Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Model Uncertainty”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 397 records · Page 22

An improved framework for the dynamic likelihood filtering approach to data assimilation

Here, we propose improvements to the Dynamic Likelihood Filter (DLF), a Bayesian data assimilation filtering approach, specifically tailored to wave problems. The DLF approach was developed to address the common challenge in the application of data assimilation to hyperbolic problems in the geosciences and in engineering, where observation systems are sparse in space and time. When these observations have low uncertainties, as compared to model uncertainties, the DLF exploits the inherent nature of information and uncertainties to propagate along characteristics to produce estimates that are phase aware as well as amplitude aware, as would be the case in the traditional data assimilation approach. Along characteristics, the stochastic partial differential equations underlying the linear or nonlinear stochastic dynamics are differential equations. This study focuses on developing the explicit challenges of relating dynamics and uncertainties in the Eulerian and Lagrangian frames via dynamic Gaussian processes. It also implements the approach using the ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) and compares the DLF approach to the conventional one with respect to wave amplitude and phase estimates in linear and nonlinear wave problems. Numerical comparisons show that the DLF/EnKF outperforms the EnKF estimates, when applied to linear and nonlinear wave problems. This advantage is particularly noticeable when sparse, low uncertainty observations are used.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Density modification of cryo-EM maps

Density modification uses expectations about features of a map such as a flat solvent and expected distributions of density in the region of the macromolecule to improve individual Fourier terms representing the map. This process transfers information from one part of a map to another and can improve the accuracy of a map. Here, the assumptions behind density modification for maps from electron cryomicroscopy are examined and a procedure is presented that allows the incorporation of model-based information. Density modification works best in cases where unfiltered, unmasked maps with clear boundaries between the macromolecule and solvent are visible, and where there is substantial noise in the map, both in the region of the macromolecule and the solvent. It also is most effective if the characteristics of the map are relatively constant within regions of the macromolecule and the solvent. Model-based information can be used to improve density modification, but model bias can in principle occur. Here, model bias is reduced by using ensemble models that allow an estimation of model uncertainty. A test of model bias is presented that suggests that even if the expected density in a region of a map is specified incorrectly by using an incorrect model, the incorrect expectations do not strongly affect the final map.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Status of the KRUSTY Benchmark Modeling and Uncertainty Analysis

The U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) desire for a small nuclear reactor for space applications led to a prototype assembly, Kilopower Reactor Using Stirling Technology (KRUSTY). The KRUSTY experiments included four phases: component critical, cold critical, warm critical, and high temperature. The KRUSTY benchmark described in this paper includes five configurations from the component critical experiments that were performed at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) beginning in November 2017. Preliminary results have been reported. The benchmark is now nearing completion (although it is still preliminary until formally accepted by the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project [ICSBEP] working group). In this paper, we present the updated benchmark and its uncertainties. These results were computed using MCNP6.2 ® with ENDF/B-VIII.0 cross sections.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗