SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “decisions”
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.
Assessing the Impact of Automated Document Classification Decisions on Human Decision-Making
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Co-optimization to Integrate Power System Reliability Decisions with Resiliency Decisions.
Abstract not provided.
Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501
The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)
A Typology of Decision-Making Tasks for Visualization
Despite decision-making being a vital goal of data visualization, little work has been done to differentiate decision-making tasks within the field. While visualization task taxonomies and typologies exist, they often focus on more granular analytical tasks that are too low-level to describe large complex decisions, which can make it difficult to reason about and design decision-support tools. In this paper, we contribute a typology of decision-making tasks that were iteratively refined from a list of design goals distilled from a literature review. Our typology is concise and consists of only three tasks: CHOOSE, ACTIVATE, and CREATE. Although decision types originating in other disciplines exist, we provide definitions for these tasks that are suitable for the visualization community. Our proposed typology offers two benefits. First, the ability to compose and hierarchically organize the tasks enables flexible and clear descriptions of decisions with varying levels of complexities. Second, the typology encourages productive discourse between visualization designers and domain experts by abstracting the intricacies of data, thereby promoting clarity and rigorous analysis of decision-making processes. We demonstrate the benefits of our typology through four case studies, and present an evaluation of the typology from semi-structured interviews with experienced members of the visualization community who have contributed to developing or publishing decision support systems for domain experts. Our interviewees used our typology to delineate the decision-making processes supported by their systems, demonstrating its descriptive capacity and effectiveness. Finally, we present preliminary findings on the usefulness of our typology for visualization design.
Climate-aware decision-making: lessons for electric grid infrastructure planning and operations
Abstract Climate change poses significant risks to large-scale infrastructure systems and brings considerable uncertainties that challenge historical planning approaches. Here we focus on how climate awareness might be better incorporated into planning and decision-making in the electric power sector. To do so, we consider lessons from decision science literature where researchers have specifically focused on how to make better decisions under uncertainty. We perform a three-part review: of decision science literature on best practices for decision-making under uncertainty, of industry practice documents to understand how new uncertainties may affect the types of decisions electric utilities are making today, and of literature on electricity sector planning under climate change to assess how lessons from decision science might fit into sector-specific analyses. We discuss how characterizations of uncertainty from the decision science literature might guide approaches in the electricity sector to appropriately capture climate-related uncertainties. We also distill three key ideas from the decision science literature that can be incorporated into electricity sector planning to manage these new uncertainties: robustness, adaptive planning, and multi-stakeholder engagement. We offer example recommendations for how these key ideas might be incorporated into one essential type of planning activity, capacity expansion.
The modeling of risk perception in the use of structural health monitoring information for optimal maintenance decisions
This paper proposes an approach to select a maintenance strategy from a predefined set of choices considering the decision maker’s behavioral risk profile. It is assumed that the damage state is characterized by a continuous state parameter probabilistically inferred from observable sensor data. This work applies an engineering application of consequence-based decision-making incorporating the acceptable risk intensity of the decision-maker, i.e., the decision-maker’s (individual or an organization) valuation of the outcome of a decision, using a risk profile model. The utility of a decision-maker is subjective, and this paper considers the fact that different decision-makers mentally assign a different importance factor (the utility) to the seriousness or urgency to take necessary actions with the increasing intensity of structural damage. The approach herein incorporates a layer of human psychology on selecting appropriate maintenance strategies that not only depend on the posterior distribution of unmeasurable damage state but also consider the behavioral risk profile of the decision-maker. Further, the collective decision-making of an organization consisting of many individuals is also investigated. The approach is exemplified in a case study involving life cycle monitoring of a miter gate, part of a lock system enabling navigation of inland waterways.
Analytical Framework for Homeowner-Focused Computational Cost-Benefit Mitigation Decision Making
As a result of increasing windstorm losses in the United States over the past 50 years, a variety of residential wind hazard mitigation strategies have been recommended. Wind hazard mitigation undoubtedly reduces windstorm losses; however, little customized information is available to support the economic decision-making process for individual stakeholders, especially at the consumer level. Therefore, there is a need for decision support tools to calculate, evaluate, and present the economic benefits of mitigation over variable decision-making time horizons for unique building characteristics in specific geographical locations. This paper presents a cost-benefit computational decision-making recommendation framework that evaluates and presents the cost effectiveness of mitigation, customized based on location, years of interest, and building characteristics. The decision-making framework consists of two cores. The user-independent core and user-dependent core which consists of eight steps, divided into four subprocesses: (1) data acquisition, (2) data evaluation, (3) cost-benefit calculation, and (4) results comparison and decision making. To demonstrate the framework, a wood-framed single-family home in light suburban terrain in Golden Meadow, Louisiana, is used as a case study, considering retrofit mitigation with a $15,000 budget and a decision-making time horizon of 30 years. The case study provides six mitigation options, with cost ranging between approximately $2,000 and $15,000 and net benefit/cost ratios ranging from 2.4 to 13. Once fully implemented in a decision making information tool, the developed mitigation recommendation framework will provide valuable information that can be used by home designers, builders, owners, and other stakeholders to better understand the economic facets of wind hazard mitigation, providing critical information as part of the overall decision-making process.
First-of-a-Kind Risk-Informed Digital Twin for Operational Decision Making
A digital twin (DT) is a digital model or a collection of models of a physical entity. DTs in the nuclear arena can be used from plant design through decommissioning. Decisions are typically a priori or made offline. Risk-informed decision making is identifying what can go wrong, its frequency, and the consequences of its failure. Ideally risk-informed decision making reflects the current state of the plant and provides a decision in real time. Traditionally, probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) evaluate the failures of safety systems, the risk of core damage, and the offsite dose as the consequence. However, this DT evaluates the decisions on the control side rather than the protection side. It uses the same risk methods to probabilistically inform the decision-making process but in a different way. Rather than evaluating the risk of core damage, this DT evaluates the likelihood of avoiding a trip set point while maintaining plant safety. Performance-based assessments are identified via its probabilistic evaluation of operational alternatives based on system status. Because the purpose of the control system is to maintain system variables within prescribed operating ranges, upsets or challenges that can exceed a trip set point resulting in a plant transient and a challenge to plant mitigating systems based on actual plant conditions, are evaluated to safely maintain the plant within the operating ranges. The probabilistic portion of the model is autonomously and automatically adjusted, and the metric of interest (i.e. likelihood of avoiding a trip set point) is recalculated. The digital representation of the physical system (i.e. the DT) performs a deterministic performance–based assessment of the probabilistically identified alternatives identified to validate the probabilistic assessment. A decision-making algorithm selects the appropriate option based on the probabilistic and deterministic assessments and transmits a control signal to a component(s) to initiate a corrective action or informs an operator of its decision.
Transportation Hub Infrastructure Expansion: Decision Support Under Uncertainty
The Athena project (www.athena-mobility.org) has worked to investigate the relationship between the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport (DFW) and the greater Dallas area in order to better understand and therefore better inform future decision-making regarding the critical infrastructure that influence mobility between the airport and the city. Through this work, infrastructure related to curbside pickup and drop-off, parking, public transit, and the road network congestion were identified as critical to the operation of the DFW transportation hub. The infrastructure analysis and expansion aspect of the Athena project is focused on the restructuring of the CTA curb as a hierarchical curb and the building or repurposing of parking infrastructure as the interplay between these two areas. Many sources of uncertainty exist that may impact future airport and transportation hub operations, such as passenger volume growth, population demographic changes over time, electric vehicle (EV) adoption rates, and autonomous vehicle (AV) adoption rates. Due to these sources of uncertainty, we have selected for our research a modeling framework that can capture various types of uncertainty and hedge against those uncertainties in the optimization process. We analyze road network and curb congestion, the rise of transportation networking companies, trends in parking usage, existing policies around this infrastructure, airport revenue streams, and other contributing factors to enable infrastructure decision making with less uncertainty. To accomplish this wholistic analysis, we have developed a novel multi-stage, multi-period stochastic optimization model which considers the airport's decisions from 2025-2045 under different possible future macro trajectories and day-to-day variations in operational conditions captured as "annual representation of operations" scenarios with respective probabilities. This model has also been designed to leverage the outputs of various efforts under the Athena project to create a combined decision framework for infrastructure decisions. These various efforts include the route optimization model, the ASPIRES simulation, the mode choice model, and the SUMO traffic simulation. Our computational experiments of this system at scale have resulted in a working version of our infrastructure model which enables the explicit representation and consideration of various sources of uncertainty in the decision process to enable robust, flexible decision-making. This model has been effectively run on NREL's HPC system, Eagle, with large numbers of stochastic scenarios and shows promise as a scalable tool for robust consideration of uncertainties in airport planning. We have tested our model using 30,240 operational circumstances in total, resulting in a problem with more 200 million variables. This model was solved in several different configurations, and a workflow to simulate the performance of the infrastructure model results was developed and deployed. In general, our results indicate that a combination of remote parking, remote curb infrastructure, and dynamic pricing can generate revenue, reduce emissions, accommodate emerging technologies such as AVs and EVs, and manage airport passenger growth over time. We note the success of the proposed strategy depends on the data collection and forecasting abilities of DFW. We have also seen that the AV adoption by TNCs might necessitate larger amounts of remote curb. The results of this work inform strategies for airport infrastructure decision making, as well as demonstrate the value of an adaptable model, but also indicate that there are avenues remaining where further research would be of value.
Critical Infrastructure Decision-Making under Long-Term Climate Hazard Uncertainty: The Need for an Integrated, Multidisciplinary Approach
U.S. critical infrastructure assets are often designed to operate for decades, and yet long-term planning practices have historically ignored climate change. With the current pace of changing operational conditions and severe weather hazards, research is needed to improve our ability to translate complex, uncertain risk assessment data into actionable inputs to improve decision-making for infrastructure planning. Decisions made today need to explicitly account for climate change – the chronic stressors, the evolution of severe weather events, and the wide-ranging uncertainties. If done well, decision making with climate in mind will result in increased resilience and decreased impacts to our lives, economies, and national security. We present a three-tier approach to create the research products needed in this space: bringing together climate projection data, severe weather event modeling, asset-level impacts, and contextspecific decision constraints and requirements. At each step, it is crucial to capture uncertainties and to communicate those uncertainties to decision-makers. While many components of the necessary research are mature (i.e., climate projection data), there has been little effort to develop proven tools for long-term planning in this space. The combination of chronic and acute stressors, spatial and temporal uncertainties, and interdependencies among infrastructure sectors coalesce into a complex decision space. By applying known methods from decision science and data analysis, we can work to demonstrate the value of an interdisciplinary approach to climate-hazard decision making for longterm infrastructure planning.
Decision Science for Machine Learning (DeSciML)
The increasing use of machine learning (ML) models to support high-consequence decision making drives a need to increase the rigor of ML-based decision making. Critical problems ranging from climate change to nonproliferation monitoring rely on machine learning for aspects of their analyses. Likewise, future technologies, such as incorporation of data-driven methods into the stockpile surveillance and predictive failure analysis for weapons components, will all rely on decision-making that incorporates the output of machine learning models. In this project, our main focus was the development of decision scientific methods that combine uncertainty estimates for machine learning predictions, with a domain-specific model of error costs. Other focus areas include uncertainty measurement in ML predictions, designing decision rules using multiobjecive optimization, the value of uncertainty reduction, and decision-tailored uncertainty quantification for probability estimates. By laying foundations for rigorous decision making based on the predictions of machine learning models, these approaches are directly relevant to every national security mission that applies, or will apply, machine learning to data, most of which entail some decision context.
Making a Water Data System Responsive to Information Needs of Decision Makers
Evidence-based environmental management requires data that are sufficient, accessible, useful and used. A mismatch between data, data systems, and data needs for decision making can result in inefficient and inequitable capital investments, resource allocations, environmental protection, hazard mitigation, and quality of life. In this paper, we examine the relationship between data and decision making in environmental management, with a focus on water management. We focus on the concept of decision-driven data systems —data systems that incorporate an assessment of decision-makers' data needs into their design. The aim of the research was to examine the process of translating data into effective decision making by engaging stakeholders in the development of a water data system. Using California's legislative mandate for state agencies to integrate existing water and other environmental data as a case study, we developed and applied a participatory approach to inform data-system design and identify unmet data needs. Using workshops and focused stakeholder meetings, we developed 20 diverse use cases to assess data sources, availability, characteristics, gaps, and other attributes of data used for representative decisions. Federal and state agencies made up about 90% of the data sources, and could readily adapt to a federated data system, our recommended model for the state. The remaining 10% of more-specialized data, central to important decisions across multiple use cases, would require additional investment or incentives to achieve data consistency, interoperability, and compatibility with a federated system. Based on this assessment, we propose a typology of different types of data limitations and gaps described by stakeholders. We also propose technical, governance, and stakeholder engagement evaluation criteria to guide planning and building environmental data systems. Data-system governance involving both producers and users of data was seen as essential to achieving workable standards, stable funding, convenient data availability, resilience to institutional change, and long-term buy-in by stakeholders. Our work provides a replicable lesson for using decision-maker and stakeholder engagement to shape the design of an environmental data system, and inform a technical design that addresses both user and producer needs.
Use of a controlled experiment and computational models to measure the impact of sequential peer exposures on decision making
It is widely believed that one’s peers influence product adoption behaviors. This relationship has been linked to the number of signals a decision-maker receives in a social network. But it is unclear if these same principles hold when the “pattern” by which it receives these signals vary and when peer influence is directed towards choices which are not optimal. To investigate that, we manipulate social signal exposure in an online controlled experiment using a game with human participants. Each participant in the game decides among choices with differing utilities. We observe the following: (1) even in the presence of monetary risks and previously acquired knowledge of the choices, decision-makers tend to deviate from the obvious optimal decision when their peers make a similar decision which we call the influence decision, (2) when the quantity of social signals vary over time, the forwarding probability of the influence decision and therefore being responsive to social influence does not necessarily correlate proportionally to the absolute quantity of signals. To better understand how these rules of peer influence could be used in modeling applications of real world diffusion and in networked environments, we use our behavioral findings to simulate spreading dynamics in real world case studies. We specifically try to see how cumulative influence plays out in the presence of user uncertainty and measure its outcome on rumor diffusion, which we model as an example of sub-optimal choice diffusion. Together, our simulation results indicate that sequential peer effects from the influence decision overcomes individual uncertainty to guide faster rumor diffusion over time. However, when the rate of diffusion is slow in the beginning, user uncertainty can have a substantial role compared to peer influence in deciding the adoption trajectory of a piece of questionable information.
Risk Model for EM Decision Support Toolsets
The Government Office of Accountability (GAO) has published several reports identifying the need for the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) to address mounting costs for DoE's cleanup program. DOEEM could greatly benefit from independent decision tool-sets/models that would allow them to evaluate options and inform business decision at the enterprise level considering site-specific life cycle costs and system plans. Program goals: Develop a tool-set that enables EM to independently evaluate alternatives, assess outcomes from different contracting strategies, and inform critical decisions for the enterprise. Project goals: Adaption of a Risk Model for integration with complimentary tool-sets for project level decision making. Operational Events: Discrete event model that evaluates operational variables (e.g. capacity, throughput, maintenance constraints) and identify bottlenecks. Identifying and Bounding Project Risk: Identify risks that impact confidence in meeting goals (e.g. production). Life cycle Cost: Evaluate impacts of staffing levels, inventory, and capital investments on life cycle costs. Methods and approach: Monte Carlo Analysis is being executed to generate results: Input derives from Risk Register Data; Tied to Projected and Target Schedules; Incorporates float duration within the model. Assumes associated risk mitigation actions being completed within a timeline of five fiscal years. Metrics include: Confidence in Meeting Production Goal; Confidence in Safety Standards; Confidence in Continuous Operation; Other Metrics can be added as appropriate regarding specific site needs. The adapted risk model can be used as a stand alone decision tool or can be integrated complementary tool-sets (i.e. process and cost models) for project-specific decisions. These support tool-sets can then be integrated with others for site- and complex- level evaluations. Future work includes designing an adaptable and modular framework that would allow integration of multiple tool-sets for holistic and/or targeted evaluation of alternative strategies for decision making that could lead to risk and cost reduction across the enterprise.
Reimagining How Flood Warnings Can Inform Decision‐Making and Community Actions
Society faces increasingly severe flood hazards, intensifying demand for flood early warning systems (FEWS) that deliver accurate and actionable information. However, most existing FEWS remain prediction‐centric, treating decision‐making as a downstream consumer of hazard forecasts while offering limited support for uncertainty interpretation, risk communication, and real‐world response. This Perspective presents a vision and blueprint for a novel inland FEWS‐decision‐making (FEWS‐DM) framework that repositions decision‐making as an equal partner in the forecasting process—not a passive recipient of its outputs. The framework is built on three tightly coupled, co‐evolving thrusts: Physical Science (T1), which advances flood prediction with quantified uncertainty informed by decision relevance; Human Science (T2), which incorporates psychology, behavior, and cultural and institutional context; and Decision Science (T3), which unifies physical predictions and human factors through principled, utility‐based decision support with end‐to‐end uncertainty management. Rather than treating T1 as a solved problem, FEWS‐DM recognizes that forecast development itself must be shaped by decision needs through continuous bidirectional feedback. We identify key scientific, behavioral, and operational challenges limiting such integration and discuss the enabling role of AI, while emphasizing human‐centered design and community feedback as essential for building trust and improving flood risk management.
Impact Mapping for Geospatial Reasoning and Decision Making
Objective The reported study evaluated a novel approach to aiding geospatial reasoning and decision making. Background Impact mapping aims to alleviate the cognitive demands of geospatial tasks in part by externalizing data in the form of an integrated decision surface. This is achieved by aggregating data across multiple sources of information and visualizing their combined utility rather than objective measurements or individual utility. Previous research has shown that geospatial decisions improve when aided in this manner, but it remains unknown if dynamic decision making, often plagued by fatigue and anchoring bias, would benefit similarly. Method The experiment implemented a systematic manipulation of the presence of a composite impact map and the number of attributes present in a two-stage disaster relief, resource allocation task to investigate when and how impact mapping is beneficial or deleterious to decision makers. Results The presence of the composite impact map increased the utility of selected sites, increased re-planning decisions, reduced information display views, and reduced workload. Generally, the effect of the composite impact map was greater when participants were asked to evaluate more attributes. Conclusion Composite impact maps appear to improve repeated geospatial reasoning and minimize anchoring bias because they alleviate the cognitive demands otherwise necessary to interpret and maintain information from multiple attributes. Application Data visualization techniques, such as impact mapping, can improve repeated geospatial decision making in environments that include high cognitive demand.
Clear Sky Toolkit: Decision Support User Guide
The Clear Sky Decision Support Template is a Microsoft Excel-based resource that enables users to screen and prioritize critical facilities for the addition of solar + storage. The Decision Support Template consolidates and streamlines the most relevant resources from the emergency management discipline, the electric utility sector, and national energy research institutions to assist in further site analysis and decision-making. The Decision Support Template is intended for use by local government and private sector decision-makers who aim to mitigate the effects of power outages on critical infrastructure, understand the potential for deploying photovoltaic (PV) and storage solutions on critical facilities, and align emergency management planning processes and utility needs with community resilience objectives. The Decision Support Template is divided into five modules that provide a structured, step-by-step approach users can follow and apply to unique circumstances. This process guides a more thorough and accurate assessment of a site's potential to accommodate a solar + storage system, provide grid benefits to utilities, and support community resilience and disaster mitigation for the broader region. After identifying potentially viable and preferred sites for solar + storage using the Decision Support Template, users should conduct a more detailed evaluation and consultation with a solar professional.