Uncertainty Quantification of Moment Tensor Inversions due to Earth Model Uncertainty.
Abstract not provided.
Preston, Leiph↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “under uncertainty”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Towards an integrated and efficient framework for leveraging reduced order models for multifidelity Uncertainty Quantification.
Abstract not provided.
Blonigan, Patrick Joseph↗
NOVEL APPLICATION OF UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS TO SEVERE ACCIDENTS: INTERROGATING MODEL FORM UNCERTAINTY AND DEVELOPING INSIGHTS INTO SEVERE ACCIDENT PROGRESSION.
Abstract not provided.
Albright, Lucas Iain↗
Uncertainty Quantification of Moment Tensor Inversions due to Earth Model Uncertainty.
Abstract not provided.
Preston, Leiph↗
Evidential Deep Learning: Enhancing Predictive Uncertainty Estimation for Earth System Science Applications
Abstract Robust quantification of predictive uncertainty is a critical addition needed for machine learning applied to weather and climate problems to improve the understanding of what is driving prediction sensitivity. Ensembles of machine learning models provide predictive uncertainty estimates in a conceptually simple way but require multiple models for training and prediction, increasing computational cost and latency. Parametric deep learning can estimate uncertainty with one model by predicting the parameters of a probability distribution but does not account for epistemic uncertainty. Evidential deep learning, a technique that extends parametric deep learning to higher-order distributions, can account for both aleatoric and epistemic uncertainties with one model. This study compares the uncertainty derived from evidential neural networks to that obtained from ensembles. Through applications of the classification of winter precipitation type and regression of surface-layer fluxes, we show evidential deep learning models attaining predictive accuracy rivaling standard methods while robustly quantifying both sources of uncertainty. We evaluate the uncertainty in terms of how well the predictions are calibrated and how well the uncertainty correlates with prediction error. Analyses of uncertainty in the context of the inputs reveal sensitivities to underlying meteorological processes, facilitating interpretation of the models. The conceptual simplicity, interpretability, and computational efficiency of evidential neural networks make them highly extensible, offering a promising approach for reliable and practical uncertainty quantification in Earth system science modeling. To encourage broader adoption of evidential deep learning, we have developed a new Python package, Machine Integration and Learning for Earth Systems (MILES) group Generalized Uncertainty for Earth System Science (GUESS) (MILES-GUESS) ( https://github.com/ai2es/miles-guess ), that enables users to train and evaluate both evidential and ensemble deep learning. Significance Statement This study demonstrates a new technique, evidential deep learning, for robust and computationally efficient uncertainty quantification in modeling the Earth system. The method integrates probabilistic principles into deep neural networks, enabling the estimation of both aleatoric uncertainty from noisy data and epistemic uncertainty from model limitations using a single model. Our analyses reveal how decomposing these uncertainties provides valuable insights into reliability, accuracy, and model shortcomings. We show that the approach can rival standard methods in classification and regression tasks within atmospheric science while offering practical advantages such as computational efficiency. With further advances, evidential networks have the potential to enhance risk assessment and decision-making across meteorology by improving uncertainty quantification, a longstanding challenge. This work establishes a strong foundation and motivation for the broader adoption of evidential learning, where properly quantifying uncertainties is critical yet lacking.
Schreck, John S.↗
Meta-uncertainty for particle image velocimetry
Uncertainty quantification for Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) is critical for comparing experimentally measured flow fields with Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) results, and model design and validation. However, PIV features a complex measurement chain with coupled, non-linear error sources, and quantifying the uncertainty is challenging. Multiple assessments show that none of the current methods can reliably measure the actual uncertainty across a wide range of experiments, and estimates can vary. Because the current methods differ in assumptions regarding the measurement process and calculation procedures, it is not clear which method is best to use for an experiment where the error distribution is unknown. To address this issue, we propose a method to estimate an uncertainty method's sensitivity and reliability, termed the Meta-Uncertainty. The novel approach is automated, local, and instantaneous, and based on perturbation of the recorded particle images. We developed an image perturbation scheme based on adding random unmatched particles to the interrogation window pair considering the signal-to-noise (SNR) of the correlation plane. Each uncertainty scheme's response to several trials of random particle addition is used to estimate a reliability metric, defined as the rate of change of the inter-quartile range (IQR) of the uncertainties with increasing levels of particle addition. We also propose applying the meta-uncertainty as a weighting metric to combine uncertainty estimates from individual schemes, based on ideas from the consensus forecasting literature. We use planar and stereo PIV measurements across a range of canonical flows to assess the performance of the uncertainty schemes. Further, a novel method is introduced to assess an uncertainty scheme's performance based on a quantile comparison of the error and uncertainty distributions, generalizing the current method of comparing the RMS of the two distributions. Here, the results show that the combined uncertainty method outperforms the individual methods, and this work establishes the meta-uncertainty as a useful reliability assessment tool for PIV uncertainty quantification.
47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
Uncertainty Quantification of Calculated Temperatures for the AGR 5/6/7 Experiment
This report documents the quantification of uncertainty of the calculated temperature data for the Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) 5/6/7 fuel irradiation experiment conducted in the Advanced Test Reactor at Idaho National Laboratory in support of the Advanced Reactor Technologies? research and development program. Recognizing uncertainties inherent in physics and thermal simulations of the AGR 5/6/7 capsules, the results of the numerical simulations are used in combination with statistical analysis methods to improve qualification of measured data. The calculated fuel temperatures for AGR tests are also used for validation of the fission product transport and fuel performance simulation models. These crucial roles of the calculated fuel temperatures in ensuring achievement of the AGR experimental program objectives require accurate determination of the model temperature uncertainties. This report covers temperature uncertainty results for each of the five AGR 5/6/7 capsules. To quantify the uncertainty of calculated temperatures determined using the ABAQUS finite element heat transfer code, this study identifies and analyzes model parameters of potential importance to the calculated temperatures of fuel compacts and thermocouples. The selection of input parameters for uncertainty quantification is based on the ranking of their influences upon temperature predictions. Thus, selected input parameters include those with high sensitivity and those with the largest uncertainty. Propagation of model parameter uncertainty and sensitivity is then used to quantify the overall uncertainty of calculated temperatures. Measurement uncertainty, analysis of modeling assumptions, and expert judgment are used as the basis to quantify the uncertainty range for selected input parameters. The input uncertainties are dynamic, accounting for the effect of unplanned events and changes in thermal properties of capsule components over extended exposure to high temperatures and fast neutron irradiation. The sensitivity analysis performed in this work went beyond the traditional local sensitivity. Using experimental design, analysis of pairwise interactions of model parameters was performed to establish sufficiency of the time dependent first order (linear) expansion terms in constructing the temperature response surface. To achieve completeness, uncertainty propagation made use of pairwise noise correlations of model parameters. Furthermore, using an interpolation scheme over the input parameter domain, the analysis obtains time dependent sensitivity over the test campaign duration. This allows computation of uncertainty for the calculated fuel temperatures and the calculated graphite temperatures at thermocouple locations during the entire irradiation period.
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
Quantifying the Uncertainty of the Future Hydrological Impacts of Climate Change: Comparative Analysis of an Advanced Hierarchical Sensitivity in Humid and Semiarid Basins
Comparison and quantification of different uncertainties of future climate change involved in the modeling of a hydrological system are highly important for both hydrological modelers and policy-makers. However, few studies have accurately estimated the relative importance of different sources of uncertainty at different spatiotemporal scales. Here, a hierarchical sensitivity analysis framework (HSAF) incorporated with a variance-based global sensitivity analysis is developed to quantify the spatiotemporal contributions of different uncertainties in hydrological impacts of climate change in two different climatic (humid and semiarid) basins in China. The uncertainty sources include three emission scenarios (ESs), 20 global climate models (GCs), three hydrological models (HMs), and the associated sensitive hydrological parameters (PAs) screened and sampled by the Morris and Latin hypercube sampling methods, respectively. Further, the results indicate that the overall trend of uncertainty is PA > HM > GC > ES, but their uncertainties have discrepancies in projections of different hydrological variables. The HM uncertainty in annual and monthly discharge projections is generally larger than the PA uncertainty in the humid basin than semiarid basin. The PA has greater uncertainty in extreme hydrological event (annual peak discharge) projections than in annual discharge projections for both basins (particularly for the humid basin), but contributes larger uncertainty to annual and monthly discharge projections in the semiarid basin than humid basin. The GC contributes larger uncertainty in all the hydrological variables projections in the humid basin than semiarid basin, while the ES uncertainty is rather limited in both basins. Overall, our results suggest there is greater spatiotemporal variability of hydrological uncertainty in more arid regions.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Measurement Uncertainty in One-Of-A-Kind Event Data Analysis
A golden standard in science is to repeat an experiment a statistically significant number of times, recording data using the same set of detectors and the same data analysis methodology. In such case experimental error includes both the range of true values generated by repetitions of the experiment, and measurement uncertainty caused by the detector. They are independent. It is a huge and too frequently used simplification, to assume that one can measure multiple repetitions of an identical experiment, resulting in identical true experimental value. Repetitions, as similar is it is experimentally achievable, have unavoidable built-in differences resulting in a range of the true values rather than in a single value. When modern, very sensitive and well calibrated measurement systems are used, this range is not negligible, and sometimes dominates over the measurement uncertainty. Range of true values depends on built-in differences in physics of the experiment. Stochastic physical processes result typically in a broader range of true values than non-stochastic processes do. Measurement uncertainty depends on a measurement method (properties of the detector not of the experiment). Modern measurement methods, including digital ones, frequently make the measurement uncertainty very small. When data from one–of –a kind experiment are analyzed, only the measurement uncertainty is reported. It provides no information about the range of true experimental values, neither about reliability of a reported data point. Reliability of a data point is in general independent from its measurement uncertainty. However, in practice reliable measurement methods frequently have high measurement uncertainty, while low reliability methods are applied to limit measurement uncertainty. Comparison of reliable data with high measurement uncertainty to not so reliable data measured with low uncertainty is discussed – in different scenarios different data analysis methods are applicable. Methods for data analysis from an experiment repeated statistically significant number of times are very well developed. They do not require a detailed expertise in physics of an experiment, nor in the properties of the measurement system used, and meaning of the reported uncertainty is well understood in any scientific community. It all changes when data from one-of-a-kind experiment is analyzed. Analyst’s expertise is required both in the physics of the experiment and in all aspects of the measurement system, all possible malfunctions. Data users must remember that only measurement uncertainty is reported from any one-of-a-kind experiment. Theory with simulations may provide estimation of expected built-in differences in the experiment, and by this of expected range of true values for a given experiment; yet measurement uncertainty can never be used in place of the range of true experimental values.
71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
E-Area Low Level Waste Generator Inventory Uncertainty Estimation
This report describes the method used to estimate the uncertainty and bias in the low-level waste inventory, as reported by Waste Generators, for waste disposed in the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility at SRS. The waste cut uncertainty and bias is summed to calculate the current total uncertainty and bias in each disposal unit in the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility. This information is used to estimate the future uncertainty and bias when all disposal units are closed. For most waste cuts, there are two areas of inventory uncertainty and bias: in the isotopic characterization of the waste stream and in the measurement of total waste cut activity. Waste stream characterization is accomplished through a combination of process knowledge and analytical measurements. This characterization is documented by a technical baseline that describes the relative quantity of each isotope present in the waste stream. The total activity of each individual waste cut is usually measured directly or is calculated through a ratio of activity per weight or activity per volume. The waste cut total activity is multiplied by the waste stream isotopic fraction to calculate the total isotopic activity present in the waste cut. The waste cut uncertainty and bias is calculated by analyzing the uncertainties and biases in the waste stream characterization and waste cut measurements and adding the uncertainties in quadrature and multiplying the reported isotopic activities by the bias factors. The current isotopic inventory, uncertainty, and bias of a disposal unit is the sum of the currently disposed individual waste cut isotopic activities, uncertainties, and biases. The future uncertainty and bias is estimated based on the average “worst-case” (largest) uncertainties and biases of currently closed and operational disposal units. This report details the method, data sources, and calculation techniques used to calculate these values. It also presents some of the difficulties in working with the reported data and gives examples of the calculations and analysis. The software used to carryout the analysis is included and the location of the complete individual analyses is given. After discussion with waste generators, examination of multiple waste characterization documents, and a review of SRS Manual 1S, the reported ELLWF radionuclide activities are clearly conservative and likely represent reasonable upper bounds for the true activities. However, quantifying the bias and uncertainty in each waste cut requires detailed analysis of the documentation for each waste cut measurement and waste stream characterization.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Uncertainty analysis of correlated parameters in automated reaction mechanism generation
Abstract Uncertainty analysis is a useful tool for inspecting and improving detailed kinetic mechanisms because it can identify the greatest sources of model output error. Owing to the very nonlinear relationship between kinetic and thermodynamic parameters and computed concentrations, model predictions can be extremely sensitive to uncertainties in some parameters while uncertainties in other parameters can be irrelevant. Error propagation becomes even more convoluted in automatically generated kinetic models, where input uncertainties are correlated through kinetic rate rules and thermodynamic group values. Local and global uncertainty analyses were implemented and used to analyze error propagation in Reaction Mechanism Generator (RMG), an open‐source software for generating kinetic models. A framework for automatically assigning parameter uncertainties to estimated thermodynamics and kinetics was created, enabling tracking of correlated uncertainties. Local first‐order uncertainty propagation was implemented using sensitivities computed natively within RMG. Global uncertainty analysis was implemented using adaptive Smolyak pseudospectral approximations as implemented in the MIT Uncertainty Quantification Library to efficiently compute and construct polynomial chaos expansions to approximate the dependence of outputs on a subset of uncertain inputs. Cantera was used as a backend for simulating the reactor system in the global analysis. Analyses were performed for a phenyldodecane pyrolysis model. Local and global methods demonstrated similar trends; however, many uncertainties were significantly overestimated by the local analysis. Both local and global analyses show that correlated uncertainties based on kinetic rate rules and thermochemical groups drastically reduce a model's degrees of freedom and have a large impact on the determination of the most influential input parameters. These results highlight the necessity of incorporating uncertainty analysis in the mechanism generation workflow.
Gao, Connie W.↗
DeepUQ: Assessing the Aleatoric Uncertainties from two Deep Learning Methods
Assessing the quality of aleatoric uncertainty estimates from uncertainty quantification (UQ) deep learning methods is important in scientific contexts, where uncertainty is physically meaningful and important to characterize and interpret exactly. We systematically compare aleatoric uncertainty measured by two UQ techniques, Deep Ensembles (DE) and Deep Evidential Regression (DER). Our method focuses on both zero-dimensional (0D) and two-dimensional (2D) data, to explore how the UQ methods function for different data dimensionalities. We investigate uncertainty injected on the input and output variables and include a method to propagate uncertainty in the case of input uncertainty so that we can compare the predicted aleatoric uncertainty to the known values. We experiment with three levels of noise. The aleatoric uncertainty predicted across all models and experiments scales with the injected noise level. However, the predicted uncertainty is miscalibrated to $\rm{std}(\sigma_{\rm al})$ with the true uncertainty for half of the DE experiments and almost all of the DER experiments. The predicted uncertainty is the least accurate for both UQ methods for the 2D input uncertainty experiment and the high-noise level. While these results do not apply to more complex data, they highlight that further research on post-facto calibration for these methods would be beneficial, particularly for high-noise and high-dimensional settings.
Nevin, Rebecca↗
How does uncertainty of soil organic carbon stock affect the calculation of carbon budgets and soil carbon credits for croplands in the U.S. Midwest?
Cropland carbon budget depicts the amount of carbon flowing in and out of agroecosystems and the changes in carbon stocks of soil and living biomass during the same period. Soil carbon credit is the additional change in soil carbon stock under certain farming practices compared with the business-as-usual practices. Accurately calculating cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit is critical to assessing climate change mitigation potential in agroecosystems. The calculation of cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit is sensitive to local soil and climatic conditions, especially initial soil organic carbon (SOC) stock, which is determined by both SOC concentration (SOC%) and bulk density (Bulk_Density). SOC stock data are either from soil sampling or gridded public survey data. In agroecosystem models, SOC stock data are a key model input for quantifying cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit. However, various types and degrees of uncertainties exist in SOC stock datasets, which propagate to the quantification of SOC stock change. In particular, a large discrepancy is found in two widely used SOC stock datasets — Rapid Carbon Assessment dataset (RaCA) and Gridded Soil Survey Geographic Database (gSSURGO) — in the U.S. Midwest, with a relative difference (quantified using Normalized Root Mean Square Error, NRMSE) of 48.0% for 0–30 cm SOC stock between the two datasets. It remains largely unclear how uncertainty in SOC stocks affects the calculation of cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit. To address this question, we used a well-validated process-based agroecosystem model, ecosys, to assess the impacts of SOC stock uncertainty on carbon budget and soil carbon credit calculation in the U.S. Midwestern corn-soybean rotation systems. Our results reveal the following findings: (1) A sizable discrepancy exists in simulated cropland carbon budget between using gSSURGO and using RaCA for their SOC% and Bulk_Density as model inputs, with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of only 0.4 for simulated change of SOC stock (ΔSOC) using these two different soil datasets. (2) Simulated cropland carbon budget components were more sensitive to initial SOC% than to Bulk_Density. For example, the upper and lower quartiles of multi-year averaged ΔSOC were –29.8 and 4.8 gC/m 2 /year for the selected counties respectively, with an uncertainty of 13.7 and 0.7 gC/m 2 /year induced by uncertainties in initial SOC% and Bulk_Density, respectively. (3) Both simulated ΔSOC and its uncertainty were negatively correlated with initial SOC%, whereas ΔSOC was negatively correlated with air temperature, and ΔSOC uncertainty was positively correlated with air temperature. (4) The uncertainty of calculated soil carbon credits was much smaller compared with the uncertainty of calculated absolute carbon budgets assuming the same SOC stock uncertainty level in the inputs. Specifically, in our assessment comparing planting cover crops vs no cover crop, the uncertainty of calculated soil carbon credits induced by initial SOC% uncertainty was less than 4% (relative to the quantified value of the soil carbon credits) for 90% of the cases. Our analysis highlights that high accuracy measurement of SOC% as inputs is needed for the calculation of cropland carbon budgets; however, soil carbon credit quantification is much less sensitive to the initial SOC% inputs, and the current publicly available soil datasets (e.g., gSSURGO) are largely suitable for the calculation of soil
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Uncertainty analysis of steady-state measurements with a hot-filament type calorimetric emissometer
Calorimetric emissometers measure total hemispherical emissivity by measuring the heat transferred from a heated sample to its surroundings under a vacuum. The accuracy of emissometers standardized by the ASTM C835-06 are well understood. This work uses the Guide to the Evaluation of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) for the propagation uncertainties for an ASTM compliant emissometer. The GUM method was able to develop a measurement model and expressions to determine the uncertainty for other emissometers of this type. Data on ‘as-received’ Hastelloy X was used to develop a detailed uncertainty analysis of the emissivity measurement. Data on ‘as-received’ SS 347 and sandblasted A387 Gr. 91 and previous data by the group on A508/A533B were used to determine uncertainty over the ranges 0.16 to 0.81. For all samples, relative uncertainties in emissivities varied from 0.77% to 2.5% when using a fluxgate magnetometer sensor (FMS) to measure the DC heating current. Data on Hastelloy X using a Hall-effect sensor for DC current and low alloy steel showed the DC current and voltage across the test section to be dominate sources of uncertainty. When these sources were reduced, the specimen temperature and the surface area of the test sections were main sources of uncertainty in the emissivity, especially at higher temperatures. As thermal expansion of the surface was considered in the calculations, correlation between specimen temperature and surface area was examined. It was found to be a small contribution to emissivity's uncertainty despite the differences in linear CTE and its uncertainty for the materials analyzed in this study. For low temperatures, the chamber temperature can be a significant source of uncertainty if not sufficiently cooled. The GUM was also briefly compared to uncertainty from the 2nd and 3rd expansions of the Taylor series. We found that the results were the same when rounding to two significant figures.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Nuclear data uncertainty propagation applied to the versatile test reactor conceptual design
We report the Versatile Test Reactor (VTR) currently under development is a 300 MWth sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) fueled with ternary metal alloy fuel, which aims to accelerate the testing of advanced nuclear fuels, materials, instrumentation, and sensors in high flux environments that are necessary to license the next generation of advanced reactor concepts. To support the VTR design process, uncertainties associated with the nuclear data has been propagated through the reactor core neutronics calculation to global parameters of interest, such as the core multiplication factor, kinetic parameters, and various reactivity feedback coefficients, following the sensitivity based uncertainty propagation approach. By folding the sensitivity coefficients, separately computed by the generalized perturbation theory code PERSENT and Monte Carlo code Serpent 2, with the variance-covariance matrices from COMMARA-2.0, we obtain the reaction-wise, isotope-wise, and overall uncertainties for each response of interest due to nuclear data uncertainty. With Serpent 2, the statistical error of the uncertainty is obtained by propagating the statistical error of the sensitivity coefficients through the same process using a newly developed uncertainty propagation method. From both codes, the overall top uncertainty contributors are found to be the cross section of Fe-56 elastic scattering, Na-23 elastic scattering, and U 238 inelastic scattering. The large contributions of the Fe-56 elastic scattering cross sections to global parameters are due to its relatively large relative uncertainty of 5–10% in nuclear data and the large volume of Fe-containing reflector assemblies in the fairly compact VTR core design. Both codes agreed well for the overall uncertainty estimates of all responses of interest, except the delayed neutron fraction, prompt neutron generation time, and the coolant density feedback coefficient, where Serpent 2 yielded a much larger value than PERSENT due to the large statistical error of sensitivity coefficients. The calculated uncertainties are also compared to those associated with other SFR cores. Another outcome of this study is a variance-covariance matrix of reactivity coefficients, which can be used in the subsequent uncertainty propagation to the system level to investigate the impact of identified uncertainties on system responses in the safety analysis.
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗