Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Public Opinion”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Assessing the nature of large language models: A caution against anthropocentrism.

Generative AI models garnered a large amount of public attention and speculation with the release of OpenAI’s chatbot, ChatGPT in November of 2022. At least two opinion camps exist – one that is excited about the possibilities these models offer for fundamental changes to human tasks, and another that is highly concerned about the power these models seem to have – especially since the release of GPT-4, which was trained on multimodal data and has ~1.7 trillion (T) parameters. We evaluated some concerns regarding these models’ power by assessing GPT-3.5 using standard, normed, and validated cognitive and personality measures. These measures come from the tradition of psychometrics in experimental psychology and have a long history of providing valuable insights and predictive distinctions in humans. For this seedling project, we developed a battery of tests that allowed us to estimate the boundaries of some of these models’ capabilities, how stable those capabilities are over a short period of time, and how they compare to humans.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Assessing the nature of large language models: A caution against anthropocentrism

Generative AI models garnered a large amount of public attention and speculation with the release of OpenAI’s chatbot, ChatGPT in November of 2022. At least two opinion camps exist – one that is excited about the possibilities these models offer for fundamental changes to human tasks, and another that is highly concerned about the power these models seem to have – especially since the release of GPT-4, which was trained on multimodal data and has ~1.7 trillion (T) parameters. We evaluated some concerns regarding these models’ power by assessing GPT 3.5 using standard, normed, and validated cognitive and personality measures. These measures come from the tradition of psychometrics in experimental psychology and have a long history of providing valuable insights and predictive distinctions in humans. For this seedling project, we developed a battery of tests that allowed us to estimate the boundaries of some of these models’ capabilities, how stable those capabilities are over a short period of time, and how they compare to humans.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

The Influence of Aqueous Dispersivity on Transport of Radiological Material at LANL MDA G - 20450

Aqueous dispersivity is a phenomenon by which a solute moving in groundwater mixes with water that does not contain the solute and becomes diluted. Solutes take paths of varying lengths through pore networks or experience slower velocities due to interactions with pore walls. Aqueous dispersivity leads to breakthrough curves with earlier arrival than expected in purely advective systems and persistent 'tails,' or late-arriving, dilute concentrations of the solute. Dispersivity can be longitudinal (in the direction of flow) or transverse (orthogonal to flow). LANL has disposed of radioactive material at Material Disposal Area (MDA) G since the late 1950's. Most of the disposed materials at MDA G are low-level waste (LLW), but other types of radioactive wastes are disposed or stored at the site. For example, there is a collection of remote-handled transuranic waste (RH-TRU) waste in 33 shafts, which were intended to be stored retrievably. Aqueous-phase radionuclides included in models of contaminant transport at MDA G are subject to dispersive processes in porous media of the vadose zone and saturated zone. To model dispersivity at MDA G probabilistically, we created site-specific distributions of aqueous dispersivity. First, we performed a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed publications, reports from other performance assessments of MDA G, and documentation from sites that were considered similar based on expert opinion, such as Yucca Mountain. Data were included from a wide range of sources, so that distributions developed based on the data reflect the current state of knowledge in properties of the subsurface environment. Data were grouped based on value type (e.g., determined via experiment or used in a different model), rock type, zone type (saturated or unsaturated), and site, and were weighted in the distributions according to their relevance to the site and zone type. We combined Monte Carlo simulation and bootstrapping techniques to produce approximate distributions of mean aqueous dispersivity. Distributions of dispersivity for saturated and unsaturated zone transport are differentiated by data weight and the length scales over which transport occurs. We find that underestimating or disregarding transverse dispersivity may lead to overstating simulated well capture in the saturated zone at MDA G. Neglecting transverse dispersivity is a common assumption due in part to use of one-dimensional transport models that do not consider solute spreading orthogonal to flow. Also, we find that variability in longitudinal dispersivity is associated with substantial travel time alterations in the MDA G unsaturated zone and in simulated contaminant breakthrough times at a downstream observation plane in the MDA G saturated zone. Finally, at large scales (>1000 m), a linear trend between the dispersivity coefficient and length over which transport occurs may overestimate the dispersivity coefficient. Future modeling work with application to solute spreading could include interacting advective and diffusive zones in the highly fractured basalt below MDA G. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of the frequency and nature of erroneous x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy analyses in the scientific literature

Here, this study was undertaken to understand the extent and nature of problems in x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) data reported in the literature. It first presents an assessment of the XPS data in three high-quality journals over a six-month period. This analysis of 409 publications showing XPS spectra provides insight into how XPS is being used, identifies the common mistakes or errors in XPS analysis, and reveals which elements are most commonly analyzed. More than 65% of the 409 papers showed fitting of XP spectra. An ad hoc group (herein identified as “the committee”) of experienced XPS analysts reviewed these spectra and found that peak fitting was a common source of significant errors. The papers were ranked based on the perceived seriousness of the errors, which ranged from minor to major. Major errors, which, in the opinion of the ad hoc committee, can render the interpretation of the data meaningless, occurred when fitting protocols ignored underlying physics and chemistry or contained major errors in the analysis. Consistent with other materials analysis data, ca. 30% of the XPS data or analysis was identified as having major errors. Out of the publications with fitted spectra, ca. 40% had major errors. The most common elements analyzed by XPS in the papers sampled and researched at an online database, include carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, sulfur, and titanium. A scrutiny of the papers showing carbon and oxygen XPS spectra revealed the classes of materials being studied and the extent of problems in these analyses. As might be expected, C 1s and O 1s analyses are most often performed on sp2-type materials and inorganic oxides, respectively. These findings have helped focus a series of XPS guides and tutorials that deal with common analysis issues. The extent of problematic data is larger than the authors had expected. Quantification of the problem, examination of some of the common problem areas, and the development of targeted guides and tutorials may provide both the motivation and resources that enable the community to improve the overall quality and reliability of XPS analysis reported in the literature.

Major, George H.↗
DOE OSTI2022

A multi-criteria CCUS screening evaluation of the Gulf of Mexico, USA

Continued research into reservoir characterization along with offshore carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) transportation and infrastructure assets is needed to facilitate development of safe and successful carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) projects. This paper outlines a multi-criteria evaluation methodology that incorporates disparate sets of quantitative, spatially variable data into a decision-making framework for screening the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) outer continental shelf (OCS) for potentially viable CO 2 storage and enhanced oil recovery (EOR) sites. Criteria categories include favorable geologic characteristics, logistics, and potential risks. Data compiled for 14 criteria from several publicly available geographic information system (GIS) layers was aggregated over 2559 spatially balanced points across the study area using the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)-developed Cumulative Spatial Impact Layers™ (CSIL) GIS tool. Criteria are weighted by qualitative expert opinion relative to their perceived importance to given scenarios— the output of combined criteria values and weights enables regional CO 2 storage suitability differentiation. The methodology considers both technical and non-technical factors impacting CCUS decision-making. The flexible methodology enables a systematic approach to regional ranking at high spatial resolution over a large study domain. Additionally, the framework enables high-grading of priority sites that warrant further characterization and follow-on analysis. Areas along the Louisiana coast and Mississippi River Delta consistently rank high for all scenarios largely a result of the favorable geology with the potential for stacked storage, as well as the density of existing pipelines and platforms, and proximity to several onshore CO 2 sources. High-graded regions for the CO 2 EOR-related scenarios are typically located further offshore towards the middle and edge of the OCS compared to higher priority regions for the geologic storage scenarios which fall closer to the Louisiana coastline.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Modern Senicide in the Face of a Pandemic: An Examination of Public Discourse and Sentiment About Older Adults and COVID-19 Using Machine Learning

Objectives This study examined public discourse and sentiment regarding older adults and COVID-19 on social media and assessed the extent of ageism in public discourse. Methods Twitter data (N = 82,893) related to both older adults and COVID-19 and dated from January 23 to May 20, 2020, were analyzed. We used a combination of data science methods (including supervised machine learning, topic modeling, and sentiment analysis), qualitative thematic analysis, and conventional statistics. Results The most common category in the coded tweets was “personal opinions” (66.2%), followed by “informative” (24.7%), “jokes/ridicule” (4.8%), and “personal experiences” (4.3%). The daily average of ageist content was 18%, with the highest of 52.8% on March 11, 2020. Specifically, more than 1 in 10 (11.5%) tweets implied that the life of older adults is less valuable or downplayed the pandemic because it mostly harms older adults. A small proportion (4.6%) explicitly supported the idea of just isolating older adults. Almost three-quarters (72.9%) within “jokes/ridicule” targeted older adults, half of which were “death jokes.” Also, 14 themes were extracted, such as perceptions of lockdown and risk. A bivariate Granger causality test suggested that informative tweets regarding at-risk populations increased the prevalence of tweets that downplayed the pandemic. Discussion Ageist content in the context of COVID-19 was prevalent on Twitter. Information about COVID-19 on Twitter influenced public perceptions of risk and acceptable ways of controlling the pandemic. Finaly, public education on the risk of severe illness is needed to correct misperceptions.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Passenger Survey - Washington DC Metrorail - 2012

The primary purposes of the survey were to update ridership by the jurisdiction of residence for use in Metrorail’s operating subsidy allocation and to collect demographic, travel, and access data for Title VI compliance, system planning, and operation analyses. It was not a customer opinion survey; the focus was on ridership and travel characteristics.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Metrobus Survey - Washington DC - 2014

The primary purposes of the survey were to update ridership by the jurisdiction of residence for use in Metrobus’ operating subsidy allocation and to collect demographic, travel, and access data for Title VI compliance, system planning, and operation analyses. It was not a customer opinion survey; the focus was on ridership and travel characteristics.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Travel Decision Survey - San Francisco - 2013

On behalf of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), Corey, Canapary & Galanis undertook a Travel Decision Survey within the City and County of San Francisco, as well as the eight surrounding Bay Area counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Marin, Santa Clara, Napa, Sonoma, and Solano. The primary goals of this study were to: 1. Assess percent mode share for travel in San Francisco for evaluation of the SFMTA Strategic Objective 2.3: Mode Share target of 50% non-private auto travel by FY 2018 with a 95% confidence level and margin of error ±5% or less. 2. Evaluate the above statement based on number of trips to, from, and within San Francisco by Bay Area residents. Trips by visitors to the Bay Area and for commercial purposes are not included. 3. Provide additional trip details, including trip purpose for each trip in the mode-share question series. 4. Collect demographic data on the population of Bay Area residents who travel to, from, and within San Francisco. 5. Collect data on travel behavior and opinions that support other SFMTA strategy and project evaluation needs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Travel Decision Survey - San Francisco - 2014

On behalf of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), Corey, Canapary & Galanis undertook a Travel Decision Survey within the City and County of San Francisco, as well as the eight surrounding Bay Area counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Marin, Santa Clara, Napa, Sonoma, and Solano. The primary goals of this study were to: 1. Assess percent mode share for travel in San Francisco for evaluation of the SFMTA Strategic Objective 2.3: Mode Share target of 50% non-private auto travel by FY 2018 with a 95% confidence level and margin of error ±5% or less. 2. Evaluate the above statement based on number of trips to, from, and within San Francisco by Bay Area residents. Trips by visitors to the Bay Area and for commercial purposes are not included. 3. Provide additional trip details, including trip purpose for each trip in the mode-share question series. 4. Collect demographic data on the population of Bay Area residents who travel to, from, and within San Francisco. 5. Collect data on travel behavior and opinions that support other SFMTA strategy and project evaluation needs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Travel Decision Survey - San Francisco - 2015

On behalf of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), Corey, Canapary & Galanis undertook a Travel Decision Survey within the City and County of San Francisco, as well as the eight surrounding Bay Area counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Marin, Santa Clara, Napa, Sonoma, and Solano. The primary goals of this study were to: 1. Assess percent mode share for travel in San Francisco for evaluation of the SFMTA Strategic Objective 2.3: Mode Share target of 50% non-private auto travel by FY 2018 with a 95% confidence level and margin of error ±5% or less. 2. Evaluate the above statement based on number of trips to, from, and within San Francisco by Bay Area residents. Trips by visitors to the Bay Area and for commercial purposes are not included. 3. Provide additional trip details, including trip purpose for each trip in the mode-share question series. 4. Collect demographic data on the population of Bay Area residents who travel to, from, and within San Francisco. 5. Collect data on travel behavior and opinions that support other SFMTA strategy and project evaluation needs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Travel Decision Survey - San Francisco - 2017

On behalf of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), Corey, Canapary & Galanis undertook a Travel Decision Survey within the City and County of San Francisco, as well as the eight surrounding Bay Area counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, San Mateo, Marin, Santa Clara, Napa, Sonoma, and Solano. The primary goals of this study were to: 1. Assess percent mode share for travel in San Francisco for evaluation of the SFMTA Strategic Objective 2.3: Mode Share target of 50% non-private auto travel by FY 2018 with a 95% confidence level and margin of error ±5% or less. 2. Evaluate the above statement based on number of trips to, from, and within San Francisco by Bay Area residents. Trips by visitors to the Bay Area and for commercial purposes are not included. 3. Provide additional trip details, including trip purpose for each trip in the mode-share question series. 4. Collect demographic data on the population of Bay Area residents who travel to, from, and within San Francisco. 5. Collect data on travel behavior and opinions that support other SFMTA strategy and project evaluation needs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Public perceptions of wave energy development on the west coast of North America: Risks, benefits, and coastal attachment

While solar and wind energy continue to grow as significant sources of renewable energy, a global energy transition away from fossil fuels will require an expanding portfolio of generating resources. Marine renewable energy has the potential to contribute greatly in the coming decades, as the more predictable nature of wave energy can support the resiliency of the power grid and complement solar and inland wind generation. Yet, the broad deployment of marine energy technologies like wave energy will depend on public support, making it critical to identify the relevant factors associated with public attitudes and risk/benefit perceptions. This paper draws on social representations theory to specifically examine perceptions of wave energy on the west coast of North America, a site chosen because of the high suitability for wave energy generation and the fact that one of only three wave energy test sites in the world is under development off the coast of Oregon. Using an online survey in June 2020, we recruited a sample of 2000 respondents from California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. We found a majority of respondents held positive attitudes to wave energy, but respondents also had low familiarity – with a quarter of respondents lacking sufficient information to form an opinion. We used logistic regression to identify factors correlated with wave energy attitudes, finding that respondents who were more supportive of wind and solar energy, more optimistic about new technology, and reported more familiarity with wave energy were significantly more likely to have a positive impression of wave energy. Respondents with higher levels of place attachment to coastal areas were more split, as they perceived higher benefits of wave energy – but also higher risks. Our results indicate broad appeal of wave energy on the west coast, but we caution policymakers and developers to not take initial siting processes for granted. As experience has shown for offshore wind, broad appeal does not guarantee a smooth siting process in a local context. Furthermore, the role of place attachment to coastal areas must be taken seriously or risk alienating local communities.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2024

Physical, socio-psychological, and behavioural determinants of household energy consumption in the UK

Determining which attitudes and behaviours predict household energy consumption can help accelerate the low-carbon energy transition. Conventional approaches in this domain are limited, often relying on survey methods that produce data on individuals’ motivations and self-reported activities without pairing these with actual energy consumption records, which are particularly hard to collect for large, nationally representative samples. This challenge precludes the development of empirical evidence on which attitudes and behaviours influence patterns of energy consumption, thus limiting the extent to which these can inform energy interventions or conservation programs. This study demonstrates a novel methodology for estimating energy consumption in the absence of actual energy records by using a large, publicly available data set of energy consumption in the UK. We develop a predictive model using the Smart Energy Research Laboratory (SERL) data portal (with records from nearly 13,000 UK households) and then use this model to predict energy consumption (both electric and gas) for a sample of 1,000 UK householders for which we separately collect over 200 variables relating to climate change attitudes and practices. Our approach uses a set of over 50 independent variables that are shared between the data sets, allowing us to train a model on the SERL data and use it to analyse the relationship between energy consumption and the opinions, motivations, and daily practices of survey respondents. Results show that electricity consumption is influenced by a broader range of factors compared to gas. Household energy use is best explained by physical dwelling characteristics, socio-demographic variables, and certain behavioural and attitudinal measures. Notably, pro-environmental attitudes, frugality, and conscientiousness correlate with lower energy use, while income and consumerism are linked to higher consumption. We discuss how these findings can inform efforts to decarbonise home energy use in the UK.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Participation in and Assessment of the Second DNCSH Public Workshop

The DOE/NRC Criticality Safety for Commercial-Scale HALEU Fuel Cycle and Transportation (DNCSH) project was established through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (H.R. 5376) to support the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and industry in addressing critical experiment validation gaps that impede the licensing basis and regulatory approval of high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) operations. An initial public workshop was held in February 2024 to address HALEU transportation validation gaps. The resulting call for proposals was released in April and resulted in funding for the execution and/or evaluation of 16 critical experiments. A second public workshop was held in August 2025 to address facility and operational validation gaps, precluding a second call for proposals. A list of attendees is provided in APPENDIX A, Table A-1. A total of 319 participants joined the meeting, which was hosted online via Microsoft Teams as well as in person. The slides from the meeting were uploaded online to the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The meeting agenda is provided in Table 1-1. In preparation for the meeting, a study was performed to examine expected fissile forms for the fuel cycles of various fuel types at different stages of production and the apparent validation gaps. The resulting report, titled “Benchmark Gap Assessment for the Manufacturing of High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium Fuels,” provided the foundation for the discussions that took place during the workshop. The discussions and the validation gaps in the report were used to develop the second call for proposals. The present report presents the feedback received before, during, and after the second workshop. All the data presented are based on voluntarily self-reported identification, opinions from workshop participants, and survey responses and are assumed to be as accurate as practically reasonable. The discussions during the workshop and the subsequent survey responses were intended to direct attention to industry-specific areas of interest and to collect feedback on the work performed to date by the DNCSH project.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2026

1995 OKI Household Activity and Travel Report Survey

The OKI Household Activity and Travel Report Survey 1995, conducted by Market Opinion Research, gathered household activity and travel data from 3,000 households within the OKI region (Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana Council of Governments' service area). The region covers over 2,615 square miles and is home to 697,468 households (over 1.75 million people). The primary purpose of this study was to provide OKI with a new database of travel patterns and behavior to assist in updating the region's transportation models. Respondents were asked to report their activities for a 24-hour period from 3:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. on an assigned activity day. The survey included weekday assignments only from October 4, 1995, to November 30, 1995.

1Hz data↗