Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “reliability optimization visualization”

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.

59 records · Page 4

WISP: Watching grid Infrastructure Stealthily through Proxies (Final Technical Report)

The complex interdependencies of cyber systems (sensors and communications), physical grids and associated electricity market operations make protecting electric power grids a significant challenge. The energy sector is constantly under new, targeted, advanced and dangerous cyber-attacks that have the potential to result in the loss of human life. These threats are further exacerbated by our need to modernize the grid. One focus of cyber security research in smart grids is the securing of the SCADA system through advanced intrusion detection systems (IDS) and bad data detection algorithms in state estimation. These methods either require full knowledge of the system topology and parameters or fail to understand the physical behaviors under attack. WISP (Watching grid Infrastructure Stealthily through Proxies) is designed to provide additional protection to the power grid using only publicly available data. In particular, WISP exploits the spatio-temporal nature of the real time locational marginal prices (LMPs), in conjunction with other information such as bids, weather, outages and load data to analyze anomalous power pricing behaviors and then correlate those observations to localize regions of interest and identify potential cyber events. WISP is non-intrusive as the tool is deployed as a service in the Cloud or on premise and provides reliable information to system operators for enhanced situational awareness, without impeding energy delivery functions. The WISP technology comprises three modules: the data-driven anomaly detection core, the vulnerability and risk analysis and the root cause analysis. The data-driven anomaly detection core performs the tasks of feature selection, anomaly detection and attack region localization. The vulnerability and risk analysis module provides system level information of the vulnerable variables and times, assisting the operators in selecting monitoring and protection nodes. The root cause analysis module takes the detection results and identifies potential operational conditions that contribute to the detected anomalies. In Phase I, we have demonstrated the feasibility and effectiveness of WISP. We developed a realistic electricity market simulator capable of generating normal and attack market data under various operational conditions. We developed a series of cyber-attack detection and analysis algorithms and evaluated them under multiple data sources. Finally, we integrated all modules into an end-to-end software, providing functions for data management, data analytics and visualization. Specifically, we have achieved: (i) real-time data acceptance from external utility interfaces with >99% acceptance rate; (ii) high performance anomaly detection algorithms with >98% detection accuracy and <0.1% false alarm rate; and (iii) ultra-low computing delay <50 milliseconds. Additionally, our team developed algorithms to identify the vulnerable variables in electricity market operations and root cause analysis functions to identify major contributors to the price spikes. These ancillary modules are necessary when deploying WISP in real world industry environment. In Phase II, we have demonstrated the effectiveness of WISP software on realistic largescale power systems. We performed red team testing for the Phase I WISP software and identified software vulnerabilities and implemented corresponding mitigation solutions. We adapted the electricity market simulator for the Texas synthetic 2000-bus system and generated datasets for the false data injection attacks. We created database and visualization interfaces for the Texas system and the ISO New England system. We performed software optimization in terms of operation efficiency, computing speed and detection accuracy. Finally, we tested the software on the Texas system and the ISO New England system and evaluated the detection performance. Overall, we achieved above 89% detection rate, below 3% false alarm rate and below 37 seconds of end-to-end detection delay.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Science Opportunity Analyzer (SOA) Version 8

SOA allows scientists to plan spacecraft observations. It facilitates the identification of geometrically interesting times in a spacecraft s orbit that a user can use to plan observations or instrument-driven spacecraft maneuvers. These observations can then be visualized multiple ways in both two- and three-dimensional views. When observations have been optimized within a spacecraft's flight rules, the resulting plans can be output for use by other JPL uplink tools. Now in its eighth major version, SOA improves on these capabilities in a modern and integrated fashion. SOA consists of five major functions: Opportunity Search, Visualization, Observation Design, Constraint Checking, and Data Output. Opportunity Search is a GUI-driven interface to existing search engines that can be used to identify times when a spacecraft is in a specific geometrical relationship with other bodies in the solar system. This function can be used for advanced mission planning as well as for making last-minute adjustments to mission sequences in response to trajectory modifications. Visualization is a key aspect of SOA. The user can view observation opportunities in either a 3D representation or as a 2D map projection. Observation Design allows the user to orient the spacecraft and visualize the projection of the instrument field of view for that orientation using the same views as Opportunity Search. Constraint Checking is provided to validate various geometrical and physical aspects of an observation design. The user has the ability to easily create custom rules or to use official project-generated flight rules. This capability may also allow scientists to easily assess the cost to science if flight rule changes occur. Data Output allows the user to compute ancillary data related to an observation or to a given position of the spacecraft along its trajectory. The data can be saved as a tab-delimited text file or viewed as a graph. SOA combines science planning functionality unique to both JPL and the sponsoring spacecraft. SOA is able to ingest JPL SPICE Kernels that are used to drive the tool and its computations. A Percy search engine is then included that identifies interesting time periods for the user to build observations. When observations are then built, flight-like orientation algorithms replicate spacecraft dynamics to closely simulate the flight spacecraft s dynamics. SOA v8 represents large steps forward from SOA v7 in terms of quality, reliability, maintainability, efficiency, and user experience. A tailored agile development environment has been built around SOA that provides automated unit testing, continuous build and integration, a consolidated Web-based code and documentation storage environment, modern Java enhancements, and a focus on usability

Witoff, Robert J.↗

NASA Earth Systems Digital Twins (ESDT)

"Similarly to artificial intelligence, which is now revolutionizing many aspects of our daily lives, Earth system digital twin technologies have the potential to revolutionize the way Earth Science research will be conducted in the future, and how results and knowledge from this research will provide information to support decision making and yield impactful societal benefits. An Earth System Digital Twin or ESDT is a dynamic and interactive information system that first provides a digital replica of the past and current states of the Earth or Earth system as accurately and timely as possible; second, allows for computing forecasts of future states under nominal assumptions and based on the current replica; and third, offers the capability to investigate many hypothetical scenarios under varying impact assumptions. In other words, an ESDT provides the integrated What-Now, What-Next, and What-If pictures of the Earth or Earth system, by continuously ingesting newly observed data and by leveraging multiple interconnected models, machine learning as well advanced computing and visualization capabilities. Digital twins have been developed in engineering since 2002, but the interest in digital twins for the Earth domain is more recent and stems from the convergence of several developments: - The huge amount of diverse data that has now been collected continuously for more than 50 years, and that is becoming more and more difficult to access, understand, and utilize. - At the same time, because of climate change and its impacts the information produced by all of this data is becoming of interest to many new non-traditional users for analyzing and predicting various phenomena. - Because of advances in computational and visualization capabilities and the parallel unprecedented development of machine learning (ML), extracting relevant information from these large amounts of data and running complex models faster has become possible. As a result, it is becoming necessary and possible to build intuitive and interactive frameworks that will enable users with various skill levels and/or organizational hierarchy levels to easily access large amounts of targeted information along with the relevant tools and models (Earth system and human activity models), to support them in analyzing and visualizing this information, to help them understand interactions among models, to visualize the potential outcomes of various impacts, and to support decision or policy making. The full power of digital twins is that, through an integrated representation and standardized tools and software technologies, the same digital replica can address the needs of multiple users at various resolutions (spatial and temporal) and for various applications (science, economic, policy, etc.) – “from farmer to scientist”. With all these interests at stake, the challenges of building optimal digital twins are many and complex. The first challenge is to determine if a Digital Twin should be global or local, and multi-domain or thematic. For example, some domains such as Climate or Weather will require a global Digital Twin or Digital Twin capabilities while science areas such as Biodiversity might be more local. We can also envision that multiple thematic ESDTs, e.g., Air Quality, Wildfires, Hydrology could be federated or provide input to other ESDTs, either on a regional level or to a more global ESDT. Overall, we can imagine a future “web” of Digital Twins co-existing in a hierarchy or in a network, and capable of being connected or federated depending on the needs. This last point brings up the very important challenge of interoperability, including standards and protocols that will need to be built into these systems from the beginning. Each individual digital twin would have full flexibility in internal construction but would need standards-based interfaces (input and output) or hooks to make it compatible with others. Another challenge when building digital twins will be to decide how to organize each digital replica. Based on the applications targeted by the DT under implementation, various amounts and types of raw data, Analysis Ready Data (ARD) and information will need to be incorporated. Depending on the required latencies and needs of the users, various solutions can be considered, including Data Cubes, Data Lakes, pointers, or computing information on demand. We envision that each ESDT will choose a solution adapted to its specific objectives. Another important challenge is the type(s) of visualization that will be used, as well as the level of interactivity and refresh rate that will be required. Again, this will depend on the objectives of the ESDT, but also on the various users’ needs. In most cases, several types of visualizations and human interfaces will need to be offered depending on the projected users of that system. In parallel to the challenges highlighted above, there are also many tools and technologies that will need to be developed or improved for all types of digital twins. Among those are improved machine learning technologies, for example providing explainability, but also ML techniques for causality and providing a better integration of physics models. Additionally, reliable uncertainty quantification methods will be needed for all ESDT components, from validating data fusion and assimilation to assessing the accuracy of ML models and weighing the values of decisions supported by those systems. This presentation introduces the ESDT concept, presents several ESDT use cases, and a proposed ESDT architecture framework, as well as various technologies being developed by the Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program."

Earth Science Remote Sensing; Information Systems↗

An Applied Strategy for Using Empirical and Hybrid Models in Online Monitoring

The monitoring of plant equipment for failure prediction is one of the key contributors to operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for a nuclear power plant (NPP) because O&M monitoring depends on labor-intensive activities that are required to meet high equipment reliability standards. These activities rely primarily on humans for information gathering, condition diagnosis, and predictive analysis. Online monitoring aims to automate these activities by relying on sensors to replace human information gathering and machine learning to replace human analysis and decision making. To facilitate automated monitoring, a systematic strategy for anomaly detection is needed to optimally use the available sensor data, empirical models, and physics-supported models. This strategy is essential to provide credible reasoning on why and when an empirical (i.e., purely data-driven) versus hybrid (i.e., physics-supported) approach should be used and to determine the ideal mix of these two approaches for a defined anomaly detection scope. The extant methods usually adopt an ad hoc trial-and-error approach that, in addition to being time-consuming and costly, is also highly subjective; it is impacted by the background and the skill set of the personnel making the decisions. Thus, such an approach cannot guarantee an optimum outcome. This represents the motivation of the current research effort, which is focused on devising a scientifically supported strategy for the optimum selection of anomaly detection methods. This report presents a detailed assessment of the main anomaly detection techniques within the empirical or hybrid method streams. Empirical methods include pattern, statistical, and causal inference. Hybrid methods include the use of physics models to train and test data methods, reduce data dimensionality, reduce data-model complexity, augment data, and reduce empirical uncertainty; hybrid methods also include the use of data to tune physics models. The listed techniques within these two streams represent the vast majority of techniques performed for anomaly detection. Using the techniques as outcomes, a strategy was developed to enable a systematic decision-making process to lead to one of these techniques. The strategy is driven by key decision points related to data relevance, simple modeling feasibility, data inference, physics-modeling value, data dimensionality, physics knowledge, method of validation, performance, data availability and suitability for training and testing, cause-effect, entropy inference, and model fitting. Each of these decision points in the strategy is explained in detail in this report with examples, along with the scientific basis behind the decisions and outcomes in common and simplified terminology. The strategy is developed for use by any NPP staff with basic engineering or science knowledge. A user-friendly graphical state flow diagram was also developed as a visual presentation of the strategy. The strategy was tested and demonstrated through two pilot projects for the application of anomaly detection at an NPP. Each pilot had two use cases: an initial case in which certain decisions were made that resulted in one or more empirical techniques and a revised use case where one or more key decisions were modified resulting in using a set of hybrid methods.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

Water Across Synthetic Aperture Radar Data (WASARD): SAR Water Body Classification for the Open Data Cube

The detection of inland water bodies from Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data provides a great advantage over water detection with optical data, since SAR imaging is not impeded by cloud cover. Traditional methods of detecting water from SAR data involves using thresholding methods that can be labor intensive and imprecise. This paper describes Water Across Synthetic Aperture Radar Data (WASARD): a method of water detection from SAR data which automates and simplifies the thresholding process using machine learning on training data created from Geoscience Australia’s WOFS algorithm. Of the machine learning models tested, the Linear Support Vector Machine was determined to be optimal, with the option of training using solely the VH polarization or a combination of the VH and VV polarizations. WASARD was able to identify water in the target area with a correlation of 97% with WOFS. Sentinel-1, Open Data Cube, Earth Observations, Machine Learning, Water Detection 1. INTRODUCTION Water classification is an important function of Earth imaging satellites, as accurate remote classification of land and water can assist in land use analysis, flood prediction, climate change research, as well as a variety of agricultural applications [2]. The ability to identify bodies of water remotely via satellite is immensely cheaper than contracting surveys of the areas in question, meaning that an application that can accurately use satellite data towards this function can make valuable information available to nations which would not be able to afford it otherwise. Highly reliable applications for the remote detection of water currently exist for use with optical satellite data such as that provided by LANDSAT. One such application, Geoscience Australia’s Water Observations from Space (WOFS) has already been ported for use with the Open Data Cube [6]. However, water detection using optical data from Landsat is constrained by its relatively long revisit cycle of 16 days [5], and water detection using any optical data is constrained in that it lacks the ability to make accurate classifications through cloud cover [2]. The alternative solution which solves these problems is water detection using SAR data, which images the Earth using cloud-penetrating microwaves. Because of its advantages over optical data, much research has been done into water detection using SAR data. Traditionally, this has been done using the thresholding method, which involves picking a polarization band and labeling all pixels for which this band’s value is below a certain threshold as containing water. The thresholding method works since water tends to return a much lower backscatter value to the satellite than land [1]. However, this method can be flawed since estimating the proper threshold is often imprecise, complicated, and labor intensive for the end user. Thresholding also tends to use data from only one SAR polarization, when a combination of polarizations can provide insight into whether water is present. [2] In order to alleviate these problems, this paper presents an application for the Open Data Cube to detect water from SAR data using support vector machine (SVM) classification. 2. PLATFORM WASARD is an application for the Open Data Cube, a mechanism which provides a simple yet efficient means of ingesting, storing, and retrieving remote sensing data. Data can be ingested and made analysis ready according to whatever specifications the researcher chooses, and easily resampled to artificially alter a scene’s resolution. Currently WASARD supports water detection on scenes from ESA’s Sentinel-1 and JAXA’s ALOS. When testing WASARD, Sentinel-1 was most commonly used due to its relatively high spatial resolution and its rapid 6 day revisit cycle [5]. With minor alterations to the application's code, however, it could support data from other satellites. 3. METHODOLOGY Using supervised classification, WASARD compares SAR data to a dataset pre-classified by WOFS in order to train an SVM classifier. This classifier is then used to detect water in other SAR scenes outside the training set. Accuracy was measured according to the following metrics:  Precision: a measure of what percentage of the points WASARD labels as water are truly water  Recall: a measure of what percentage of the total water cover WASARD was able to identify.  F1 Score: a harmonic average of the precision and recall scores Both precision and recall are calculated at the end of the training phase, when the trained classifier is compared to a testing dataset. Because the WOFS algorithm’s classifications are used as the truth values when training a WASARD classifier, when precision and recall are mentioned in this paper, they are always with respect to the values produced by WOFS on a similar scene of Landsat data, which themselves have a classification accuracy of 97% [6]. Visual representations of water identified by WASARD in this paper were produced using the function wasard_plot(), which is included in WASARD. 3.1 Algorithm Selection The machine learning model used by WASARD is the Linear Support Vector Machine (SVM). This model uses a supervised learning algorithm to develop a classifier, meaning it creates a vector which can be multiplied by the vector formed by the relevant data bands to determine whether a pixel in a SAR scene contains water. This classifier is trained by comparing data points from selected bands in a SAR scene to their respective labels, which in this case are “water” or “not water” as given by the WOFS algorithm. The SVM was selected over the Random Forest model, which outperformed the SVM in training speed, but had a greater classification time and lower accuracy, and the Multilayer Perceptron Artificial Neural Network, which had a slightly higher average accuracy than the SVM, but much greater training and classification times. Figure 1: Visual representation of the SVM Classifier. Each white point represents a pixel in a SAR scene. In Figure 1, the diagonal line separating pixels determined to be water from those determined not to be water represents the actual classification vector produced by the SVM. It is worth noting that once the model has been trained, classification of pixels is done in a similar manner as in the thresholding method. This is especially true if only one band was used to train the model. 3.1 Feature Selection Sentinel-1 collects data from two bands: the Vertical/Vertical polarization (VV) and the Vertical/Horizontal polarization (VH). When 100 SVM classifiers were created for each polarization individually, and for the combination of the two, the following results were achieved: Figure 2: Accuracy of classifiers trained using different polarization bands. Precision and Recall were measured with respect to the values produced by WOFS. Figure 2 demonstrates that using both the VV and VH bands trades slightly lower recall for significantly greater precision when compared with the VH band alone, and that using the VV band alone is inferior in both metrics. WASARD therefore defaults to using both the VV and VH bands, and includes the option to use solely the VH band. The VV polarization’s lower precision compared to the VH polarization is in contrast to results from previous research and may merit further analysis [4]. 3.2 Training a Classifier The steps in training a classifier with WASARD are 1. Selecting two scenes (one SAR, one optical) with the same spatial extents, and acquired close to each other in time, with a preference that the scenes are taken on the same day. 2. Using the WOFS algorithm to produce an array of the detected water in the scene of optical data, to be used as the labels during supervised learning 3. Data points from the selected bands from the SAR acquisition are bundled together into an array with the corresponding labels gathered from WOFS. A random sample with an equal number of points labeled “Water” and “Not Water” is selected to be partitioned into a training and a testing dataset 4. Using Scikit-Learn’s LinearSVC object, the training dataset is used to produce a classifier, which is then tested against the testing dataset to determine its precision and recall The result is a wasard_classifier object, which has the following attributes: 1. f1, recall, and precision: 3 metrics used to determine the classifier’s accuracy 2. Coefficient: Vector which the SVM uses to make its predictions. The classifier detects water when the dot product of the coefficient and the vector formed by the SAR bands is positive 3. Save(): allows a user to save a classifier to the disk in order to use it without retraining 4. wasard_classify(): Classifies an entire xarray of SAR data using the SVM classifier All of the above steps are performed automatically when the user creates a wasard_classifier object. 3.3 Classifying a Dataset Once the classifier has been created, it can be used to detect water in an xarray of SAR data using wasard_classify(). By taking the dot product of the classifier’s coefficients and the vector formed by the selected bands of SAR data, an array of predictions is constructed. A classifier can effectively be used on the same spatial extents as the ones where it was trained, or on any area with a similar landscape. While

Kreiser, Zachary↗