Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “regression”

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.

23 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Explainable machine learning reveals that local structural motifs encode the thermodynamic state across the CuZr metallic glass-forming range

Metallic glasses derive their properties from the statistics of local atomic motifs rather than from long-range order, yet a quantitative, chemistry-specific link between motif populations and the underlying glassy state has remained elusive. In this work we combine large-scale molecular dynamics, Voronoi tessellation, deep neural networks, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) to identify which local structural motifs define the glassy state of Cu—Zr metallic glasses. A dataset of 17,180 atomistic configurations spanning ten compositions (Cu 20 Zr 80 –Cu 80 Zr 20 ) and four quench rates (10 9 –10 12 K/s) is used to train a feed-forward neural network that regresses temperature across the 50–2000 K liquid–supercooled–glass range, achieving a mean absolute error of 19.89 K and R 2 = 0.9974, confirming that the local structural state is faithfully encoded in motif-level structure. SHAP analysis then reveals that a tightly coupled near-icosahedral family of motifs (coordination numbers (CN) 11–13, including the full icosahedron 001200 and its single-atom-perturbation sibling 10930) collectively encodes the thermodynamic state of the system across the full glass-forming range. The CN = 11–13 ordered members carry negative SHAP values at high populations, tracking the most deeply-quenched configurations, while 10930 shows the reversed signature consistent with its role as a soft-spot host whose population shrinks as the icosahedral network deepens. The analysis demonstrates that explainable machine learning can isolate the minimal motif vocabulary defining the glassy state and recovers the near-icosahedral building blocks previously identified by data-driven analyses of Cu—Zr. The approach provides a general, chemistry-specific route for characterizing the structural state of disordered materials.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS2026

Updated global and regional trends of stratospheric ozone profiles

We present updated evaluation of stratospheric ozone profile trends in the 60° S–60°N latitude range using long-term ground-based and satellite climate data records, as well as simulations by chemistry-climate models. The trends are evaluated using the LOTUS (Long-term Ozone Trends and Uncertainties in the Stratosphere) regression model. Analyses of satellite data confirm the statistically significant positive ozone trends in the period 2000–2024 in the upper stratosphere of ~1–3% per decade, with larger trends at mid-latitudes compared to the tropics. The trends are slightly positive or close to zero in the middle stratosphere, and mostly negative, -1 to -2% per decade, in the lower stratosphere, but they are not statistically significant. The morphology and magnitude of ozone trends are similar to previous analyses (2000–2020 trends). Ozone trends in 2000–2024 predicted by chemistry-climate model simulations are in good agreement with combined satellite trends. In the upper stratosphere, models predict a slightly stronger ozone recovery than observations. In the lower stratosphere, both models and satellite observations report negative trends in the tropics, while modelled ozone trends are slightly positive at mid-latitudes. Ozone profile trends over several stations estimated from ground-based records capture the same overall vertical pattern of ozone trends as merged gridded satellite datasets. Analyses of regional ozone profile trends in 2003–2024 using merged satellite datasets confirmed the previous observations of a longitudinal structure in ozone trends in the NH mid-latitude stratosphere, with positive trends over Scandinavia and negative trends over Siberia. However, the magnitude of this dipole-like structure is reduced compared to previous analyses.

trends↗
NASA NTRS2026

Machine Learning for Predicting Team Functioning in HERA Missions

Team functioning is integral to success in future long term space exploration missions. Proactively detecting declines in team functioning can mitigate conflict and ensure mission success. This project developed a speech-based artificial intelligence (AI) system that unobtrusively predicts degradation in team functioning, including performance and cohesion, in the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) Campaigns 4 and 5. The AI system conducted automated analysis of the prosodic (tone of voice) and linguistic (language content) components of speech, modeling interpersonal dynamics at both the turn-taking and day-wide levels. We investigated team functioning via observing structured interactions (i.e., multi-mission space exploration vehicle-extra vehicular activity [MMSEV-EVA], team interaction battery [TIB]) and unstructured interactions before the MMSEV-EVA task. We developed machine learning models to predict team functioning (objective task accuracy, self reported team efficacy and self reported team cohesion) by analyzing OpenSmile acoustic features, linguistic descriptors extracted via the linguistic inquiry and word count (LIWC) dictionary, and semantic embeddings. In the TIB, static models using logistic regression and random forests were not able to predict task accuracy, but predicted team efficacy and cohesion during both the decision making and relational tasks to a moderate level (60-70%). Majority voting on the individual turns to predict day long team efficacy further increased accuracies (70-80%). Finally, long short-term memory (LSTM) models showed the best performance across all variables (80-91%), including task performance. In the MMSEV-EVA, static models achieved an accuracy of 60% with majority voting, which increased to 80% through the incorporation of mission day as a variable, accounting for the learning effect. A key finding across both tasks was the "team-dependent" nature of these interactions; models achieved much higher accuracy when trained on prior days of the same team's data rather than attempting to generalize across entirely different teams, with even 1-2 days of prior data per team achieving 5-15% improvement over team-independent models. In addition, the incorporation of pre-task data from the same team also improves model performance, e.g., incorporating data from the decision-making task of the TIB, which preceded the relational task, improved the prediction of team efficacy and cohesion during the latter. We compared model performance when trained on machine-generated data compared to data that had been further corrected by human annotators. Overall, models trained on human-corrected data exhibited a modest improvement in performance, particularly when acoustic features were used. We found no significant correlation between word error rate (WER) and model accuracy (r(55) = -0.08, p = 0.51), but model’s accuracy was significantly higher for medium/high quality transcription (0.74 (SD = 0.48)) compared to the low-quality group (0.64 (SD = 0.36)) (t(63)=2.82, p = 0.006). Based on these, several design recommendation emerge, that could inform Standards at NASA. Models predicting team functioning should incorporate at least one to two days of historical interaction data, include brief pre-task discussions, and explicitly model temporal learning effects, especially for longer operational tasks. Minimum quality standards for automated speech-processing pipelines are needed, given the performance gains observed with manually corrected acoustic data. Finally, systems should leverage both acoustic features and language embeddings in complementary ways, with modality choices and fusion strategies tailored to mission context, task demands, and data quality requirements.

Shrivatsa Mishra↗
DOE OSTI2025

Plasma phosphorylated tau217 strongly associates with memory deficits in the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum

Abstract Plasma phosphorylated tau (p-tau) biomarkers open unprecedented opportunities for identifying carriers of Alzheimer’s disease pathophysiology in early disease stages using minimally invasive techniques. Plasma p-tau biomarkers are believed to reflect tau phosphorylation and secretion. However, it remains unclear to what extent the magnitude of plasma p-tau abnormalities reflects neuronal network disturbance in the form of cognitive impairment. To address this question, we included 103 cognitively unimpaired elderly and 40 cognitively impaired, amyloid-β-positive individuals from the TRIAD cohort, in addition to 336 cognitively unimpaired and 216 cognitively impaired, amyloid-β-positive older adults from the BioFINDER-2 cohort. Participants had tau PET scans, amyloid PET scans or amyloid CSF, p-tau217, p-tau181 and p-tau231 blood measures, structural T1-MRI and cognitive assessments. In this cross-sectional study, we used regression models and correlation analyses to assess the relationship between plasma biomarkers and cognitive scores. Furthermore, we applied receiver operating characteristic curves to assess cognitive impairment across plasma biomarkers. Finally, we categorized participants into amyloid (A), p-tau (T1) and tau PET (T2) positive (+) or negative (−) profiles and ran non-parametric comparisons to assess differences across cognitive domains. We found that plasma p-tau217 was more associated with cognitive performance than p-tau181 and p-tau231 and that this relationship was particularly strong for memory scores (TRIAD: βp-tau217 = −0.53, βp-tau181 = −0.35 and βp-tau231 = −0.24; BioFINDER-2: βp-tau217 = −0.52, βp-tau181 = −0.24 and βp-tau231 = −0.29). Associations in amyloid-β-positive participants resembled these results, but other cognitive scores also showed strong associations in cognitively impaired individuals. Moreover, plasma p-tau217 outperformed plasma p-tau181 and plasma p-tau231 in identifying memory impairment (area under the curve values for TRIAD: p-tau217 = 0.86, p-tau181 = 0.77 and p-tau231 = 0.75; and for BioFINDER-2: p-tau217 = 0.86, p-tau181 = 0.76 and p-tau231 = 0.81) and in identifying executive function impairment only in the BioFINDER-2 cohort (p-tau217 = 0.82, p-tau181 = 0.76 and p-tau231 = 0.76). Lastly, we showed that subtle memory deficits were present in A+T1+T2− participants for plasma p-tau217 (P = 0.007) and plasma p-tau181 (P = 0.01) in the TRIAD cohort and for all biomarkers across cognitive domains in A+T1+T2− and A+T1+T2− individuals (P < 0.001 in all) in the BioFINDER-2 cohort. The A+T1+T2− individuals showed cognitive deficits in both cohorts (P < 0.001 in all). Together, our results suggest that plasma p-tau217 stands out as a biomarker capable of identifying memory deficits attributable to Alzheimer’s disease and that memory impairment certainly occurs in amyloid-β- and plasma p-tau-positive individuals who have no significant amounts of tau in the neocortex.

Neurosciences & Neurology↗
DOE OSTI2026

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗