Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Visual inference”

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.

33 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Nonlinear encoding in diffractive information processing using linear optical materials

Nonlinear encoding of optical information can be achieved using various forms of data representation. Here, we analyze the performances of different nonlinear information encoding strategies that can be employed in diffractive optical processors based on linear materials and shed light on their utility and performance gaps compared to the state-of-the-art digital deep neural networks. For a comprehensive evaluation, we used different datasets to compare the statistical inference performance of simpler-to-implement nonlinear encoding strategies that involve, e.g., phase encoding, against data repetition-based nonlinear encoding strategies. We show that data repetition within a diffractive volume (e.g., through an optical cavity or cascaded introduction of the input data) causes the loss of the universal linear transformation capability of a diffractive optical processor. Therefore, data repetition-based diffractive blocks cannot provide optical analogs to fully connected or convolutional layers commonly employed in digital neural networks. However, they can still be effectively trained for specific inference tasks and achieve enhanced accuracy, benefiting from the nonlinear encoding of the input information. Our results also reveal that phase encoding of input information without data repetition provides a simpler nonlinear encoding strategy with comparable statistical inference accuracy to data repetition-based diffractive processors. Our analyses and conclusions would be of broad interest to explore the push-pull relationship between linear material-based diffractive optical systems and nonlinear encoding strategies in visual information processors.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Foundation Models for Zero-Shot Segmentation of Scientific Images without AI-Ready Data

Zero-shot and prompt-based models have excelled at visual reasoning tasks by leveraging large-scale natural image corpora, but they often fail on sparse and domain-specific scientific image data. We introduce Zenesis, a no-code interactive computer vision platform designed to reduce data readiness bottlenecks in scientific imaging workflows. Zenesis integrates lightweight multimodal adaptation for zero-shot inference on raw scientific data, human-in-the-loop refinement, and heuristic-based temporal enhancement. We validate our approach on Focused Ion Beam Scanning Electron Microscopy (FIB-SEM) datasets of catalyst-loaded membranes. Zenesis outperforms baselines, achieving an average accuracy of 0.947, Intersection over Union (IoU) of 0.858, and Dice score of 0.923 on amorphous catalyst samples; and 0.987 accuracy, 0.857 IoU, and 0.923 Dice on crystalline samples. These results represent a significant performance gain over conventional methods such as Otsu thresholding and standalone models like the Segment Anything Model (SAM). Zenesis enables effective image segmentation in domains where annotated datasets are limited, offering a scalable solution for scientific discovery.

Mukherjee, Shubhabrata↗
DOE OSTI2025

PySIDT: Subgraph Isomorphic Decision Trees for Molecular Property Prediction

Accurate molecular property prediction is important across all fields of chemistry. Deep neural networks (DNNs) have become increasingly popular due to their ability to train automatically, avoiding the incredibly tedious process of constructing and extending traditional property estimation schemes. However, DNNs require large amounts of training data, are challenging to interpret, require large amounts of memory to load even during inference, and have severe difficulties incorporating qualitative chemical knowledge, which are often desired for molecular property prediction tasks. Here, in this study, we present PySIDT (https://github.com/zadorlab/PySIDT), a software for training and running inference on Subgraph Isomorphic Decision Trees (SIDTs). SIDTs are graph-based decision trees made of nodes associated with molecular substructures. Inference is done by descending target molecular structures down the decision tree to nodes with matching subgraph isomorphic substructures and making predictions based on the final (most specific) nodes matched. SIDTs scale down well to dataset sizes much smaller than is feasible for DNNs. As trees of molecular substructures, SIDTs are inherently readable and easy to visualize, making them easy to analyze. They are also straightforward to extend and retrain, facilitate uncertainty estimation, and enable easy integration of expert knowledge. We demonstrate the SIDT approach discussing its application to a diverse range of molecular prediction tasks: rate coefficient estimation, diffusion coefficient estimation, thermochemistry estimation, transition state bond stretch prediction, p K a prediction, stability of molecular structures, stability of surface structures, and prediction of surface lateral interaction energetics. Additionally, we demonstrate the power of the SIDT algorithms in two direct learning curve vanilla comparisons with the popular DNN-based software Chemprop and the popular gradient boosted trees-based software XGBoost on enthalpy of formation and rate coefficient prediction tasks. In particular, in the enthalpy of formation case, vanilla PySIDT is able to outperform vanilla Chemprop and XGBoost across the full range of training/validation set sizes out to 11,560 data points.

Johnson, Matthew Sean [Sandia National Laboratorie↗
DOE OSTI2026

In-Situ TEM Molten Salt Corrosion

Molten salt reactors (MSRs) offer a compelling pathway for next-generation nuclear energy, with advantages in thermal efficiency, inherent safety, and flexible fuel management. Yet, halide-based molten salts introduce significant materials challenges, particularly alloy corrosion. Alloy performance in these environments ultimately depends on understanding how corrosion initiates and progresses at the nanoscale, however most existing models rely on post-exposure characterization, leaving degradation mechanisms largely inferred rather than directly observed. NiCr alloys have garnered interest in MSRs applications as the Ni-based matrix provides strength and creep resistance, while Cr content offers oxidation resistance in air. However, NiCr corrosion resistance in chloride salts has proven poor due to preferential chromium dissolution, the formation of Cr-depleted pathways, and grain-boundary attack. This work aims to directly visualize corrosion of Ni-20Cr exposed to LiCl-KCl using in-situ Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) to capture real-time microstructural evolution during corrosion. Experiments will be performed at ~800 °C under controlled pressure conditions while utilizing Energy-Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) to analyze elemental redistribution. Observation of chromium depletion fronts, associated surface restructuring, and localized chloride enrichment are expected. Ultimately, this study is expected to provide a link between microscale processes and the macroscopic degradation behaviors relevant to MSR operation in advanced reactor environments. Simultaneously, this approach enables future in-situ investigations regarding alloy composition, salt chemistry, and their influence on corrosion pathways and long-term stability.?

36 - MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

A quantitative comparison of the fingerprint of twinned microstructures through surface and three-dimensional techniques

Assessing the fingerprint of a material’s microstructure is key for supporting materials design. With the emergence of a wide range of 3D characterization techniques, it is critical to understand the main differences in fingerprints reconstructed from 2D and 3D datasets. To this end, we introduce a graph-based microstructure reconstruction framework that enables structural comparisons of twin domain networks in high purity Ti using 3D and 2D electron backscatter diffraction. Insights into the structure of the twin networks are facilitated by combining statistical analysis of twin crystallography with visual and graphical analysis of the novel graph abstractions of the twins. We demonstrate that compared to 3D reconstructions, conventional 2D views of twinning miss key aspects of the microstructure including the high interconnectivity of domains into networks that span the full reconstruction volume. The reduced cross-grain and in-grain twin connectivity typically observed in 2D has notable implications on our understanding of how twinning mediates the plastic response of microstructures and how twin networks evolve. It is thus clear that 3D characterization is critical for accurately inferring both twin network morphologies as well as the key unit processes facilitating network formation.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Digital Twin for Chemical Science: a case study on water interactions on the Ag(111) surface

Directly visualizing chemical trajectories offers insights into catalysis, gas-phase reactions and photoinduced dynamics. Tracking the transformation of chemical species is best achieved by coupling theory and experiment. Here we developed Digital Twin for Chemical Science (DTCS) v.01, which integrates theory, experiment and their bidirectional feedback loops into a unified platform for chemical characterization. DTCS addresses a core question: given a set of experimental conditions, what is the expected outcome and why? It consists of a forward solver that takes a chemical reaction network and predicts spectra under experimental conditions, and an inverse solver that infers kinetics from measured spectra. We applied DTCS to ambient-pressure X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy measurements of the Ag–H2O interface as an example. This approach enables real-time knowledge extraction and guides experiments until a stopping condition is met based on accuracy and degeneracy. As a step toward autonomous chemical characterization, DTCS provides mechanistic knowledge in a verified, standardized manner.

Chemistry↗
DOE OSTI2024

Time-series metagenomics reveals changing protistan ecology of a temperate dimictic lake

Abstract Background Protists, single-celled eukaryotic organisms, are critical to food web ecology, contributing to primary productivity and connecting small bacteria and archaea to higher trophic levels. Lake Mendota is a large, eutrophic natural lake that is a Long-Term Ecological Research site and among the world’s best-studied freshwater systems. Metagenomic samples have been collected and shotgun sequenced from Lake Mendota for the last 20 years. Here, we analyze this comprehensive time series to infer changes to the structure and function of the protistan community and to hypothesize about their interactions with bacteria. Results Based on small subunit rRNA genes extracted from the metagenomes and metagenome-assembled genomes of microeukaryotes, we identify shifts in the eukaryotic phytoplankton community over time, which we predict to be a consequence of reduced zooplankton grazing pressures after the invasion of a invasive predator (the spiny water flea) to the lake. The metagenomic data also reveal the presence of the spiny water flea and the zebra mussel, a second invasive species to Lake Mendota, prior to their visual identification during routine monitoring. Furthermore, we use species co-occurrence and co-abundance analysis to connect the protistan community with bacterial taxa. Correlation analysis suggests that protists and bacteria may interact or respond similarly to environmental conditions. Cryptophytes declined in the second decade of the timeseries, while many alveolate groups (e.g., ciliates and dinoflagellates) and diatoms increased in abundance, changes that have implications for food web efficiency in Lake Mendota. Conclusions We demonstrate that metagenomic sequence-based community analysis can complement existing efforts to monitor protists in Lake Mendota based on microscopy-based count surveys. We observed patterns of seasonal abundance in microeukaryotes in Lake Mendota that corroborated expectations from other systems, including high abundance of cryptophytes in winter and diatoms in fall and spring, but with much higher resolution than previous surveys. Our study identified long-term changes in the abundance of eukaryotic microbes and provided context for the known establishment of an invasive species that catalyzes a trophic cascade involving protists. Our findings are important for decoding potential long-term consequences of human interventions, including invasive species introduction.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

AlgaeOrtho, a bioinformatics tool for processing ortholog inference results in algae

Introduction: Microalgae constitute a prominent feedstock for producing biofuels and biochemicals by virtue of their prolific reproduction, high bioproduct accumulation, and the ability to grow in brackish and saline water. However, naturally occurring wild type algal strains are rarely optimal for industrial use; therefore, bioengineering of algae is necessary to generate superior performing strains that can address production challenges in industrial settings, particularly the bioenergy and bioproduct sectors. One of the crucial steps in this process is deciding on a bioengineering target: namely, which gene/protein to differentially express. These targets are often orthologs which are defined as genes/proteins originating from a common ancestor in divergent species. Although bioinformatics tools for the identification of protein orthologs already exist, processing the output from such tools is nontrivial, especially for a researcher with little or no bioinformatics experience. Methods: The present study introduces AlgaeOrtho, a user-friendly tool that builds upon the SonicParanoid orthology inference tool (based on an algorithm that identifies potential protein orthologs based on amino acid sequences) and the PhycoCosm database from JGI (Joint Genome Institute) to help researchers identify orthologs of their proteins of interest in multiple diverse algal species. Results: The output of this application includes a table of the putative orthologs of their protein of interest, a heatmap showing sequence similarity (%), and an unrooted tree of the putative protein orthologs. Notably, the tool would be instrumental in identifying novel bioengineering targets in different algal strains, including targets in not-fully annotated algal species, since it does not depend on existing protein annotations. We tested AlgaeOrtho using three case studies, for which orthologs of proteins relevant to bioengineering targets, were identified from diverse algal species, demonstrating its ease of use and utility for bioengineering researchers. Discussion: This tool is unique in the protein ortholog identification space as it can visualize putative orthologs, as desired by the user, across several algal species.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Methodology to Evaluate the Grid Reliability Impact of Oscillations Induced by Large Loads

The rapid growth of hyperscale AI data centers is bringing renewed attention to the reliability risk that sustained forced oscillations pose to bulk power systems, with cyclic computational workloads emerging as a new forcing source. Unlike the broadband, stochastic disturbances from traditional industrial loads such as arc furnaces, AI training and inference facilities can inject large active power swings concentrated at specific frequencies over extended durations - characteristics that existing grid planning practices do not account for. While the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) has recognized this gap and called for system-level studies of large load interconnections, no standardized methodology exists to screen, simulate, and quantify these risks at the planning stage. This report presents the Risk Assessment Tool for Large Load-induced Events (RATLLE), a Python-based, publicly available script suite developed at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to evaluate bulk power system reliability risks from data center-induced oscillations. RATLLE implements a three-module workflow: a screening module that identifies vulnerable interconnection locations and excitable system modes; a simulation module that models cyclic data center load behavior using a commercial positive sequence simulation platform; and an analysis module that computes risk metrics and generates interactive visualization dashboards. The risk metrics, formulated around simulation observables, map oscillation impacts to a three-stage severity scale spanning latent equipment fatigue through imminent cascading failure. The methodology is demonstrated on two Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) system models: a publicly available 240-bus reduced representation and a detailed 2031 Heavy Winter planning case. Case studies illustrate that even modest 50 MW forced oscillations at resonant frequencies can produce wide-area power swings, N-1 security constraint violations, and cascading generator trips through protection actions - outcomes that would not occur under normal operating conditions without oscillations present. The results underscore the need for standardized oscillation impact assessment in large load interconnection studies and provide a reproducible, extensible framework for utilities to adopt or customize within their existing planning workflows.

Biswas, Shuchismita↗
DOE OSTI2025

Employing Eye Trackers to Reduce Nuisance Alarms

When process operators anticipate an alarm prior to its annunciation, that alarm loses information value and becomes a nuisance. This study investigated using eye trackers to measure and adjust the salience of alarms with three methods of gaze-based acknowledgement (GBA) of alarms that estimate operator anticipation. When these methods detected possible alarm anticipation, the alarm’s audio and visual salience was reduced. A total of 24 engineering students (male = 14, female = 10) aged between 18 and 45 were recruited to predict alarms and control a process parameter in three scenario types (parameter near threshold, trending, or fluctuating). The study evaluated whether behaviors of the monitored parameter affected how frequently the three GBA methods were utilized and whether reducing alarm salience improved control task performance. The results did not show significant task improvement with any GBA methods (F(3,69) = 1.357, p = 0.263, partial η 2 = 0.056). However, the scenario type affected which GBA method was more utilized (X 2 (2, N = 432) = 30.147, p < 0.001). Alarm prediction hits with gaze-based acknowledgements coincided more frequently than alarm prediction hits without gaze-based acknowledgements (X 2 (1, N = 432) = 23.802, p < 0.001, OR = 3.877, 95% CI 2.25–6.68, p < 0.05). Participant ratings indicated an overall preference for the three GBA methods over a standard alarm design (F(3,63) = 3.745, p = 0.015, partial η 2 = 0.151). This study provides empirical evidence for the potential of eye tracking in alarm management but highlights the need for additional research to increase validity for inferring alarm anticipation.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Permafrost Thaw, Uneven Subsidence and Projected Drying of Ice-wedge Polygon Tundra: Modeling Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper Permafrost Thaw, Uneven Subsidence and Projected Drying of Ice-wedge Polygon Tundra (in prep) to support a modeling study investigating how projected increases in Arctic temperature and precipitation will jointly influence hydrologic conditions in ice-rich tundra landscapes. With this dataset, this study is to address the research question: Will Arctic tundra landscapes become wetter or drier with increasing precipitation and temperature in the future when thaw-induced ground subsidence and associated microtopographic evolution are represented? The simulations focus on ice-wedge polygon tundra, a widespread form of ice-rich permafrost terrain that is highly sensitive to thaw-driven landscape change. This dataset contains model input and output data for four study watersheds in Alaska: Anaktuvuk, Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow), Brooks Foothills, and Prudhoe Bay. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.5), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model. For each watershed, ten modeling cases were performed representing two landscape evolution conditions (with subsidence and without subsidence) combined with five climate forcing scenarios derived from Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP5, SSP5 with precipitation trend, SSP2, SSP2 with precipitation trend, and SSP2 with double precipitation trend). Particularly, for each watershed under the forcing SSP2 with precipitation trend, there are two additional simulations considering spatially heterogeneous subsidence distributions: one assumes randomly distributed scaling and the other includes elevation dependent distribution scaling. These simulations span 1980–2099 and include spin-up runs (1980–2009) followed by transient projections (2010–2099). To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized by watershed. For each study watershed, the dataset contains: (1) Pre-partitioned mesh files for 32-core modeling (.par.32.XX), located in EACH_WATERSHED/mesh/basin; and also a non-partitioned mesh file (.exo) located in EACH_WATERSHED/mesh; (2) Climate forcings corresponding to the five SSP scenarios (.h5), located in EACH_WATERSHED/data; (3) Final states (.h5) from column spin-up modeling used to initialize historical watershed-scale spin-up runs from 1980 to 2009, located in EACH_WATERSHED/PreSpinupHistorical; (4) Final states (.h5) of historical watershed-scale spin-up runs from 1980 to 2009 used to initialize projection runs, located in EACH_WATERSHED/Spinup_daymetERA5; (5) ATS modeling input files (.xml), located in EACH_WATERSHED/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/inputfiles; (6) ATS modeling output files (.dat), located in in EACH_WATERSHED/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/combined_obs; (7) For the Brooks Foothills watershed, additional spatial model outputs are provided (.h5) for selected years (2033 and 2093) used to generate spatial figures in this study, located in Brooksfoothills/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/results-WITH/WITHOUT_SUBSIDENCE-year2033/2093. All data files with suffix .h5 can be accessible through Python h5py, and all data files with suffix of .dat can be imported by Python pandas. Mesh file with .exo can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python netCDF. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments in the Arctic (NGEE Arctic) project is a research effort to reduce uncertainty in the Department of Energy’s Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) by developing a predictive understanding of Arctic tundra ecosystems underlain by permafrost and to quantify feedbacks from the Arctic tundra to the Earth system. NGEE Arctic is supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. Over Phases 1–3, observations made by the NGEE Arctic team across a gradient of permafrost landscapes in Arctic Alaska improved the representation of tundra processes in the land surface component of E3SM (the E3SM Land Model, ELM). Model improvements emphasized unique aspects of permafrost environments and explored reductions in model complexity while retaining predictive power. The Arctic-informed ELM developed by NGEE Arctic has been used to make novel predictions on processes ranging from permafrost thaw to soil biogeochemical cycling to Earth system feedbacks associated with the unique characteristics of tundra plants. In Phase 4, the NGEE Arctic team is evaluating our new predictive understanding under novel conditions across the Arctic domain. In collaboration with partners at long-term pan-Arctic research sites we are examining whether an Arctic-informed ELM can faithfully simulate interactions among surface and subsurface processes at site, regional, and pan-Arctic scales. In turn, we are using variety of tools to dynamically extend and evaluate ELM inference, with an emphasis on data synthesis and pan-Arctic model evaluation, reintegration of code with an evolving E3SM, scaling across heterogeneous Arctic landscapes, and the appropriate representation of the impacts of increasingly frequent Arctic disturbances.

EARTH SCIENCE > ATMOSPHERE > PRECIPITATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

LABQ3: Bayesian method for quantification of mineral compositions and nano-scale elemental mapping of 3D synchrotron XCT data

Quantitative analysis of mineral compositions is essential in understanding geochemical, mineralogical and environmental processes. Fine-resolution 3D imaging is widely done using synchrotron X-ray computed tomography (XCT), but existing analyses are limited to visualization and segmentation. This paper presents a new method, Linear Attenuation Bayesian Quantitative 3D-mapper (LABQ3), based on the linearity of X-ray attenuation with respect to elemental concentrations. To address the random variability in attenuation measurements, LABQ3 employs Bayesian decision theory to minimize classification error, using reference attenuation distributions from scans of pure mineral standards. To demonstrate LABQ3 and test its performance, we studied precipitated carbonate samples. XCT scans were done at multiple energies using the transmission X-ray microscope (TXM) at beamline 32-ID-C of the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne National Laboratory. The reconstructed 3D images have a voxel size of 20 nm. Analyses revealed rich nano-scale compositional heterogeneity within individual particles. A mixture of calcium and cadmium produced an overall stoichiometric composition of (Ca 0.78 ,Cd 0.22 )CO 3 , with some voxels containing nearly pure CdCO 3 . The addition of zinc led to an overall stoichiometric composition of 33% Ca, 28% Cd, 39% Zn, with a nearly pure CaCO 3 core and compositional zonation through the rim. These compositional gradients are related to temporal sequences of carbonate mineral formation where Cd precipitated at the beginning in (Ca,Cd)CO 3 , while Cd and Zn precipitated at the end in (Ca, Cd,Zn)CO 3 . Results differ from bulk analyses using Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS), showing that LABQ3 provides particle-specific insights. LABQ3 distinguishes itself by quantifying chemical compositions along a continuum, making it different from XCT analyses based on segmentation. LABQ3 allows simultaneous acquisition of morphology and chemical composition in 3D, facilitating the interpretation of chemical gradients of trace elements, quantification of solid solution compositions, inferences about temporal sequences of mineral precipitation, and addressing other concerns about solid-phase chemistry.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
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

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↗
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↗