Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Collaborative Science”

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 469 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Reactor System Demonstration with Cyber-Attack Scenarios Using CrowPis and Arduino Microcontrollers

This study covers developing and simulating nuclear reactor system using CrowPis and Arduino microcontrollers for demonstrating cyber-attack scenarios. The team was tasked with implementing more sensors and cybersecurity aspects to the reactor program that was created by last year’s high school interns. The team received the opportunity to collaborate and obtain advice from multiple university interns that helped us gain a better perspective of our project. Our mentor’s background in nuclear science was pivotal to our understanding what we could add to the reactor program to make it as realistic as possible. The first week of our internship was spent reading as much material as possible to gain an understanding of and the background for cyber-attacks and nuclear science. Nuclear science was a new horizon for each of the high school interns on the team, so spending this time in the beginning of our internship was crucial to our success. For the remaining portion of our internship, the team collectively did our best to implement as many sensors and use as much hardware as we could to make an accurate representation of a nuclear reactor in the program that was created. This internship was a big learning experience for everyone on the team. We all gained so many insights into the nuclear world and how it can benefit our lives, as well as how so many moving pieces are needed for it to work properly.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Dynamics of electrified liquid surface during plasma-liquid interaction

The research goal of this Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Fusion Energy Science (OFES) project was to investigate the electrified liquid surface dynamics using a shallow water model. The project was an extension of the Princeton Collaborative Research Facility (PCRF) project to work with Dr. Mikhail Shneider at Princeton University.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Collaborative Proposal: Improving Understanding of the Internal Structure and Dynamics of Deep Convection Using ARM Observations and Large Eddy Simulations (Final progress report)

This is the final technical report for the DOE Atmospheric System Research funded project entitled "Collaborative Proposal: Improving Understanding of the Internal Structure and Dynamics of Deep Convection Using ARM Observations and Large Eddy Simulations". This project addressed several science questions related to the structure and behavior of deep convective clouds in the atmosphere. It applied knowledge gained from this work to improve the deep cumulus convection parameterization in the Community Earth System Model (CESM). Specific outcomes related to the project include an improved understanding of: (1) how convective cloud environments regulate the size of thermals reaching the upper troposphere, and hence the shallow-to-deep convective transition; (2) the role of dynamic pressure forcing in thermal and convective cloud evolution; and (3) the role of vertical wind shear on the behavior of moist thermals and the transition from shallow to deep convection. Although the primary motivation of this project was to improve basic understanding of thermal dynamics in atmospheric convection, an important component of this work was using this improved understanding to modify the representation of entrainment and vertical velocity profiles in the Zhang-McFarlane cumulus parameterization used in CESM. This work also had a strong observational component, with analyses of Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) observations to characterize thermal characteristics and behavior. Observations collected during the ARM-supported CACTI field project were used with high-resolution simulations to explore environmental controls on deep convection initiation. Data from the ARM-supported MC3E field project were also used to evaluate the representation of updraft vertical velocities in the Zhang-McFarlane cumulus parameterization. This project directly supported the training of two post-doctoral researchers and led to 16 peer-reviewed published papers.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Challenges and Future Directions in Quantifying Terrestrial Evapotranspiration

Terrestrial evapotranspiration is the second-largest component of the land water cycle, linking the water, energy, and carbon cycles and influencing the productivity and health of ecosystems. The dynamics of ET across a spectrum of spatiotemporal scales and their controls remain an active focus of research across different science disciplines. Here, we provide an overview of the current state of ET science across in situ measurements, partitioning of ET, and remote sensing, and discuss how different approaches complement one another based on their advantages and shortcomings. We aim to facilitate collaboration among a cross-disciplinary group of ET scientists to overcome the challenges identified in this paper and ultimately advance our integrated understanding of ET.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Coast-Urban-Rural Atmospheric Gradient Experiment

Accurately representing the climate and weather variability within cities and providing well-tested representations of the impacts of urban systems on the atmospheric environment are challenges for current earth system models (ESMs). Field data for testing and developing these models are critical to addressing these limitations. The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility will support a field campaign aimed at understanding how different surface-atmosphere interactions around a city are influencing its climate. The Coast-Urban-Rural Atmospheric Gradient Experiment (CoURAGE) is expected to operate from December 2024 to November 2025 in and around Baltimore, Maryland. With its aging infrastructure, growing susceptibility to heat and flooding, and ongoing issues with air and water pollution, Baltimore is characteristic of many large industrial cities in the Eastern United States. ARM, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science user facility, plans to deploy one of its three mobile observatories at Morgan State University’s Clifton Park site in downtown Baltimore. Ancillary ARM sites are also planned for rural Maryland, northwest of the city; and to the southern end of Kent Island in Chesapeake Bay. Data from CoURAGE will complement measurements from the Baltimore Social-Environmental Collaborative (BSEC), one of four DOE Urban Integrated Field Laboratories that will operate in cities across the United States to study urban climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Simple Standard for Sharing Ontological Mappings (SSSOM)

Abstract Despite progress in the development of standards for describing and exchanging scientific information, the lack of easy-to-use standards for mapping between different representations of the same or similar objects in different databases poses a major impediment to data integration and interoperability. Mappings often lack the metadata needed to be correctly interpreted and applied. For example, are two terms equivalent or merely related? Are they narrow or broad matches? Or are they associated in some other way? Such relationships between the mapped terms are often not documented, which leads to incorrect assumptions and makes them hard to use in scenarios that require a high degree of precision (such as diagnostics or risk prediction). Furthermore, the lack of descriptions of how mappings were done makes it hard to combine and reconcile mappings, particularly curated and automated ones. We have developed the Simple Standard for Sharing Ontological Mappings (SSSOM) which addresses these problems by: (i) Introducing a machine-readable and extensible vocabulary to describe metadata that makes imprecision, inaccuracy and incompleteness in mappings explicit. (ii) Defining an easy-to-use simple table-based format that can be integrated into existing data science pipelines without the need to parse or query ontologies, and that integrates seamlessly with Linked Data principles. (iii) Implementing open and community-driven collaborative workflows that are designed to evolve the standard continuously to address changing requirements and mapping practices. (iv) Providing reference tools and software libraries for working with the standard. In this paper, we present the SSSOM standard, describe several use cases in detail and survey some of the existing work on standardizing the exchange of mappings, with the goal of making mappings Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR). The SSSOM specification can be found at http://w3id.org/sssom/spec. Database URL: http://w3id.org/sssom/spec

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Clarifying Terminology in Microbial Ecology: A Call for Precision in Scientific Communication

The rapid evolution of microbiology as a field of research has led to the introduction of new terminology and the adaptation of existing terms. However, inconsistencies in the use of these terms, including variations across different scientific disciplines, can lead to confusion and miscommunication within the scientific community. This article discusses the importance of precise terminology in microbiome research, highlighting examples where terms have been misused or redefined without clear justification. We also present a list of frequently used terms in microbial ecology along with their specific definitions. We argue that the misuse of terminology can hinder scientific progress by creating ambiguity and misunderstanding. To address this, we propose a set of guidelines for the consistent use of key terms and provide clear definitions for some of the most commonly misused or newly introduced terms in the field. The definitions provided herein will also function as a guide for young researchers new to the field of microbial ecology. Accurate and consistent use of terminology is crucial for effective communication and collaboration in microbiology research. By adhering to standardised definitions, researchers can ensure that their work is clearly communicated and contributes meaningfully to the progress of science.

definitions↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Collaborative Research: Louis Stokes Regional Center of Excellence: Louis Stokes Midwest Regional Center of Excellence (LSMRCE) for Broadening Participation in STEM

The Louis Stokes Midwest Regional Center of Excellence (LSMRCE) for Broadening Participation in STEM, a partnership of Chicago State University (CSU), aimed to increase the number of underrepresented minority (URM) students graduating with science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) degrees and matriculating into graduate STEM programs. As a member institution of the LSMRCE, Fermi Research Alliance, LLC, (Fermilab) looked to support its continued mission of increasing URM student participation in its Summer Internship in Science and Technology (SIST) internship program. The program provided URMs with access to research skills development, mentoring and professionalization activities via paid, summer research internships at Fermilab. Students received instruction and mentoring while gaining exposure to a global laboratory workforce and community with diverse academic and professional expertise. In addition, students established professional relationships and networked with senior researchers, early career scientists, technical professionals, post-docs and other undergraduate interns to help forge collaboration, innovation and mentoring opportunities at Fermilab and LSMRCE partner institutions

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nanoporous Materials Genome Center Final Technical Report

Nanoporous materials (NPMs), including zeolites/zeotypes, metal-organic frameworks (MOFs), covalent organic frameworks, polymers with intrinsic microporosity, and molecular cages, possess enormous potential in diverse areas relevant to the DOE Office of Science Basic Energy Sciences (BES) mission and objectives. The Nanoporous Materials Genome Center (NMGC) has developed exascale-ready software, computational/theoretical chemistry methods, and data-driven science approaches that enable (i) the de-novo design of functional NPMs for chemical separation and catalysis tasks of increasing complexity, (ii) the discovery of the most promising functional NPMs from databases of synthesized and hypothetical adsorbent structures and the optimization of process conditions for specific applications, and (iii) the microscopic-level understanding of the fundamental interactions underlying the function of NPMs including hierarchical architectures, composite materials, responsive frameworks that may undergo phase transitions or post-synthetic modifications, and materials containing defects, partial disorder, or interfaces. A pivotal part of the NMGC project has been a tight collaboration between leading experimental groups for synthesis and characterization of NPMs and of computational groups that allowed for iterative feedback. The NMGC project has resulted in the publication of more than 290 research and review articles including more than 60 publications in high-impact journals and more than 15 journal covers. NMGC publications have already received more than 20,000 citations (with more than 3,000 citations per year in 2021, 2022, and 2023) and contribute to an h-index of more than 72. The NMGC award has supported collaborative research involving 28 research groups and contributed to the training of more than 40 postdocs, more than 60 graduate students, and more than 20 undergraduate students with broad expertise in data-driven science approaches, computational chemistry methods, and high-performance computing, in addition to the skills to thrive in an integrated experimental and computational research environment.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2020

2017 Puerto Rico G-LiHT Metadata

This data package contains metadata for data acquired for sample transects across Puerto Rico using NASA Goddard's Lidar, Hyperspectral, and Thermal (G-LiHT) Airborne Imager in March 2017. Flights specifically targeted sites with coincident field data collection for NGEE-Tropics, existing forest inventory plots from the USDA-Forest Service Forest Inventory & Analysis (FIA) program and university collaborators, and other research installations (e.g., NEON).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

PD21A680: Additive Manufacturing Process Optimization and Qualification FY21 Year-end Report

This project builds upon knowledge gained from previous projects on Additive Manufacturing (AM) operation, process control and monitoring, repeatability, and process improvement. This project will exclusively focus on metal powder bed additive manufacturing (PBAM). Objective 1: Advance metal powder bed AM R&D capabilities. Perform enhanced R&D on increased build volumes and throughput, safety and handling controls, process monitoring, and diagnostics with a focus on production end-states. Objective 2: Build upon knowledge gained from previous PDRD projects to develop deeper understanding of process controls, essential for transitioning metal AM processes for future applications. Objective 3: Maintain business development and research advantages through collaborations with external industry and university partners.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Prototyping a self-learning digital twin platform for personalized treatment in melanoma patients (Final Report)

We completed all the Milestones and disseminated results at the 2021 Computational Approaches for Cancer Workshop (CAFCW21) at the SuperComputing21 conference. As part of Milestone 1, we developed and implemented a prototype digital twin of metastatic melanoma patients, performed quality checks on the code and released it as open source. The work has directly driven major grant proposals by the team on computational digital twins and supporting software infrastructure, including a successful fellowship application by the PI. Work was lead by Paul Macklin (Contact PI, Indiana University), in collaboration with Ilya Shmulevich (PI, Institute for Systems Biology), Tina Hernandez-Boussard (PI, Stanford Univ.), Jeffrey Bryan (Co-I, University of Missouri), Snigdhansu Chatterjee (Co-I, University of Minnesota), and Mohammad Fallahi-Sichani (Co-I, U. of Virginia). Postdoctoral student Heber L. Rocha (Macklin lab, IU) performed intensive computational work, in collaboration with Senior Research Scientist Boris Aguilar (Shmulevich lab, ISB).

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Unlocking the benefits of transparent and reusable science for climate-risk management

People around the world seek climate-risk information to guide their decisions. For instance, projections about future flood risk inform where households choose to live, how lenders manage credit risks, and which communities receive federal funding. Yet data limitations and fundamental validation challenges raise important concerns about the reliability of such projections. The principles of transparency and reusability help address these concerns by enabling scrutiny of assumptions and methods, development of foundational data and tools, and consistent application of evaluation standards. While there is ongoing debate about how much transparency commercial climate-risk services should provide, many expect non-commercial actors to lead the way on operationalizing transparency and reusability to fulfill their knowledge-building role in the climate-risk ecosystem. However, despite prominent success stories, we find a substantial gap between principles and practice: only four percent of the most-cited peer-reviewed climate-risk studies in recent years fully share their data and code despite this being a widely accepted minimum standard for transparency. We highlight low-cost measures that non-commercial researchers can take now to improve transparency and reusability. We also emphasize that transformative progress requires substantial investment, cross-sector collaboration, and careful consideration of tradeoffs, data rights, and multiple perspectives on equity. We hope this perspective accelerates both immediate actions and longer-term conversations to improve the ability of science to effectively support timely, evidence-based, and sound climate-risk management.

Open Science↗
DOE OSTI2020

Opportunities and Challenges from Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for the Advancement of Science, Technology, and the Office of Science Missions

In February 2019, the President signed Executive Order 13859, Maintaining American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence. This order launched the American Artificial Intelligence Initiative, a concerted effort to promote and protect AI technology and innovation in the United States. The Initiative implements a government-wide strategy in collaboration and engagement with the private sector, academia, the public, and like-minded international partners. Among other actions, key directives in the Initiative called for Federal agencies to: Prioritize AI research and development investments, Enhance access to high-quality cyberinfrastructure and data, Ensure that the US maintains an international leadership role in the development of technical standards for AI, and Provide education and training opportunities to prepare the American workforce for the new era of AI. The mission of the Department of Energy (DOE) is to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions. In terms of Science and Innovation, the DOE’s mission is to maintain a vibrant US effort in science and engineering as a cornerstone of our economic prosperity with clear leadership in strategic areas. From July to October in 2019, the Argonne, Oak Ridge, and Berkeley National Laboratories hosted a series of four AI for Science Town Hall meetings in Chicago, Oak Ridge, Berkeley, and Washington DC. The four meetings were attended by over 1300 scientists from the 17 DOE Labs, 39 companies, and over 90 universities. The goal of the Town Hall series was ‘to examine scientific opportunities in the areas of artificial intelligence, Big Data, and high-performance computing (HPC) in the next decade, and to capture the big ideas, grand challenges, and next steps to realizing these.’ The discussions at the meetings were captured in the final report of the AI for Science Town Hall meetings.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Measurements and Analyses to Enable Science for the Eastern Pacific Cloud Aerosol Precipitation Experiment (EPCAPE)

Coastal cities provide the opportunity to characterize the substantial effects of manmade particles on marine cloud properties and processes. La Jolla lies to the north of San Diego, California, but it is often about a day directly downwind of the major pollution sources located in the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The large dynamic range of aerosol particle concentrations combined with the multi-hour to multi-day persistence of stratocumulus cloud layers makes the site ideal for investigating the seasonal changes in cloud and aerosol properties as well as the quantitative relationships between cloud and aerosol properties. The Eastern Pacific Cloud Aerosol Precipitation Experiment (EPCAPE) characterized the extent, radiative properties, aerosol interactions, and precipitation characteristics of stratocumulus clouds in the Eastern Pacific across all four seasons at two coastal sites in La Jolla. This project was designed to enhance and expand the scientific uses of the ARM AMF1 measurements from EPCAPE. The goal was to ensure meaningful observations were collected that would enable science. The project included the following objectives: (1) Reviewing the ARM AMF1 measurements [ARM, 2021a; b] and circulating a summary of the measurements each week, (2) Comparing AMF1 measurements to those provided by collaborators (including filter measurements at the pier), (3) Collecting and analyzing filter samples from Scripps Pier by Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and X-ray Fluorescence (XRF), (4) Assisting in operations of instruments provided by Guest PIs when possible, and (5) Providing an initial compilation of EPCAPE aerosol and cloud seasonal differences. The expected outcomes of these objectives were enhanced proposals and publications using EPCAPE measurements by helping to identify instrument issues, expanded data access and awareness by distributing weekly plots and related summaries, improved source-related attribution of aerosols with elemental tracers, additional observations provided by Guest PIs, and accelerated ACI studies enabled by the compiled seasonal summaries of aerosol and cloud properties. Three examples of the science enabled by this project are findings that (i) aerosol and cloud aqueous production contributes more than half of sulfate particle mass concentration, (ii) upwind sources make chemical composition very similar at nearby sites despite local differences in meteorology, and (iii) most of the large mass concentration of semi-volatile organic components is co-emitted and co-evaporated with nitrate. Together these findings illustrate how ARM extended field campaigns in coastal regions can be used to constrain ACI processes with direct observations. By using the unique ARM suite of cloud radiative products in addition to the measured aerosol properties at a coastal location, we were able to address the more specific question of which aerosol particles cause how much of the effects on clouds. Identifying this signature in coastal areas provides an opportunity to test the representation of aerosol sources by global models in a range of clean and urban-influenced conditions.

Russell, Lynn [Univ. of California, San Diego, CA ↗