Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “leverage scores”

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.

77 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2023

Leveraging Automated Fiber Placement Computer Aided Process Planning Framework for Defect Validation and Dynamic Layup Strategies

Process planning represents an essential stage of the Automated Fiber Placement (AFP) workflow. It develops useful and efficient machine processes based upon the working material, composite design, and manufacturing resources. The current state of process planning requires a high degree of interaction from the process planner and could greatly benefit from increased automation. Therefore, a list of key steps and functions are created to identify the more difficult and time-consuming phases of process planning. Additionally, a set of metrics must exist by which to evaluate the effectiveness of the manufactured laminate from the machine code created during the Process Planning stage. Layup strategies, in addition to dog ears, stagger shifts, steering constraints, and starting points, represented the group of functions labeled as process optimization and ranked the highest in terms of priority for automation. The laminates resulting from the selected parameters are evaluated through the occurrences of principal defect metrics such as fiber gaps, overlaps, angle deviation and steering violations. This document presents an automated software solution to the layup strategy and starting point selection phase of process planning. A series of ply scenarios are generated with variations of these ply parameters and evaluated according to a set of metrics entered by the Process Planner. These metrics are generated through use of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP), where relative importance between each of the fiber features are defined. The ply scenarios are selected which reduce the overall fiber feature scores based on the defects the Process Planner wishes to minimize.

HiCAM↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

LLMs and GenAI Tools to Depict Contributions of Human Systems to Spaceflight Tasks Execution

Recent advancements in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AI/ML) technologies, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) capable of sophisticated syntax analysis, offer substantial potential in automating complex processes, thereby saving time and human resources. This study explores the development of an LLM-driven model designed to analyze and categorize a diverse set of Mars mission tasks into 18 predefined Human System Task Categories (HSTCs) based on their textual descriptions. As part of developing the Crew Health and Performance – Probabilistic Risk Assessment (CHP-PRA projects Performance Risk Model (PRisM) proof-of-concept, we established a framework to project performance scores from small-scale tests onto a preliminary list of Mars tasks. The foundation of our model was a comprehensive spreadsheet populated by NASA experts and clinicians, which detailed each Mars task alongside binary indicators of HSTC involvement. This dataset enabled the initial application of supervised ML, training and testing on existing HSTC labels. The HSTCs were originally defined from a medical system perspective, focusing on task impairments due to deteriorated human health. To expand our model's scope to include categories impacting performance, we face the challenge of generating binary labels (0 or 1) for new categories without pre-existing data. We address this by employing Generative AI (GenAI) software to determine whether a given task involved a new category by asking, "Does task A involve using category B?" We validate our approach by comparing the GenAI's binary classifications with the expert-provided labels for existing HSTCs. Notably, we utilize Ollama [4], a locally hosted GenAI tool that does not require cloud access, thus safeguarding NASA's proprietary data from unauthorized exposure. This study demonstrates the feasibility of leveraging cutting-edge AI tools to advance research, paving the way for automation and rapid decision-making in space exploration.

Mona Matar↗
DOE OSTI2024

Identification of Climatological Representative Days in the Mid-Atlantic for High-Fidelity Offshore Wind Energy Modeling

The goal of reaching 30 GW of offshore wind energy by 2030 becomes more realistic with the continued approval of offshore wind energy areas by the Biden Administration. In the Mid-Atlantic, where wind energy projects are in the most advanced stages of development, there is increased research focus on the eventual interaction of these wind farms. These interactions, in the form of wakes and cluster wakes, or wakes from multiple wind farms, could have detrimental effects on power production and forecastability for downwind wind farms (Pryor et al. 2022, Golbazi et al. 2022, Rosencrans et al. 2023). To help alleviate these issues, numerical simulations in the form of numerical weather prediction (NWP) and large eddy simulations (LES) can provide insight into when cluster wake situations may occur, but running such simulations can be expensive and difficult to run for multiple years. In this study, we leverage and build upon existing techniques in the literature (Fischereit et al. 2022) to identify climatologically representative days for wind energy areas in the Mid-Atlantic where conditions would promote cluster wake situations. We select meteorological variables (wind speed, wind direction, atmospheric stability, boundary-layer height, TKE) critical to understanding wind energy production and wake propagation. We then consider two different NWP datasets of varying spatial and temporal resolution: ERA5 provides data at hourly intervals from 1940 to present at 0.25 deg (31 km) spatial resolution (Hersbach et al. 2020), and the NOW-23 dataset provides data at 5-minute resolution for 21 years at 2-km spatial resolution (Bodini et al. 2020). Our first step is to compare these two datasets for an overlapping 21-year time period. Initial results show that the required number of days to represent the long-term climate increases with each additional variable considered. In their study of the German Bight, Fischereit et al. (2022) found that they could represent the long-term wind and wave climate in a "near-perfect" way with -180 days, by reaching a Perkins Skill Score (PSS) of 0.9; our investigation of the mid-Atlantic wind resource region with ERA5 and NOW-23 data suggests that we will need -100 days to reach a PSS of 0.9. As we expand our parameter space to include multiple variables, the number of required days will likely grow. These results will ultimately be used to select case studies to best represent cluster wake conditions that apply to this region for the lifetime of likely wind farms in this mid-Atlantic region.

clusterwakes↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The INSTEP Monitoring Network: Merging High-and-Low Cost Measurements to Characterize California Wildfires

Despite challenges with data quality and scope, low-cost sensor networks have skyrocketed in popularity over the last 15 years, making air quality data available on refined spatial scales. More recently, studies have leveraged both high and low-quality instruments to create stronger “hybrid” models, with most studies focusing on particulate matter. Low-cost measurements typically represent ground-level emissions only, providing context for human health issues from climate change-driven events such as wildfires. Since low-cost sensors’ capabilities are localized, daily events and microclimates tend to dominate the data rather than larger regional or atmospheric trends. Likewise, their low cost explains their high uncertainty. In contrast, some regulatory-grade instruments produce column measurements as well, providing reliable information on a broader scope. To bridge this gap while expanding into gas-phase measurements, we deployed 12 air quality sensor packages in California, USA during the 2022 wildfire season. These INSTEP (Inexpensive Network Sensor Technology Exploring Pollution) monitors measure carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and several hydrocarbons including methane (CH4) and formaldehyde (HCHO). Half of the monitors were co-located with remote sensing spectrometers: NASA Pandora and Total Column Carbon Observing Network (TCCON). The overlap in pollutants includes NO2, O3, and HCHO between the INSTEP monitors and the Pandora column measurements. TCCON covers column CO, CO2, and CH4, rounding out our comparison. Most of the monitors were distributed throughout the San Francisco Bay area, and an additional three were located within 100 km of Los Angeles. The sites ranged in geographic and population characteristics, including desert, mountainous, coastal, and urban locations. Since varying environmental conditions such as temperature and pressure are known to challenge sensor performance, we will apply newer sensor “calibration” techniques meant to combat this. We will normalize our sensor signals by z-scoring them prior to applying a single calibration model in the form of multivariate linear regression or an artificial neural network. While this technique has been validated for the hydrocarbon and ozone sensor types (metal oxide), it has not yet been tested on electrochemical and non-dispersive infrared sensors, which are also used in the INSTEP monitors. This will serve as a test to see if this normalization technique – or another – is most effective in accounting for environmental differences among sensors. Related data analysis efforts have found success with a variety of geospatial analysis techniques, including weighted network models in which high-quality instruments are given higher weights than their low-cost counterparts. Our preliminary analysis will focus on kriging, which uses a Gaussian algorithm to assign weights, providing estimated pollution levels at locations between monitors. Smoke trajectory and evolution will also be considered using both measurement types. We also aim to baseline subtract our emission estimates from each region to determine which portion of emissions are regional and local, further characterizing burn differences in northern and southern California fires. Future directions include using INSTEP jointly with TEMPO satellite data, and mobile deployments on aircraft and uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAV).

Low-cost sensors↗
DOE OSTI2025

Machine learning model inputs, outputs, and scripts associated with “Artificial intelligence-guided iterations between observations and modeling significantly improve environmental predictions”

NOTE: The manuscript associated with this data package is currently in review. The data may be revised based on reviewer feedback. Upon manuscript acceptance, this data package will be updated with the final dataset and additional metadata. This data package is associated with the manuscript “Artificial intelligence-guided iterations between observations and modeling significantly improve environmental predictions” (Malhotra et al., in prep). This effort was designed following ICON (integrated, coordinated, open, and networked) principles to facilitate a model-experiment (ModEx) iteration approach, leveraging crowdsourced sampling across the contiguous United States (CONUS). New machine learning models were created every month to guide sampling locations. Data from the resulting samples were used to test and rebuild the machine learning models for the next round of sampling guidance. Associated sediment and water geochemistry and in situ sensor data can be found at https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/1923689, https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/1729719, and https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/1603775. This data package is associated with two GitHub repositories found at https://github.com/parallelworks/dynamic-learning-rivers and https://github.com/WHONDRS-Hub/ICON-ModEx_Open_Manuscript. In addition to this readme, this data package also includes two file-level metadata (FLMD) files that describes each file and two data dictionaries (DD) that describe all column/row headers and variable definitions. This data package consists of two main folders (1) dynamic-learning-rivers and (2) ICON-ModEx_Open_Manuscript which contain snapshots of the associated GitHub repositories. The input data, output data, and machine learning models used to guide sampling locations are within dynamic-learning-rivers. The folder is organized into five top-level directories: (1) “input_data” holds the training data for the ML models; (2) “ml_models” holds machine learning (ML) models trained on the data in “input_data”; (3) “examples” contains files for direct experimentation with the machine learning model, including scripts for setting up “hindcast” run; (4) “scripts” contains data preprocessing and postprocessing scripts and intermediate results specific to this data set that bookend the ML workflow; and (5) “output_data” holds the overall results of the ML model on that branch. Each trained ML model resides on its own branch in the repository; this means that inputs and outputs can be different branch-to-branch. There is also one hidden directory “.github/workflows”. This hidden directory contains information for how to run the ML workflow as an end-to-end automated GitHub Action but it is not needed for reusing the ML models archived here. Please see the top-level README.md in the GitHub repository for more details on the automation. The scripts and data used to create figures in the manuscript are within ICON-ModEx_Open_Manuscript. The folder is organized into four folders which contain the scripts, data, and pdf for each figure. Within the “fig-model-score-evolution” folder, there is a folder called “intermediate_branch_data” which contains some intermediate files pulled from dynamic-learning-rivers and reorganized to easily integrate into the workflows. NOTE: THIS FOLDER INCLUDES THE FILES AT THE POINT OF PAPER SUBMISSION. IT WILL BE UPDATED ONCE THE PAPER IS ACCEPTED WITH ANY REVISIONS AND WILL INCLUDE A DD/FLMD AT THAT POINT. We thank the United States Forest Service, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural Resources, Cowiche Canyon Conservatory, Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission (Scientific Research Permit #210901), and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation for access to field locations where the samples labeled “SSS” were collected. We also thank the Yakama Nation Tribal Council and Yakama Nation Fisheries for working with us to facilitate sample collection and optimization of data usage according to their values and worldview. WHONDRS consortium members were asked to provide any acknowledgments for the collection of samples labeled “CM” and the following is a list of acknowledgments that were submitted with their corresponding Site IDs: (MART) Research activities were conducted in part on the Wind River Experimental Forest within the Gifford Pinchot National Forest; (MP- 100379) Philadelphia is part of Lenapehoking, the ancestral homelands of the Lenape peoples; (MP-102398) Land surveyed is the ancestral homelands of the Nookhose'iinenno (Arapaho), Tsis tsis'tas (Cheyenne), and Nuuchu (Ute); (MP-100749 and MP- 100747) Georgia Coastal Ecosystem LTER, OCE-1832178; (SP-70 and SP-72) Eastern Shoshone, Shoshone-Bannock; (MP- 102944) Funded by Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. On the traditional lands of the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz, Confederated Tribes of the Grand Rhonde, and the Clatsop-Nehalem Confederated Tribe; (MP- 100607) Holiday Creek is located on the traditional territory of the Monacan Indian Nation; (SP-45) Lafayette Blue Springs State Park; (MP-102420) NSF DEB-2016749; (MP-100019) New Hampshire Agriculture Experiment Station; (SP-35) Rayonier (land owner; https://www.rayonier.com/); (MP- 101276) US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research, Subsurface Biogeochemical Research, Watershed Dynamics and Evolution SFA at ORNL; (MP- 103224) Watershed Dynamics and Evolution SFA at ORNL; (MP- 101584) Traditional lands of the Oceti Sakowin (Dakota, Lakota, Nakoda) and Anishinaabe Peoples.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗