Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “software sustainability”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Then and Now: Improving Software Portability, Productivity, and 100× Performance

The US Exascale Computing Project (ECP) has succeeded in preparing applications to run efficiently on the first reported Exascale supercomputers in the world. To achieve this, it modernized the whole leadership software stack, from libraries to simulation codes. In this article, we contrast selected leadership software before and after ECP. We discuss how sustainable research software development for leadership computing can embrace the conversation with the hardware vendors, the leadership computing facilities, the software community, and the domain scientists who are the application developers and integrators of software products. We elaborate on how software needs to take portability as a central design principle and to benefit from interdependent teams; we also demonstrate how moving to programming languages with high momentum, like modern C++, can help improve the sustainability, interoperability, and performance of research software. Finally, we showcase how cross-institutional efforts can enable algorithm advances that are beyond incremental performance optimization.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1994

Software architecture standard for simulation virtual machine, version 2.0

The Simulation Virtual Machine (SBM) is an Ada architecture which eases the effort involved in the real-time software maintenance and sustaining engineering. The Software Architecture Standard defines the infrastructure which all the simulation models are built from. SVM was developed for and used in the Space Station Verification and Training Facility.

Sturtevant, Robert↗
DOE OSTI2023

Operational Energy Life Cycle Data Development for the National Institute of Standards And Technology (NIST) Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) Neutral Environmental Software Tool (NEST)

For this analysis, regionalized life cycle assessment (LCA) results for environmental impacts (using the Tool for Reduction and Assessment of Chemicals and Other Environmental Impacts [TRACI] 2.1) and cumulative energy demand (using the Federal Life Cycle Analysis Commons Elementary Flow List [FEDEFL] Inventory Methods v1.0.0) were evaluated for the production and utilization of electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and propane as commodities within residential and commercial buildings. These results can used as a framework for future research into net zero, high-performance buildings, such as done here for the Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) database by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Engineering Laboratory. The geographical results were assigned to each United States (U.S.) Zone Improvement Plan (ZIP) code based on the ZIP code location and corresponding Balancing Authority Area, natural gas basin, and Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADDs). Additionally, previously developed models were utilized to develop future life cycle profiles. Projections were based on data available from the U.S. Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2022 through 2050 (AEO 2022). Electricity LCA models were updated based on AEO 2022 projected annual generation mixes, while the natural gas baseline model was updated based on projected shares of natural gas types (conventional, shale, tight, and coalbed methane). Projections of crude oil production rates and export rates were applied to the petroleum baseline model in five-year increments to investigate their effects on the life cycle profile of fuel oil and propane. While only 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP-100) with climate carbon feedback (CC-FB) and Cumulative Energy Demand are shown in Section 4: Results, the complete results, including Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential, GWP-100 without inclusion of CC-FB, Human Health Impacts Potentials (Cancer, Non-Cancer), Ozone Depletion Potential, Particulate Matter Formation Potential, and Photochemical Smog Formation Potential, are tabulated for each ZIP code in the Excel worksheets that accompany this analysis. For the Excel spreadsheet tools associated with this report, please go to https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=f8890fac-be55-44ac-aaa9-e2888bfabe93

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Basic Research Needs in The Science of Scientific Software Development and Use: Investment in Software is Investment in Science

Increasingly powerful and affordable computing has revolutionized scientific and scholarly discovery across a broad range of fields. Computing relies on software, which has been rapidly growing in scope, diversity, and complexity. At the same time, the methods, processes, and tools used to produce and utilize this essential software are often ad hoc, and the study and improvement of them are often done without the benefit of direct funding or prioritization. Consequently, concerns are growing about the productivity of the developers and users of scientific software, its sustainability, and the trustworthiness of the results that it produces. Increased investment, especially in the characterization and improvement of how scientific software is developed and used, is important for sustaining and improving the impact of software as the scope and complexity of scientific efforts expand. Without this investment, we face the risk of diminishing returns on our software investments because the demands for increased functionality, usability, reliability, and more will not be sufficiently met. The US Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE/SC) is at the forefront of modern software-enabled scientific discovery across numerous areas of computational, experimental, and observational science, including major investments in national user facilities that support these activities. For many years, DOE/SC software investments have provided tremendous value to the scientific community. We want to continue and further improve the value of DOE/SC software efforts by using a scientific approach to understanding and improving how scientific software is developed and used. In December 2021, the DOE/SC Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) convened a workshop on basic research needs for the Science of Scientific-Software Development and Use (SSSDU). Through keynote presentations, lightning talks, and breakout groups, which built on insights from 124 pre-workshop position papers, participants discussed the current practice of software development, maintenance, evolution, and use, and considered how the scientific method could be used to examine these practices and develop more evidence-based approaches to enhance the impact of software and computing on all areas of science. Workshop participants identified three priority research directions (PRDs) and three important crosscutting themes that center on the following overarching insight: Software has become an essential part of modern science, impacting discoveries, policy, and technological development. To maintain and improve confidence in science delivered via software, we must improve the processes and tools that help us create and use software, and this enhancement requires a deep understanding of the diverse array of teams and individuals doing the work.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Experiences with a Flexible User Research Process to Build Data Change Tools

Scientific software development processes are understood to be distinct from commercial software development practices due to uncertain and evolving states of scientific knowledge. Sustaining these software products is a recognized challenge, but under-examined is the usability and usefulness of such tools to their scientific end users. User research is a well-established set of techniques (e.g., interviews, mockups, usability tests) applied in commercial software projects to develop foundational, generative, and evaluative insights about products and the people who use them. Currently these approaches are not commonly applied and discussed in scientific software development work. The use of user research techniques in scientific environments can be challenging due to the nascent, fluid problem spaces of scientific work, varying scope of projects and their user communities, and funding/economic constraints on projects.In this paper, we reflect on our experiences undertaking a multi-method user research process in the Deduce project. The Deduce project is investigating data change to develop metrics, methods, and tools that will help scientists make decisions around data change. There is a lack of common terminology since the concept of systematically measuring and managing data change is under explored in scientific environments. To bridge this gap we conducted user research that focuses on user practices, needs, and motivations to help us design and develop metrics and tools for data change. This paper contributes reflections and the lessons we have learned from our experiences. We offer key takeaways for scientific software project teams to effectively and flexibly incorporate similar processes into their projects.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Position Papers for the ASCR Workshop on the Science of Scientific-Software Development and Use

Software is an increasingly important component in the pursuit of scientific discovery. Both its development and use are essential activities for many scientific teams. At the same time, very little scientific study has been conducted to understand, characterize, and improve the development and use of software for science. Computational science teams have diversified over time to include contributions from domain scientists who provide expertise in scientific and engineering disciplines, applied mathematicians and computer scientists who provide optimal algorithms and data structures, and software and data engineers who provide methodologies and tools adapted and adopted from other software domains. These diverse contributions have enabled tremendous advances in the pursuit of scientific discovery, even as models, computer architectures, and software environments have become more complicated. With this increasing diversity, we believe the next opportunity for qualitative improvement comes from applying the scientific method to understanding, characterizing, and improving how scientific software is developed and used. We believe that this pursuit requires expertise from computational scientists themselves, and from the cognitive and social sciences as well as the software engineering research community. As we look to increase the productivity and sustainability of the scientific-software-development-and-use cycle, a more systematic application of the scientific method to understand processes for software development and use will be a valuable tool to guide future work and result in more usable and sustainable software. This workshop will bring together computer scientists, software engineering researchers, computational scientists, applied mathematicians, social scientists, cognitive scientists, and others, to explore how we can conduct such systematic investigations, what can be learned, and how doing so will benefit the scientific enterprise. The workshop will be structured around a set of breakout sessions, with every attendee expected to participate actively in the discussions. Afterward, workshop attendees — from DOE, industry, and academia — will produce a report for ASCR that summarizes the findings of the workshop.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2022

The Science of Scientific Software Development and Use

Increasingly powerful and affordable computing has revolutionized scientific and scholarly discovery across a broad range of fields. Computing relies on software, which has been rapidly growing in scope, diversity, and complexity. At the same time, the methods, processes, and tools used to produce and utilize this essential software are often ad hoc, and the study and improvement of them is often done without the benefit of direct funding or prioritization. Consequently, concerns are growing about the productivity of the developers and users of scientific software, its sustainability, and the trustworthiness of the results that it produces. The US Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) is at the forefront of modern software-enabled scientific discovery across numerous areas of computational, experimental, and observational science, including major investments in national user facilities that support these activities. In December 2021, the DOE-SC Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) convened a workshop on basic research needs for the Science of Scientific Software Development and Use (SSSDU). Through keynote presentations, lightning talks, and breakout groups, participants discussed the current practice of software development, maintenance, evolution, and use, and considered how the scientific method could be used to examine these practices and develop more evidence-based approaches to enhance the impact of software and computing on all areas of science. Workshop participants identified three priority research directions (PRDs) and three important crosscutting themes that center on the following overarching insight: software has become an essential part of modern science that impacts new discovery, policy, and technological development. To have full confidence in science delivered via software, we must improve the processes and tools that help us create and use it, and this enhancement requires a deep understanding of the diverse array of teams and individuals doing the work. The full workshop report will be available at https://doi.org/10.2172/1846009.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2004

Organizational management practices for achieving software process improvement

The crisis in developing software has been known for over thirty years. Problems that existed in developing software in the early days of computing still exist today. These problems include the delivery of low-quality products, actual development costs that exceed expected development costs, and actual development time that exceeds expected development time. Several solutions have been offered to overcome out inability to deliver high-quality software, on-time and within budget. One of these solutions involves software process improvement. However, such efforts often fail because of organizational management issues. This paper discusses business practices that organizations should follow to improve their chances of initiating and sustaining successful software process improvement efforts.

software process improvement↗
DOE OSTI2020

Lightweight Software Process Improvement Using Productivity and Sustainability Improvement Planning (PSIP)

Productivity and Sustainability Improvement Planning (PSIP) is a lightweight, iterative workflow that allows software development teams to identify development bottlenecks and track progress to overcome them. In this paper, we present an overview of PSIP and how it compares to other software process improvement (SPI) methodologies, and provide two case studies that describe how the use of PSIP led to successful improvements in team effectiveness and efficiency.

Heroux, Michael A.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Challenges of and Opportunities for a Large Diverse Software Team

A large software team consisting of members with different expertise, skillsets, personalities, ethnicities, and involving collaboration on a large and complex software product presents many technical and cultural challenges, but also provides unique opportunities. In this article, we discuss the essential issues we faced when successfully transforming a collection of various independently developed software libraries into one large integrated product: the eXtreme-scale scientific Software Development Kit (xSDK). Furthermore, we argue it is just as important to pay attention to cultural challenges, such as establishment of reliable communication channels that considers, among others, differences in personalities and backgrounds as well as overcoming geographical separation and time-zone distribution when collaborating, as technical challenges. Finally, we discuss opportunities stemming from participating in a large diverse software team, such as increased internal expertise, variety of skillsets, broadened connections to external experts, and access to a larger pool of ideas or solutions.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

CodeScribe Agent

SF-26-086 CodeScribe introduces a structured, multi-stage pipeline that combines deterministic program analysis with LLM-powered translation to enable incremental, testable Fortran-to-C++ migration. First, `code-scribe index` traverses the project directory tree and produces `scribe.yaml` metadata files recording all modules, subroutines, and functions at each level, giving the LLM accurate structural context instead of a hallucinated codebase model. Second, `code-scribe draft` performs the deterministic portion of translation — converting Fortran types to C++ equivalents, replacing `use` statements with `#include` and `using namespace` directives, and detecting constructs requiring special handling — while embedding`scribe-prompt` annotations that guide the LLM through non-trivial cases such as statement-function-to-lambda conversions and `extern "C"` wrapper generation. Third, `code-scribe translate` applies project-specific TOML-based few-shot prompt templates and submits the composed prompt to a pluggable LLM backend (OpenAI, Anthropic, Argonne ARGO, any OpenAI-compatible endpoint, or local Hugging Face checkpoints), producing a C++ source file, a header, and a Fortran-C++ interface file for each translated routine so the codebase compiles and runs correctly throughout the migration. Beyond translation, CodeScribe includes a tool-using coding agent (`code-scribe agent`) with read, bash, edit, and write capabilities, and a bounded loop mode (`code-scribe loop`) that runs repeated stateless agent sessions over a task file with restricted tool access — enabling sustained, auditable software development workflows for broader scientific computing tasks.

Dhruv, Akash [Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), A↗
DOE OSTI2025

Quantum Computing Strategy 2026

Quantum computing (QC) is a rapidly maturing technology with the potential for revolutionary impacts on stockpile stewardship science and national security. Recent developments in fault-tolerant architectures have compressed vendor roadmaps, and predictions of a production-ready quantum computer by the mid-2030s are becoming increasingly credible. This strategy provides a roadmap for integrating QC into the Advanced Simulation and Computing (ASC) program by investing in four strategic focus areas: 1. Develop Capabilities in Mission-Relevant Quantum Applications: ASC will prioritize developing quantum-ready applications in mission areas that have shown significant promise for quantum advantage, including simulations of materials in extreme environments, nuclear dynamics, solving linear and nonlinear partial differential equations, and uncertainty quantification. These applications directly support stockpile stewardship science and modernization objectives. 2. Conduct R&D in Algorithms, Software, and Hardware: Sustained research into quantum algorithms, robust software tools, and quantum hardware is essential. ASC will develop efficient quantum algorithms; invest in quantum compilers, debuggers, and performance tools; and explore specialized quantum hardware tailored to NNSA’s unique requirements. 3. Engage with Vendors and Partners: Early and active collaboration with commercial quantum hardware vendors and academic partners is critical. Through testbeds, co-design agreements, and quantum demonstration facilities, ASC will influence hardware design, gain early access to emerging technologies, and ensure that quantum platforms evolve to meet mission needs. 4. Build Knowledge, Experience, and Workforce: Expanding and upskilling the quantum-trained workforce is essential to long-term success. This includes hiring, internal training, university outreach, and postdoctoral support to ensure ASC maintains the expertise required to operate, program, and integrate quantum systems as they become available. While quantum computing will never replace classical computing, it has the potential to solve certain problems with speed and accuracy that would be unachievable using any conceivable classical high-performance computing (HPC) system. By investing strategically in QC, ASC will help propel the emergent QC industry, maintain U.S. technological leadership, ensure mission readiness, and position itself to rapidly adopt quantum technologies as they mature.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Editorial: Neuroscience, computing, performance, and benchmarks: Why it matters to neuroscience how fast we can compute

At the turn of the millennium the computational neuroscience community realized that neuroscience was in a software crisis: software development was no longer progressing as expected and reproducibility declined. The International Neuroinformatics Coordinating Facility (INCF) was inaugurated in 2007 as an initiative to improve this situation. The INCF has since pursued its mission to help the development of standards and best practices. In a community paper published this very same year, Brette et al. tried to assess the state of the field and to establish a scientific approach to simulation technology, addressing foundational topics, such as which simulation schemes are best suited for the types of models we see in neuroscience. In 2015, a Frontiers Research Topic “Python in neuroscience” by Muller et al. triggered and documented a revolution in the neuroscience community, namely in the usage of the scripting language Python as a common language for interfacing with simulation codes and connecting between applications. The review by Einevoll et al. documented that simulation tools have since further matured and become reliable research instruments used by many scientific groups for their respective questions. Open source and community standard simulators today allow research groups to focus on their scientific questions and leave the details of the computational work to the community of simulator developers. A parallel development has occurred, which has been barely visible in neuroscientific circles beyond the community of simulator developers: Supercomputers used for large and complex scientific calculations have increased their performance from ~10 TeraFLOPS (10 13 floating point operations per second) in the early 2000s to above 1 ExaFLOPS (10 18 floating point operations per second) in the year 2022. This represents a 100,000-fold increase in our computational capabilities, or almost 17 doublings of computational capability in 22 years. Moore's law (the observation that it is economically viable to double the number of transistors in an integrated circuit every other 18–24 months) explains a part of this; our ability and willingness to build and operate physically larger computers, explains another part. It should be clear, however, that such a technological advancement requires software adaptations and under the hood, simulators had to reinvent themselves and change substantially to embrace this technological opportunity. It actually is quite remarkable that—apart from the change in semantics for the parallelization—this has mostly happened without the users knowing. The current Research Topic was motivated by the wish to assemble an update on the state of neuroscientific software (mostly simulators) in 2022, to assess whether we can see more clearly which scientific questions can (or cannot) be asked due to our increased capability of simulation, and also to anticipate whether and for how long we can expect this increase of computational capabilities to continue.

biophysically detailed models↗
NASA NTRS2009

The Open Source DataTurbine Initiative: Streaming Data Middleware for Environmental Observing Systems

The Open Source DataTurbine Initiative is an international community of scientists and engineers sharing a common interest in real-time streaming data middleware and applications. The technology base of the OSDT Initiative is the DataTurbine open source middleware. Key applications of DataTurbine include coral reef monitoring, lake monitoring and limnology, biodiversity and animal tracking, structural health monitoring and earthquake engineering, airborne environmental monitoring, and environmental sustainability. DataTurbine software emerged as a commercial product in the 1990 s from collaborations between NASA and private industry. In October 2007, a grant from the USA National Science Foundation (NSF) Office of Cyberinfrastructure allowed us to transition DataTurbine from a proprietary software product into an open source software initiative. This paper describes the DataTurbine software and highlights key applications in environmental monitoring.

Fountain T.↗