Results for “data restructuring” — Page 5

DOE OSTI2023

A Guide for Improved Resource Adequacy Assessments in Evolving Power Systems: Institutional and Technical Dimensions

This paper identifies and evaluates issues in traditional resource adequacy (RA) assessment practices, and how adjusting these practices may affect and depend on existing institutional arrangements for planning and procurement. The paper proposes a technical-institutional roadmap that would allow regulators in vertically-integrated jurisdictions and system planners and operators in restructured jurisdictions to revise RA practices across a range of components. First, we compile a critical review of current RA assessment practices based on (1) interviews with RA practitioners and (2) a review of recent technical literature. We find that (i) RA may need to expand beyond capacity adequacy to ensure energy adequacy – relevant for energy-limited resources such as storage – and potentially some form of ancillary service adequacy (e.g. enough ramping-up and ramping-down capability in the system); (ii) chronological hourly simulations for all hours in the year are the current best practice; (iii) metrics and models used do not reflect economic criteria in system operation and loss of load; and (iv) there is a need to improve representation of weather dependencies and weather data. Second, we review planning and RA reports for several private and public entities that plan generation and/or transmission infrastructure in the continental U.S. to look for existing practices involving resilience assessments. We find no systematic treatment of the costs of extreme weather and other hazards, the benefits of resilience, and resilience metrics in planning analyses and no systematic treatment of resilience metrics, methods, and outcomes for resource adequacy purposes. Third, we create a technical framework for probabilistic RA assessment and use it to study how key choices about how to model power system operations affect the values that are obtained for RA metrics. We find that (i) non-economic dispatch schemes that ignore economic objectives can lead to accurate RA assessments when coordinated with detailed operational strategies; (ii) multi-year data is critical to capture a wide variety of system conditions; (iii) not incorporating transmission limits into RA assessment could lead to substantial underestimation of traditional “expected value” RA metrics; and (iv) new RA metrics that capture event-specific shortfall characteristics should be used as supplements to traditional metrics. Finally, we examine RA assessments and use this information to propose a guide of evolving industry standards for resource adequacy assessments in resource planning and transmission planning. We report minimum, best, and frontier practices for temporal resolution of assessments, metrics and targets, weather data, load forecasting, characterization of variable renewable resources, characterization of transmission and market transactions, RA modeling and integration with planning processes, and capacity accreditation.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

The German Site Selection Process - Implementation and Challenges - 20528

Federal Company for Radioactive Waste Disposal (Bundesgesellschaft fuer Endlagerung mbH; hereinafter referred to as BGE) is a state-owned company established in September 2016 following the 'Act on the Organisational Restructuring in the Field of Radioactive Waste Storage'. 'Repository Site Selection Act' (hereinafter referred to as StandAG) defines the site selection procedure, aiming to ensure the best possible safety for storing high-level radioactive waste in Germany for the duration of one million years. The selection procedure is a participatory, transparent, learning and self-questioning process based on scientific expertise. Possible repository sites are sought all over Germany, without excluding or predetermining any potential site at the beginning. The procedure consists of three phases. After each phase, the legislative decides on the regions for further consideration in the next phase of the site selection procedure. The current first phase (Phase I) is divided into two steps. Objective of Step 1 is to determine subareas of favorable geological conditions based on available data. Step 2 of Phase I will lead to identification of specific regions that are considered for further surface-based geoscientific and geophysical exploration. Potential host rocks are rock salt, clay rock and crystalline rock. As part of the site selection procedure, an overview of the status of the planning and implementation of R and D activities is given. Topics of particular interest are, for example, the adaptation of the maximum temperature of 100 deg. C at the container surface, the impact of long-term climate variations as well as minimally invasive exploration methods. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Deployment of BISON models of fuel restructuring at high burnup and related fission gas behavior in UO 2

This milestone report details the advancements made in fiscal year 2024 under the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program to improve the modeling of fission gas behavior in high burnup UO 2 nuclear fuel in the BISON fuel performance code. As nuclear fuel is pushed to higher burnups, significant microstructural changes occur within the fuel, including the formation of a high burnup structure (HBS) on the pellet rim and a dark zone deeper within the pellet. These regions, characterized by subgrain formation and increased pore densities, have critical implications for fission gas behavior and release, which are not well understood. The modeling capabilities in BISON did not adequately predict these phenomena, leading to an underestimation of fuel restructuring and - potentially - of fission gas release. To address these gaps, this milestone focused on three key objectives: (1) reviewing and assessing Sifgrs's capabilities for low burnup fuel, on which high burnup capabilities rely, (2) validating and expanding HBS fission gas modeling capabilities, including investigating mechanisms for fission gas release from HBS, and (3) expanding Sifgrs to enable modeling of dark zone formation and its effects on fission gas behavior. These objectives were achieved and are described herein. The achievements of this NEAMS milestone are significant for the industry's goal of burnup extension. The improved predictive modeling capabilities for both low- and high-burnup conditions enhance our understanding of fuel performance under both normal operations and transient scenarios. Although goals were reached, future work is necessary to validate these models against experimental data and quantify their accuracy in different conditions. In parallel, mechanistic modeling efforts should continue to extend and refine these capabilities to increase accuracy while reducing reliance on empirical models. This will ensure robust performance across a broader range of conditions.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Electrochemistry-Induced Restructuring of Tin-Doped Indium Oxide Nanocrystal Films of Relevance to CO 2 Reduction

The electrochemical reduction of CO 2 into fuels using renewable electricity presents an opportunity to utilize captured CO 2 . Electrocatalyst development has been a primary focus of research in this area. This is especially true at the nanoscale, where researchers have focused on understanding nanostructure-property relationships. However, electrocatalyst structure may evolve during operation. Indium- and tin-based oxides have been widely studied as electrocatalysts for CO 2 reduction to formate, but evolution of these catalysts during operation is not well-characterized. Here, we report the evolution of nanoscale structure of precise tin-doped indium oxide nanocrystals under CO 2 reduction conditions. We show that sparse monolayer nanocrystal films desorb from the electrode upon charging, but thicker nanocrystal films remain, likely due to an increased number of physical contacts. Upon applying a cathodic voltage of –1.0 V vs RHE or greater, the original 10-nm diameter nanocrystals are no longer visible, and instead form a larger microstructural network. Elemental analysis suggests the network is an oxygen-deficient indium-tin metal alloy. We hypothesize that this morphological evolution is the result of nanocrystal sintering due to oxide reduction. Furthermore, these data provide insights into the morphological evolution of tin-doped indium oxide nanocrystal electrocatalysts under reducing conditions and highlight the importance of post-electrochemical structural characterization of electrocatalysts.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2023

Nanoscale reshaping of resonant dielectric microstructures by light-driven explosions

Femtosecond-laser-assisted material restructuring employs extreme optical intensities to localize the ablation regions. To overcome the minimum feature size limit set by the wave nature of photons, there is a need for new approaches to tailored material processing at the nanoscale. Here, we report the formation of deeply-subwavelength features in silicon, enabled by localized laser-induced phase explosions in prefabricated silicon resonators. Using short trains of mid-infrared laser pulses, we demonstrate the controllable formation of high aspect ratio (>10:1) nanotrenches as narrow as ~ $λ / 80$. The trench geometry is shown to be scalable with wavelength, and controlled by multiple parameters of the laser pulse train, such as the intensity and polarization of each laser pulse and their total number. Particle-in-cell simulations reveal localized heating of silicon beyond its boiling point and suggest its subsequent phase explosion on the nanoscale commensurate with the experimental data. The observed femtosecond-laser assisted nanostructuring of engineered microstructures (FLANEM) expands the nanofabrication toolbox and opens exciting opportunities for high-throughput optical methods of nanoscale structuring of solid materials.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2016

TH-C-204-00: Medical Physics Workshop: An Update On the Journal’s Improvement Activities and Guidance On Writing and Reviewing Papers

In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

TH-C-204-01: Vision for Medical Physics and Status of Current Initiatives

In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

TH-C-204-02: Improving Manuscript Quality Via Structured Reviews, Enhanced Scientific Category Taxonomy, and Outreach

In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

TH-C-204-03: Writing Good Scientific Papers and Responding to Critiques

In this presentation, the Editors will outline our vision for the future of Medical Physics and review recent work-in-progress initiatives to implement this vision. Finally, we will close with guidance to authors on how to write a good Medical Physics paper. A major focus will be the transition to a new publisher in 2017 following a more than 40-year association with American Institute of Physics Publishing (AIPP). Vision for Medical Physics and status of current initiatives: Jeff Williamson, Editor-in-Chief The broad vision of Medical Physics is “to continue the Journal’s tradition of publishing the very best science that propels our discipline forward and improves our contribution to patient care.” More concretely, the Journal should be the preeminent forum for exchange of cutting edge medical physics science. We seek to identify the best contributions in (a) high impact clinical physics innovations; (b) clinical translation and validation of basic science innovations; and (c) cutting edge basic science developments with potential for patient care improvements. Among the challenges and opportunities, we face are: electronic-only and open access publishing; competition from new radiological science journals; trends towards more interactive, social-media based scientific communities; and diversification of the medical physics research, authorship, and readership domains, including clinical applications quite foreign to core ABR clinical competencies. Recently implemented and ongoing initiatives include: Revised Table of Contents (TOC) and more contemporary topical submission categories Structured review template in HTML format Comprehensive hierarchical taxonomy for identifying reviewer expertise Formal process for soliciting high quality and impact Review and Vision 20/20 Articles We have recruited four Review Article Co-editors: John Rowlands and Ingrid Reiser (imaging physics) and Joao Seco and Tim Zhu (therapy physics). The Co-Editors will identify timely topics and solicit high profile authors to submit review manuscripts. To submit an article, authors will need to work with an assigned Co-Editor to develop a mutually acceptable outline and abstract. 5) A new and exciting class of articles: Medical Physics Dataset Articles (MPDAs) MPDAs describe scientifically or clinically valuable open-access datasets with high potential for contributing to the research of medical physicists working on related problems. In contrast to Research Articles, MPDAs should not include hypothesis testing; or data analyses supporting generalizable conclusions. The publically accessible dataset must be permanently archived before the MPDA can be published. This initiative is being led by Joe Deasy. Update on new publisher transition: The transition of AAPM scientific publishing operations to a major publishing house is a major opportunity to expand Medical Physics readership and its scholarly impact. The advantages include: (a) common manuscript management and web hosting platforms for Medical Physics and its sister journal, JACMP; (b) greater than 4-fold expansion of subscribing institutions; and (c) resources to mount data-driven, highly targeted marketing campaigns to enhance citation and download rates. A transition update of this epochal development, which has only begun as of this writing (3/31/16), will be given. Improving manuscript quality via structured reviews, enhanced scientific category taxonomy, and outreach: Shiva Das, Therapy Physics Editor Medical Physics is committed to continuous improvement with the ultimate goal of improving the potential impact of accepted manuscripts. In order to do so, Medical Physics must be able to tap into important/emerging areas and be able to select high quality contributions consistently via discerning reviews. Improving the quality of reviews is crucial to selecting high quality manuscripts and also to improving manuscript impact via feedback in the review process. With this in mind, Medical Physics is in the process of: (a) fostering outreach to important areas that are currently underrepresented in Medical Physics; (b) implementing a structured template review form; and (c) implementing a comprehensive scientific category taxonomy to identify reviewers who are best suited to an article. Outreach efforts have begun to various scientific areas. Strategies to increase submissions from these areas will be discussed. As a consequence of this effort, a special issue on particle therapy is under development. A review template was implemented in late 2014 on a limited test basis. Based on reviewer feedback, the template was restructured and shortened to capture essential review elements. The restructured template is due to be released shortly. The new scientific category taxonomy is in the process of being deployed to reviewers and associate editors. Salient aspects of the structured review template and scientific category taxonomy will be discussed in this talk. Writing good scientific papers and responding to critiques: Mitch Goodsitt, Imaging Physics Editor The essential components of the abstract, introduction, methods, discussion and conclusion sections of manuscripts, as well as the desired writing style and style of the figures and tables will be reviewed. Publishable Medical Physics manuscripts must include clear and concise statements of the novelty and clinical and/or scientific importance of the authors’ work. Examples of novelty include: new technical solution to an important clinical problem; new generalizable knowledge; and first demonstration that an existing engineering solution solves a clinical problem. Please note that we encourage authors of recently published conference proceedings (e.g., SPIE, IEEE) papers on novel medical physics related work to submit more substantial versions of that work to our journal. All submissions must include: sufficient background information and rationale; enough detail for others to reproduce the authors’ work; sufficient statistical analysis to refute or validate the authors’ hypotheses; a description of how the present work compares to, is distinct from, and improves upon others’ work; and sections devoted to the limitations of the study and future directions. Writing should be polished. Poor wording, grammar and composition frustrate the review process. Our journal does not have copyeditors for revising manuscripts. When authors receive critiques from the referees and associate editor, the authors should provide a detailed point-by-point response to each comment. The authors’ rebuttal should include the text of the original criticism, the authors’ response, and a pasted copy of the modified text along with the line numbers in the revised article. The new text should be highlighted in a different font color in the revised submission. Following these recommendations will improve submissions and facilitate the review process.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2017

Addressing the characterisation challenge to understand catalysis in MOFs: the case of nanoscale Cu supported in NU-1000

Here, we explore the dynamic structure and reactivity of Cu species supported on NU-1000. By combining pair distribution function (PDF) analysis and difference envelope density (DED) analysis of in situ synchrotron-based X-ray scattering data, we simultaneously probe the local structure of supported Cu-species, their distribution within NU-1000 and distortions of the NU-1000 lattice under conditions relevant to catalysis and catalyst activation. Our analyses show that atomic layer deposition (ALD) of Cu in NU-1000 (Cu-AIM) leads to the formation of Cu-oxo clusters within the small pores that connect the triangular and hexagonal channels. Exposure of Cu-AIM to a reducing atmosphere at 200 °C produces metallic Cu 0 of two distinct particle sizes: ~4 nm nanoparticles and small sub-nanometer clusters. The size of these nanoparticles appears to be constrained by NU-1000 pore dimensions, with evidence of the sub-nanometer clusters being bound within the triangular channels flanked by pyrene rings. This supported Cu 0 –NU-1000 system is catalytically active for gas-phase ethylene hydrogenation. Exposure of the catalyst to oxidative atmosphere re-oxidises the Cu species to a Cu 2 O cuprite phase. The dynamic restructuring of the system in different chemical environments underscores the importance of probing these systems in situ .

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

DOE OSTI2023

Compare predictions of transient fission gas release by empirical and mechanistic models to experiments in high burnup UO 2 fuel

Understanding and predicting fuel performance at high burnup require improving our understanding of transient fission gas release. High-burnup operations enable new mechanisms of fission gas release, which affect fuel performance. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has recently published its interpretation of existing fuel fragmentation, relocation, and dispersal data in a research information letter. There, transient fission gas release was identified as one of the main factors that contributes to fuel fragmentation, relocation, and dispersal, and therefore limits fuel extension to high burnup. However, transient fission gas release is a complex phenomenon that cannot be fully described by simple empirical descriptions. This report summarizes the development of a mechanistic model for high-burnup transient fission gas release in the fuel performance code BISON. This research was supported by the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation program during fiscal year 2023 to improve our understanding of high-burnup transient fission gas release and ability to predict it as a function of operation history. To support the development of a mechanistic transient fission gas release model, the existing Simple Integrated Fission Gas Release and Swelling (Sifgrs) model in BISON has been completely refactored to make it more modular and extensible. This effort supports the model's application to high-burnup conditions, its extension to other fuel forms, and the continuous improvement of its current features. Once refactoring was completed, models for high-burnup structure formation, fission gas transfer from non-restructured fuel to high-burnup structure, high-burnup structure intragranular and intergranular fission gas behavior, high-burnup structure bubble evolution, fuel pulverization, and the resulting transient fission gas release were tested and implemented in the Simple Integrated Fission Gas Release and Swelling (Sifgrs) model or tightly coupled to it. The new mechanistic model was then compared to an empirical model developed in parallel by a Nuclear Energy University Program project using a Studsvik high-burnup loss-of-coolant-accident assessment case. Finally, the report details the preliminary BISON results for a benchmark activity organized by the Nuclear Energy Agency to evaluate fuel performance codes' predictive capabilities for burst fission gas release. This work represents an important step toward a mechanistic understanding of fission gas release in high-burnup conditions.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2021

xSDK: Building an ecosystem of highly efficient math libraries for exascale

Current efforts to build increasingly powerful computer architectures are opening up new avenues for more complex and higher fidelity simulations coupled with data analytics and learning, leading to new scientific insights and deeper understanding. At one extreme, exascale computers will be much faster than previous computer generations (performing 10 18 operations per second—that is, 1,000 times faster than petascale). To achieve these performance improvements, computer architectures are becoming increasingly complex, with deep memory hierarchies, very high node and core counts, and heterogeneous features such as graphics processing units (GPUs). Such architectural changes impact the full breadth of computing scales, as heterogeneity pervades even current-generation laptops, workstations, and moderate-sized clusters. While emerging advanced architectures provide unprecedented opportunities, they also present significant challenges for developers of scientific applications, such as multiphysics and multiscale codes, who must adapt their software to handle disruptive changes in architectures and new programming models that have not yet stabilized. Developers must consider increasing concurrency while reducing communication and synchronization, and other complexities such as the potential for using mixed precision to leverage the compute power available in low-precision tensor cores. On one hand, developers must implement new scientific capabilities, which in turn increase code complexity. On the other hand, the codes must be ported to new architectures, requiring the inclusion of new programming models and the restructuring of code to achieve good performance. Addressing these issues is beyond the capability of any single person or team—leading to the need for collaboration among many teams, who encapsulate their expertise in reusable software and work together to create sustainable software ecosystems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Elucidating Abnormal Grain Growth in Thermomagnetic Processed Materials with Transfer Learning and Reinforcement Learning

The goal of this research program is to establish the mechanism governing local grain boundary motion, which is needed to design and process desirable microstructures for better performance, by identifying the relative contributions of grain boundary (GB) energy and mobility to grain growth. Classical models for grain growth assume that the primary mechanism for reducing the total interfacial energy is area reduction and that GB restructuring is not significant. This assumption implies that grain growth is locally driven by curvature. However, recent experimental observations using new non-destructive 3D x-ray diffraction microscopy techniques (3D-XRM) reveal that classic descriptors (i.e., curvature, number of neighbors, grain size) do not predict real grain growth. Instead, local GB motion appears to be governed by its energy relative to its neighbors such that low-energy boundaries replace those of higher energy. However, simulations that incorporate GB energy anisotropy still fail to reproduce these observations. These discrepancies suggest that the common assumption for grain growth theory must be re-examined to predict and, thus, control microstructure evolution in real polycrystals. A significant challenge to testing this assumption is due to anisotropic GB mobility. Mobility may cause abnormal grain growth or affect the final grain shapes or growth rate but its true contributions are unknown because it is difficult to measure. For example, observations in Fe have found that grains associated with high energy and high mobility boundaries tend to experience abnormal grain growth, whereas abnormal grain growth is associated with low energy and high mobility boundaries in alumina. As mobility and energy both control GB motion, it is challenging to isolate the local driving forces necessary to test the common assumption that the primary mechanism is area reduction. The novelty of this work is the use of machine learning tools to capture GB mobility and energy from 3D-XRM measurements in polycrystals to test the common assumption used in grain growth models. Machine learning can capture high-order correlations in dynamic systems like those found in the evolving GB topology. The PIs have developed a physics-regularized interpretable machine learning microstructure evolution (PRIMME) model that accurately replicates the grain growth behavior of its trained data set.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2021

Transportation Hub Infrastructure Expansion: Decision Support Under Uncertainty

The Athena project (www.athena-mobility.org) has worked to investigate the relationship between the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport (DFW) and the greater Dallas area in order to better understand and therefore better inform future decision-making regarding the critical infrastructure that influence mobility between the airport and the city. Through this work, infrastructure related to curbside pickup and drop-off, parking, public transit, and the road network congestion were identified as critical to the operation of the DFW transportation hub. The infrastructure analysis and expansion aspect of the Athena project is focused on the restructuring of the CTA curb as a hierarchical curb and the building or repurposing of parking infrastructure as the interplay between these two areas. Many sources of uncertainty exist that may impact future airport and transportation hub operations, such as passenger volume growth, population demographic changes over time, electric vehicle (EV) adoption rates, and autonomous vehicle (AV) adoption rates. Due to these sources of uncertainty, we have selected for our research a modeling framework that can capture various types of uncertainty and hedge against those uncertainties in the optimization process. We analyze road network and curb congestion, the rise of transportation networking companies, trends in parking usage, existing policies around this infrastructure, airport revenue streams, and other contributing factors to enable infrastructure decision making with less uncertainty. To accomplish this wholistic analysis, we have developed a novel multi-stage, multi-period stochastic optimization model which considers the airport's decisions from 2025-2045 under different possible future macro trajectories and day-to-day variations in operational conditions captured as "annual representation of operations" scenarios with respective probabilities. This model has also been designed to leverage the outputs of various efforts under the Athena project to create a combined decision framework for infrastructure decisions. These various efforts include the route optimization model, the ASPIRES simulation, the mode choice model, and the SUMO traffic simulation. Our computational experiments of this system at scale have resulted in a working version of our infrastructure model which enables the explicit representation and consideration of various sources of uncertainty in the decision process to enable robust, flexible decision-making. This model has been effectively run on NREL's HPC system, Eagle, with large numbers of stochastic scenarios and shows promise as a scalable tool for robust consideration of uncertainties in airport planning. We have tested our model using 30,240 operational circumstances in total, resulting in a problem with more 200 million variables. This model was solved in several different configurations, and a workflow to simulate the performance of the infrastructure model results was developed and deployed. In general, our results indicate that a combination of remote parking, remote curb infrastructure, and dynamic pricing can generate revenue, reduce emissions, accommodate emerging technologies such as AVs and EVs, and manage airport passenger growth over time. We note the success of the proposed strategy depends on the data collection and forecasting abilities of DFW. We have also seen that the AV adoption by TNCs might necessitate larger amounts of remote curb. The results of this work inform strategies for airport infrastructure decision making, as well as demonstrate the value of an adaptable model, but also indicate that there are avenues remaining where further research would be of value.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗