Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Ranking methods”

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 415 records · Page 23
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

Koopman Operators for Generalized Persistence of Excitation Conditions for Nonlinear Systems

It is hard to identify nonlinear biological models strictly from data, with results that are often sensitive to experimental conditions. Automated experimental workflows and liquid handling enables unprecedented throughput, as well as the capacity to generate extremely large datasets. We seek to develop generalized identifiability conditions for informing the design of automated experiments to discover predictive nonlinear biological models. For linear systems, identifiability is characterized by persistence of excitation conditions. For nonlinear systems, no such persistence of excitation conditions exist. We use the input-Koopman operator method to model nonlinear systems and derive identifiability conditions for openloop systems initialized from a single initial condition. We show that nonlinear identifiability is intrinsically tied to the rank of a given dataset’s power spectral density, transformed through the lifted Koopman observable space. We illustrate these identifiability conditions with a simulated synthetic gene circuit model, the repressilator. We illustrate how rank degeneracy in datasets results in overfitted nonlinear models of the repressilator, resulting in poor predictive accuracy. Our findings provide novel experimental design criteria for discovery of globally predictive nonlinear models of biological phenomena.

Boddupalli, Nibodh↗
NASA NTRS2014

Direct Signal-to-Noise Quality Comparison between an Electronic and Conventional Stethoscope aboard the International Space Station

Introduction: Evaluation of heart, lung, and bowel sounds is routinely performed with the use of a stethoscope to help detect a broad range of medical conditions. Stethoscope acquired information is even more valuable in a resource limited environments such as the International Space Station (ISS) where additional testing is not available. The high ambient noise level aboard the ISS poses a specific challenge to auscultation by stethoscope. An electronic stethoscope's ambient noise‐reduction, greater sound amplification, recording capabilities, and sound visualization software may be an advantage to a conventional stethoscope in this environment. Methods: A single operator rated signal‐to‐noise quality from a conventional stethoscope (Littman 2218BE) and an electronic stethoscope (Litmann 3200). Borborygmi, pulmonic, and cardiac sound quality was ranked with both stethoscopes. Signal‐to‐noise rankings were preformed on a 1 to 10 subjective scale with 1 being inaudible, 6 the expected quality in an emergency department, 8 the expected quality in a clinic, and 10 the clearest possible quality. Testing took place in the Japanese Pressurized Module (JPM), Unity (Node 2), Destiny (US Lab), Tranquility (Node 3), and the Cupola of the International Space Station. All examinations were conducted at a single point in time. Results: The electronic stethoscope's performance ranked higher than the conventional stethoscope for each body sound in all modules tested. The electronic stethoscope's sound quality was rated between 7 and 10 in all modules tested. In comparison, the traditional stethoscope's sound quality was rated between 4 and 7. The signal to noise ratio of borborygmi showed the biggest difference between stethoscopes. In the modules tested, the auscultation of borborygmi was rated between 5 and 7 by the conventional stethoscope and consistently 10 by the electronic stethoscope. Discussion: This stethoscope comparison was limited to a single operator. However, we believe the results are noteworthy. The electronic stethoscope out preformed the traditional stethoscope in each direct comparison. Consideration should be made to incorporate an electronic stethoscope into current and future space vehicle medical kits.

Marshburn, Thomas↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Culture-Independent Microbial Air Profiling using a Spaceflight-Compatible Nanopore Sequencing Method

Microbial monitoring of spacecraft air is critical toward assessing the efficacy of microbial controls within the environmental control and life support systems to protect the crew and vehicle environment. Currently, onboard the International Space Station (ISS), the air is monitored every quarter using an impaction air sampler. With this method, microbial cells and spores are pulled onto plates containing a growth medium. Following onboard incubation, the crew reports approximate microbial levels to the ground, but sample return is required for identification. Upon return of the plates, the isolates present are identified for crew health risk assessments. As NASA moves beyond low-Earth orbit, sample return will be impractical, and a near real-time monitoring capability is essential. Significant strides have been made in recent years to utilize a molecular-based method for microbial profiling of ISS surfaces. The developed method is independent of microbial culture, thus removing the bias toward detecting only culturable organisms, eliminating the need for sample return, and reducing the risk to crew health from exposure to high microbial levels. The work described here details the evaluation of three different air sampling platforms whose product is amenable to downstream molecular processing. The three samplers were compared in terms of mass and power requirements, ease of use, and the resulting data. For the two highest-ranking samplers, a basic concept of operations was developed to transfer the sample into the already established preparation and sequencing process. Using these concepts of operations, an in-depth comparison of the molecular data generated was compared to the historical culture-based method. Data from both methods detailed similar microbial profiles, while the molecular method detailed microbial identifications that were lacking from the culture data. The developed method will enable the generation of near real-time microbial profiles of the spacecraft atmosphere.

Brandon Dunbar↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Culture-Independent Microbial Air Profiling using a Spaceflight-Compatible Nanopore Sequencing Method

Microbial monitoring of spacecraft air is critical toward assessing the efficacy of microbial controls within the environmental control and life support systems to protect both the crew and the vehicle environment. Additionally, understanding of the atmospheric microbial profiles will be essential toward Mars-forward planetary protection planning. Currently, onboard the International Space Station (ISS), the air is monitored on a quarterly basis using an impaction air sampler. With this method, bacterial and fungal cells and spores are pulled onto plates containing growth medium. Following five days of ambient incubation onboard the ISS, the crew compares the growth to density charts and provides the approximations to the ground. Upon return of the culture plates to the Johnson Space Center’s Microbiology Laboratory, the isolates present are identified for crew health risk assessments. As NASA moves beyond the low-Earth orbit of ISS, sample return will be impractical. As such, a near real-time monitoring capability for the assessment of the spacecraft atmosphere is necessary. Significant strides have been made in recent years to utilize a molecular-based method for microbial profiling of ISS surfaces. The developed method is not dependent on microbial culture, thus removing the associated risk to the crew from high microbial levels, the bias toward detecting only the culturable organisms, and eliminates the need for sample return. The work described here details the evaluation of three different air sampling platforms whose product is amenable to downstream molecular processing and nanopore sequencing. The three samplers were compared in terms of mass and power requirements, ease-of -use, and the resulting data. For the two highest ranking samplers, a basic concept of operations was developed to transfer the sample into the already established preparation and sequencing process. Using these concepts of operations, an in-depth comparison of the molecular data generated was compared to the historical culture-based method. Data from both methods detailed similar microbial profiles, while the molecular method detailed microbial identifications that could not be identified through the culture-based method. The developed method will enable the generation of near real-time microbial profiles of the spacecraft atmosphere.

Brandon J Dunbar↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Predictor-Corrector Strategy for Adaptivity in Dynamical Low-Rank Approximations

Here, in this paper, we present a predictor-corrector strategy for constructing rank-adaptive, dynamical low-rank approximations (DLRAs) of matrix-valued ODE systems. The strategy is a compromise between (i) low-rank step-truncation approaches that alternately evolve and compress solutions and (ii) strict DLRA approaches that augment the low-rank manifold using subspaces generated locally in time by the DLRA integrator. The strategy is based on an analysis of the error between a forward temporal update into the ambient full-rank space, which is typically computed in a step-truncation approach before recompressing, and the standard DLRA update, which is forced to live in a low-rank manifold. We use this error, without requiring its full-rank representation, to correct the DLRA solution. A key ingredient for maintaining a low-rank representation of the error is a randomized SVD, which introduces some degree of stochastic variability into the implementation. The strategy is formulated and implemented in the context of discontinuous Galerkin spatial discretizations of PDEs and applied to several versions of DLRA methods found in the literature as well as a new variant. Numerical experiments comparing the predictor-corrector strategy to other methods demonstrate robustness to overcome shortcomings of step truncation or strict DLRA approaches: The former may require more memory than is strictly needed, while the latter may miss transients solution features that cannot be recovered. The effect of randomization, tolerances, and other implementation parameters is also explored.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
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↗
DOE OSTI2024

A new “gold standard”: Perturbative triples corrections in unitary coupled cluster theory and prospects for quantum computing

A major difficulty in quantum simulation is the adequate treatment of a large collection of entangled particles, synonymous with electron correlation in electronic structure theory, with coupled cluster (CC) theory being the leading framework for dealing with this problem. Augmenting computationally affordable low-rank approximations in CC theory with a perturbative account of higher-rank excitations is a tractable and effective way of accounting for the missing electron correlation in those approximations. This is perhaps best exemplified by the “gold standard” CCSD(T) method, which bolsters the baseline CCSD with the effects of triple excitations using considerations from many-body perturbation theory (MBPT). Despite this established success, such a synergy between MBPT and the unitary analog of CC theory (UCC) has not been explored. In this work, we propose a similar approach wherein converged UCCSD amplitudes are leveraged to evaluate energy corrections associated with triple excitations, leading to the UCCSD[T] method. In terms of quantum computing, this correction represents an entirely classical post-processing step that improves the energy estimate by accounting for triple excitation effects without necessitating new quantum algorithm developments or increasing demand for quantum resources. The rationale behind this choice is shown to be rigorous by studying the properties of finite-order UCC energy functionals, and our efforts do not support the addition of the fifth-order contributions as in the (T) correction. We assess the performance of these approaches on a collection of small molecules and demonstrate the benefits of harnessing the inherent synergy between MBPT and UCC theories.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
NASA NTRS2013

System and method for progressive band selection for hyperspectral images

Disclosed herein are systems, methods, and non-transitory computer-readable storage media for progressive band selection for hyperspectral images. A system having module configured to control a processor to practice the method calculates a virtual dimensionality of a hyperspectral image having multiple bands to determine a quantity Q of how many bands are needed for a threshold level of information, ranks each band based on a statistical measure, selects Q bands from the multiple bands to generate a subset of bands based on the virtual dimensionality, and generates a reduced image based on the subset of bands. This approach can create reduced datasets of full hyperspectral images tailored for individual applications. The system uses a metric specific to a target application to rank the image bands, and then selects the most useful bands. The number of bands selected can be specified manually or calculated from the hyperspectral image's virtual dimensionality.

Fisher, Kevin↗
DOE OSTI2020

Prediction of condition-specific regulatory genes using machine learning

Recent advances in genomic technologies have generated data on large-scale protein–DNA interactions and open chromatin regions for many eukaryotic species. How to identify condition-specific functions of transcription factors using these data has become a major challenge in genomic research. To solve this problem, we have developed a method called ConSReg, which provides a novel approach to integrate regulatory genomic data into predictive machine learning models of key regulatory genes. Using Arabidopsis as a model system, we tested our approach to identify regulatory genes in data sets from single cell gene expression and from abiotic stress treatments. Our results showed that ConSReg accurately predicted transcription factors that regulate differentially expressed genes with an average auROC of 0.84, which is 23.5–25% better than enrichment-based approaches. To further validate the performance of ConSReg, we analyzed an independent data set related to plant nitrogen responses. ConSReg provided better rankings of the correct transcription factors in 61.7% of cases, which is three times better than other plant tools. We applied ConSReg to Arabidopsis single cell RNA-seq data, successfully identifying candidate regulatory genes that control cell wall formation. Our methods provide a new approach to define candidate regulatory genes using integrated genomic data in plants.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Sparsity of the electron repulsion integral tensor using different localized virtual orbital representations in local second-order Møller–Plesset theory

Utilizing localized orbitals, local correlation theory can reduce the unphysically high system-size scaling of post-Hartree–Fock (post-HF) methods to linear scaling in insulating molecules. The sparsity of the four-index electron repulsion integral (ERI) tensor is central to achieving this reduction. For second-order Møller–Plesset theory (MP2), one of the simplest post-HF methods, only the (ia|jb) ERIs are needed, coupling occupied orbitals i, j and virtuals a, b. In this paper, we compare the numerical sparsity (called the “ragged list”) and two other approaches revealing the low-rank sparsity of the ERI. The ragged list requires only one set of (localized) virtual orbitals, and we find that the orthogonal valence virtual-hard virtual set of virtuals originally proposed by Subotnik et al. gives the sparsest ERI tensor. To further compress the ERI tensor, the pair natural orbital (PNO) type representation uses different sets of virtual orbitals for different occupied orbital pairs, while the occupied-specific virtual (OSV) approach uses different virtuals for each occupied orbital. Here, our results indicate that while the low-rank PNO representation achieves significant rank reduction, it also requires more memory than the ragged list. The OSV approach requires similar memory to that of the ragged list, but it involves greater algorithmic complexity. An approximation (called the “fixed sparsity pattern”) for solving the local MP2 equations using the numerically sparse ERI tensor is proposed and tested to be sufficiently accurate and to have highly controllable error. A low-scaling local MP2 algorithm based on the ragged list and the fixed sparsity pattern is therefore promising.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2025

Artificial Intelligence Benchmarking

AI benchmarking is a method for evaluating the effectiveness of an AI model using a set of standardized metrics, for example, high school-level math exams. These benchmarks and their results will enable ranking various AI models based on their effectiveness in performing a specific task.

Krishnan, Anjay [Fermilab]↗
NASA NTRS1990

Scaling laws for light-weight optics

Scaling laws for light-weight optical systems are examined. A cubic relationship between mirror diameter and weight has been suggested and used by many designers of optical systems as the best description for all light-weight mirrors. A survey of existing light-weight systems in the open literature has been made to clarify this issue. Fifty existing optical systems were surveyed with all varieties of light-weight mirrors including glass and beryllium structured mirrors, contoured mirrors, and very thin solid mirrors. These mirrors were then categorized and weight to diameter ratio was plotted to find a best fit curve for each case. A best fitting curve program tests nineteen different equations and ranks a 'goodness of fit' for each of these equations. The resulting relationship found for each light-weight mirror category helps to quantify light-weight optical systems and methods of fabrication and provides comparisons between mirror types.

Valente, Tina M.↗
NASA NTRS2003

System Safety Hazards Assessment in Conceptual Program Trade Studies

Providing a program in the concept development phase with a method of determining system safety benefits of potential concepts has always been a challenge. Lockheed Martin Space and Strategic Missiles has developed a methodology for developing a relative system safety ranking using the potential hazards of each concept. The resulting output supports program decisions with system safety as an evaluation criterion with supporting data for evaluation. This approach begins with a generic hazards list that has been tailored for the program being studied and augmented with an initial hazard analysis. Each proposed concept is assessed against the list of program hazards and ranked in three derived areas. The hazards can be weighted to show those that are of more concern to the program. Sensitivities can be also be determined to test the robustness of the conclusions

Eben, Dennis M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Control of Risks Through the Use of Procedures: A Method for Evaluating the Change in Risk

This paper considers how procedures can be used to control risks faced by an organization and proposes a means of recognizing if a particular procedure reduces risk or contributes to the organization's exposure. The proposed method was developed out of the review of work documents and the governing procedures performed in the wake of the Columbia accident by NASA and the Space Shuttle prime contractor, United Space Alliance, LLC. A technique was needed to understand the rules, or procedural controls, in place at the time in the context of how important the role of each rule was. The proposed method assesses procedural risks, the residual risk associated with a hazard after a procedure's influence is accounted for, by considering each clause of a procedure as a unique procedural control that may be beneficial or harmful. For procedural risks with consequences severe enough to threaten the survival of the organization, the method measures the characteristics of each risk on a scale that is an alternative to the traditional consequence/likelihood couple. The dual benefits of the substitute scales are that they eliminate both the need to quantify a relationship between different consequence types and the need for the extensive history a probabilistic risk assessment would require. Control Value is used as an analog for the consequence, where the value of a rule is based on how well the control reduces the severity of the consequence when operating successfully. This value is composed of two parts: the inevitability of the consequence in the absence of the control, and the opportunity to intervene before the consequence is realized. High value controls will be ones where there is minimal need for intervention but maximum opportunity to actively prevent the outcome. Failure Likelihood is used as the substitute for the conventional likelihood of the outcome. For procedural controls, a failure is considered to be any non-malicious violation of the rule, whether intended or not. The model used for describing the Failure Likelihood considers how well a task was established by evaluating that task on five components. The components selected to define a well established task are: that it be defined, assigned to someone capable, that they be trained appropriately, that the actions be organized to enable proper completion and that some form of independent monitoring be performed. Validation of the method was based on the information provided by a group of experts in Space Shuttle ground processing when they were presented with 5 scenarios that identified a clause from a procedure. For each scenario, they recorded their perception of how important the associated rule was and how likely it was to fail. They then rated the components of Control Value and Failure Likelihood for all the scenarios. The order in which each reviewer ranked the scenarios Control Value and Failure Likelihood was compared to the order in which they ranked the scenarios for each of the associated components; inevitability and opportunity for Control Value and definition, assignment, training, organization and monitoring for Failure Likelihood. This order comparison showed how the components contributed to a relative relationship to the substitute risk element. With the relationship established for Space Shuttle ground processing, this method can be used to gauge if the introduction or removal of a particular rule will increase or decrease the .risk associated with the hazard it is intended to control.

Praino, Gregory T.↗
DOE OSTI2025

6D large charge and 2D Virasoro blocks

We compute observables in the interacting rank-one 6D 𝒩 =(2,0) superconformal field theory (SCFT) at large 𝑅-charge. We focus on correlators involving Φ 𝑛 , namely symmetric products of the bottom component of the supermultiplet containing the stress tensor. By using the moduli space effective action and methods from the large-charge expansion, we compute the operator product expansion coefficients ⟨Φ 𝑛 ⁢Φ 𝑚 ⁢Φ 𝑛+𝑚 ⟩ in an expansion in 1/𝑛. The coefficients of the expansion are only partially determined from the 6D perspective, but we manage to fix them order-by-order in 1/𝑛 numerically by utilizing the 6⁢D/2⁢D correspondence. This is made possible by the fact that this 6D observable can be extracted in 2D from a specific double-scaling limit of the vacuum Virasoro block, which can be efficiently computed numerically. We also extend the computation to higher-rank SCFTs, and discuss various applications of our results to 6D as well as 2D.

classical solutions in field theory↗
NASA NTRS1992

Design and analysis issues of integrated control systems for high-speed civil transports

A study was conducted to identify, rank, and define development plans for the critical guidance and control design and analysis issues as related to economically viable and environmentally acceptable high-speed civil transport. The issues were identified in a multistep process. First, pertinent literature on supersonic cruise aircraft was reviewed, and experts were consulted to establish the fundamental characteristics and problems inherent to supersonic cruise aircraft. Next, the advanced technologies and strategies being pursued for the high-speed civil transport were considered to determine any additional unique control problems the transport may have. Finally, existing technologies and methods were examined to determine their capabilities for the design and analysis of high-speed civil transport control systems and to identify the shortcomings and issues. Three priority levels - mandatory, highly beneficial, and desirable - were established. Within each of these levels, the issues were further ranked. Technology development plans for each issue were defined. Each plan contains a task breakdown and schedule.

Mccarty, Craig A.↗