by the distributed mass and the internal modes of membrane and of the platform with its payload.

Ortiz, Gerardo, G.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Helium-4 gravitational form factors: Exchange currents

We evaluate the leading exchange corrections to the helium-4 gravitational form factors (GFFs) to momenta of the order of the nucleon mass. We use both the K-harmonic method with simple pair nucleon potential, and a Jastrow trial function using the Argonne 𝑣 14 potential, to evaluate the helium-4 GFFs. The exchange current contributions include the pair interaction, plus the seagull and the pion exchange interactions, modulo the recoil corrections. To estimate the off-shellness of the pion nucleon coupling in this momenta range, we discuss the results using either the pseudoscalar (PS) or pseudovector (PV) pion-nucleon couplings. When the PV coupling is used, the pair diagram contribution is higher order in the nonrelativistic expansion. The results for the helium-4 A-GFF are comparable to those given by the impulse approximation, especially for the PS coupling using both the K-harmonic method and variational method. The exchange current contributions with the PS coupling for the charge form factor of helium-4, yield better agreement with the existing data over a broad range of momenta, especially when the Argonne 𝑣 14 potential including the D-wave admixture is used.

A ≤ 5↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Microphone Phased Array for Launch Acoustics Application

A new, portable, phased array of microphones is built at NASA Ames Research Center specifically for the harsh environment encountered in launch pads of rocket vehicles. It uses 70 rugged, piezo-electric, dynamic pressure sensors optimally distributed on a 10.5ft diameter open frame dome structure. The open frame is light yet robust to sustain the high wind load of typical seaside launch pads, and the blast and acoustic loads from the launch. A 200-ft long cable bundle carries the microphone signals to a weather-protected electronic cabinet containing the data acquisition system, computers, and other equipment. The array is equipped with an infra-red camera and a visible wavelength camera for imaging the launch site. The beamformed noise maps will be superimposed on the video footages collected by the cameras for correct identification of the noise sources. The array is tested with very loud noise sources to determine the beamforming ability. Multiple mathematical models, such as the conventional beamforming, orthogonal-functional beamforming, spectral element method etc. are used to determine the minimum spatial resolution of the sound sources that can be measured at different frequencies. Additionally, the array hardware is being tested for different environmental conditions and electro-magnetic compliance. The goal is to use the array for NASA’s Artemis/SLS vehicle that will be launched from a newly built Mobile Launch platform and a modified launch pad. Data from a couple of validation tests will be presented in this paper. The first test involves an outdoor setup where the array was placed on a crane at several different heights and distances from a pair of very loud noise sources. The second test from the static firing of the RS25 engines in an outdoor test stand.

Acoustics↗
DOE OSTI2025

Exploring the Nucleon Structure via Deep Electroproduction Processes

Understanding the internal structure of the nucleon is a fundamental goal of modern physics, which aims at a comprehensive framework describing the internal dynamics of quarks and gluons. Among other structure functions, Generalized Parton Distributions (GPDs) offer a powerful framework for describing the nucleon dynamics by correlating the longitudinal momentum and the transverse position of its internal partons. Such a correlation provides a three-dimensional picture of the nucleon and enables access to fundamental properties, including the internal pressure distributions and the parton’s angular momentum contribution to the nucleon's total spin, thereby playing a central role in resolving the nucleon spin puzzle. At the Thomas Jefferson National Facility (JLab), polarized electron beam experiments allow for probing GPDs through the measurement of hard exclusive processes. Among the cleanest experimental channels, we find the electro-production of a real photon through the Deeply Virtual Compton Scattering (DVCS) mechanism. The first data-taking period of the CLAS12 program, taking place in 2018, allowed for unique DVCS Beam Spin Asymmetry (BSA) measurements in the phase space covered by a 10.6 GeV polarized electron beam impinging on an unpolarized liquid hydrogen target. Although detecting all final-state particles ensures exclusivity of the process, conservation laws indicate that it is not mandatory. I adopt an approach omitting the direct detection of the recoil proton, providing a simplified yet effective event selection strategy that boosts statistics and gives access to a larger phase space sensitive to the underlying GPD dynamics through BSA and cross section measurements. The Double DVCS (DDVCS) process promises a dedicated mapping of GPDs. Contributing to the electro-production of a lepton pair cross-section, the DDVCS reaction extends DVCS by allowing the final-state photon to be virtual, enriching the kinematic phase space and providing unique access to the internal correlations encoded by GPDs. A feasibility study is conducted to assess the potential of future DDVCS measurements at Jefferson Lab and the future Electron-Ion Collider (EIC). While Jefferson Lab will provide DDVCS measurements in the valence region through the SoLID$\mu$ and $\mu$CLAS12 experimental projects, in the long term, the EIC will provide complementary measurements in the sea region, both accessing unprecedented information about GPDs in a phase space region otherwise inaccessible. Taken together, these investigations demonstrate both the current capabilities and future opportunities for probing GPDs through exclusive processes. The experimental analysis of DVCS at CLAS12 provides precise measurements within an established framework, while the phenomenological study of DDVCS opens the door to richer and more comprehensive explorations with future detectors and facilities.

Alvarado, Juan [Université Paris-Saclay: Gif-sur-Y↗
NASA NTRS2004

Determining Sizes of Particles in a Flow from DPIV Data

A proposed method of measuring the size of particles entrained in a flow of a liquid or gas would involve utilization of data from digital particle-image velocimetry (DPIV) of the flow. That is to say, with proper design and operation of a DPIV system, the DPIV data could be processed according to the proposed method to obtain particle sizes in addition to particle velocities. As an additional benefit, one could then compute the mass flux of the entrained particles from the particle sizes and velocities. As in DPIV as practiced heretofore, a pulsed laser beam would be formed into a thin sheet to illuminate a plane of interest in a flow field and the illuminated plane would be observed by means of a charge-coupled device (CCD) camera aimed along a line perpendicular to the illuminated plane. Unlike in DPIV as practiced heretofore, care would be taken to polarize the laser beam so that its electric field would lie in the illuminated plane, for the reason explained in the next paragraph. The proposed method applies, more specifically, to transparent or semitransparent spherical particles that have an index of refraction different from that of the fluid in which they are entrained. The method is based on the established Mie theory, which describes the scattering of light by diffraction, refraction, and specular reflection of light by such particles. In the case of a particle illuminated by polarized light and observed in the arrangement described in the preceding paragraph, the Mie theory shows that the image of the particle on the focal plane of the CCD camera includes two glare spots: one attributable to light reflected toward the camera and one attributable to light refracted toward the camera. The distance between the glare spots is a known function of the size of the particle, the indices of refraction of the particle material, and design parameters of the camera optics. Hence, the size of a particle can be determined from the distance between the glare spots. The proposed method would be implemented in an algorithm that would automatically identify, and measure the distance between, the glare spots for each particle for which a suitable image has been captured in a DPIV image frame. The algorithm (see figure) would begin with thresholding of data from the entire image frame to reduce noise, thereby facilitating discrimination of particle images from the background and aiding in the separation of overlapping particles. It is important not to pick a threshold level so high that the light intensity between a given pair of glare spots does not fall below the threshold value, leaving the glare spots disconnected. The image would then be scanned in a sequence of rows and columns of pixels to identify groups of adjacent pixels that contain nonzero brightnesses and that are surrounded by pixels of zero brightness. Each such group would be assumed to constitute the image of one particle. Each such group would be further analyzed to determine whether the image was saturated; saturated particle images must be rejected because the locations of glare spots in saturated images cannot accurately be determined. Within each unsaturated particle image, the centroids (deemed to be the locations) of the glare spots would be determined by means of gradients of brightness distributions and three-point horizontal and three-point vertical Gaussian estimates based on the brightness values of the brightest pixels and the pixels adjacent to them. If the brightness of a given particle image contained only one peak, then it would be assumed that a second glare spot did not exist and that image would be rejected.

Wernet, M. P.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Photocatalytic Active Radiation Measurements and Use

Photocatalytic materials are being used to purify air, to kill microbes, and to keep surfaces clean. A wide variety of materials are being developed, many of which have different abilities to absorb various wavelengths of light. Material variability, combined with both spectral illumination intensity and spectral distribution variability, will produce a wide range of performance results. The proposed technology estimates photocatalytic active radiation (PcAR), a unit of radiation that normalizes the amount of light based on its spectral distribution and on the ability of the material to absorb that radiation. Photocatalytic reactions depend upon the number of electron-hole pairs generated at the photocatalytic surface. The number of electron-hole pairs produced depends on the number of photons per unit area per second striking the surface that can be absorbed and whose energy exceeds the bandgap of the photocatalytic material. A convenient parameter to describe the number of useful photons is the number of moles of photons striking the surface per unit area per second. The unit of micro-einsteins (or micromoles) of photons per m2 per sec is commonly used for photochemical and photoelectric-like phenomena. This type of parameter is used in photochemistry, such as in the conversion of light energy for photosynthesis. Photosynthetic response correlates with the number of photons rather than by energy because, in this photochemical process, each molecule is activated by the absorption of one photon. In photosynthesis, the number of photons absorbed in the 400 700 nm spectral range is estimated and is referred to as photosynthetic active radiation (PAR). PAR is defined in terms of the photosynthetic photon flux density measured in micro-einsteins of photons per m2 per sec. PcAR is an equivalent, similarly modeled parameter that has been defined for the photocatalytic processes. Two methods to measure the PcAR level are being proposed. In the first method, a calibrated spectrometer with a cosine receptor is used to measure the spectral irradiance. This measurement, in conjunction with the photocatalytic response as a function of wavelength, is used to estimate the PcAR. The photocatalytic response function is determined by measuring photocatalytic reactivity as a function of wavelength. In the second method, simple shaped photocatalytic response functions can be simulated with a broad-band detector with a cosine receptor appropriately filtered to represent the spectral response of the photocatalytic material. This second method can be less expensive than using a calibrated spectrometer.

Davis, Bruce A.↗