Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Program management”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 973 records · Page 54
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

CESER I-Corps (Final Report)

Energy I-Corps is a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sponsored entrepreneurial training program for laboratory researchers aimed at accelerating the commercialization of lab-developed technologies. The program, developed and managed by DOE's Office of Technology Commercialization (OTC) in partnership with the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR), uses a customized curriculum built on the Lean Launch Methodology and delivers a rigorous 10- to 12-week training program to selected laboratory-based teams. The Energy I-Corps team at NLR worked with the DOE's OTC and Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response (CESER) to develop and implement commercialization programming for awardees of the CESER Cybersecurity for Distributed Energy Resources Research, Development, and Demonstration Research Call, funded under Provision 40125(b) of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). 40125(b) Projects were overseen by a technical monitor at the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). The CESER Energy I-Corps Program is considered an Energy I-Corps "lite" or "mini" program, with a lighter lift to accommodate scheduling and funding per participant. This final report describes the CESER I-Corps program and provides recommendations on behalf of OTC to CESER to consider if CESER were to run an I-Corps program in future.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Distributed metadata in a high performance computing environment

A computer-executable method, system, and computer program product for managing meta-data in a distributed storage system, wherein the distributed storage system includes one or more burst buffers enabled to operate with a distributed key-value store, the co computer-executable method, system, and computer program product comprising receiving a request for meta-data associated with a block of data stored in a first burst buffer of the one or more burst buffers in the distributed storage system, wherein the meta data is associated with a key-value, determining which of the one or more burst buffers stores the requested metadata, and upon determination that a first burst buffer of the one or more burst buffers stores the requested metadata, locating the key-value in a portion of the distributed key-value store accessible from the first burst buffer.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Metadata compression

A computer-executable method, system, and computer program product for managing a Parallel-Logged File System (PLFS) on a data storage system, wherein the data storage system is in communication with an application that updates the data storage system with checkpoint data, the computer-executable method, system, and computer program product comprising receiving a first checkpoint including data from the application; analyzing the data in the first checkpoint to determine whether a pattern exists in the checkpoint data; and upon a positive determination, adding the pattern into PLFS.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2016

MO-B-201-00: Motion Management in Current Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) Practice

The motion management in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a key to success for a SBRT program, and still an on-going challenging task. A major factor is that moving structures behave differently than standing structures when examined by imaging modalities, and thus require special considerations and employments. Understanding the motion effects to these different imaging processes is a prerequisite for a decent motion management program. The commonly used motion control techniques to physically restrict tumor motion, if adopted correctly, effectively increase the conformity and accuracy of hypofractionated treatment. The effective application of such requires one to understand the mechanics of the application and the related physiology especially related to respiration. The image-guided radiation beam control, or tumor tracking, further realized the endeavor for precision-targeting. During tumor tracking, the respiratory motion is often constantly monitored by non-ionizing beam sources using the body surface as its surrogate. This then has to synchronize with the actual internal tumor motion. The latter is often accomplished by stereo X-ray imaging or similar techniques. With these advanced technologies, one may drastically reduce the treated volume and increase the clinicians’ confidence for a high fractional ablative radiation dose. However, the challenges in implementing the motion management may not be trivial and is dependent on each clinic case. This session of presentations is intended to provide an overview of the current techniques used in managing the tumor motion in SBRT, specifically for routine lung SBRT, proton based treatments, and newly-developed MR guided RT. Learning Objectives: Through this presentation, the audience will understand basic roles of commonly used imaging modalities for lung cancer studies; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed motion control methods; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed radiation beam control methodology and tumor tacking method; understand the key points in motion management for a high quality SBRT program.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

MO-B-201-01: Overcoming the Challenges of Motion Management in Current Lung SBRT Practice

The motion management in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a key to success for a SBRT program, and still an on-going challenging task. A major factor is that moving structures behave differently than standing structures when examined by imaging modalities, and thus require special considerations and employments. Understanding the motion effects to these different imaging processes is a prerequisite for a decent motion management program. The commonly used motion control techniques to physically restrict tumor motion, if adopted correctly, effectively increase the conformity and accuracy of hypofractionated treatment. The effective application of such requires one to understand the mechanics of the application and the related physiology especially related to respiration. The image-guided radiation beam control, or tumor tracking, further realized the endeavor for precision-targeting. During tumor tracking, the respiratory motion is often constantly monitored by non-ionizing beam sources using the body surface as its surrogate. This then has to synchronize with the actual internal tumor motion. The latter is often accomplished by stereo X-ray imaging or similar techniques. With these advanced technologies, one may drastically reduce the treated volume and increase the clinicians’ confidence for a high fractional ablative radiation dose. However, the challenges in implementing the motion management may not be trivial and is dependent on each clinic case. This session of presentations is intended to provide an overview of the current techniques used in managing the tumor motion in SBRT, specifically for routine lung SBRT, proton based treatments, and newly-developed MR guided RT. Learning Objectives: Through this presentation, the audience will understand basic roles of commonly used imaging modalities for lung cancer studies; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed motion control methods; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed radiation beam control methodology and tumor tacking method; understand the key points in motion management for a high quality SBRT program.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

MO-B-201-02: Motion Management for Proton Lung SBR

The motion management in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a key to success for a SBRT program, and still an on-going challenging task. A major factor is that moving structures behave differently than standing structures when examined by imaging modalities, and thus require special considerations and employments. Understanding the motion effects to these different imaging processes is a prerequisite for a decent motion management program. The commonly used motion control techniques to physically restrict tumor motion, if adopted correctly, effectively increase the conformity and accuracy of hypofractionated treatment. The effective application of such requires one to understand the mechanics of the application and the related physiology especially related to respiration. The image-guided radiation beam control, or tumor tracking, further realized the endeavor for precision-targeting. During tumor tracking, the respiratory motion is often constantly monitored by non-ionizing beam sources using the body surface as its surrogate. This then has to synchronize with the actual internal tumor motion. The latter is often accomplished by stereo X-ray imaging or similar techniques. With these advanced technologies, one may drastically reduce the treated volume and increase the clinicians’ confidence for a high fractional ablative radiation dose. However, the challenges in implementing the motion management may not be trivial and is dependent on each clinic case. This session of presentations is intended to provide an overview of the current techniques used in managing the tumor motion in SBRT, specifically for routine lung SBRT, proton based treatments, and newly-developed MR guided RT. Learning Objectives: Through this presentation, the audience will understand basic roles of commonly used imaging modalities for lung cancer studies; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed motion control methods; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed radiation beam control methodology and tumor tacking method; understand the key points in motion management for a high quality SBRT program.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

MO-B-201-03: MRI-Guided Tracking and Gating

The motion management in stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is a key to success for a SBRT program, and still an on-going challenging task. A major factor is that moving structures behave differently than standing structures when examined by imaging modalities, and thus require special considerations and employments. Understanding the motion effects to these different imaging processes is a prerequisite for a decent motion management program. The commonly used motion control techniques to physically restrict tumor motion, if adopted correctly, effectively increase the conformity and accuracy of hypofractionated treatment. The effective application of such requires one to understand the mechanics of the application and the related physiology especially related to respiration. The image-guided radiation beam control, or tumor tracking, further realized the endeavor for precision-targeting. During tumor tracking, the respiratory motion is often constantly monitored by non-ionizing beam sources using the body surface as its surrogate. This then has to synchronize with the actual internal tumor motion. The latter is often accomplished by stereo X-ray imaging or similar techniques. With these advanced technologies, one may drastically reduce the treated volume and increase the clinicians’ confidence for a high fractional ablative radiation dose. However, the challenges in implementing the motion management may not be trivial and is dependent on each clinic case. This session of presentations is intended to provide an overview of the current techniques used in managing the tumor motion in SBRT, specifically for routine lung SBRT, proton based treatments, and newly-developed MR guided RT. Learning Objectives: Through this presentation, the audience will understand basic roles of commonly used imaging modalities for lung cancer studies; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed motion control methods; familiarize the major advantages and limitations of each discussed radiation beam control methodology and tumor tacking method; understand the key points in motion management for a high quality SBRT program.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Consequence Management Cobalt Magnet 2022 Laboratory Analysis: After Action Report

On May 16-20, 2022, federal mission partners (e.g., DOE Consequence Management, CDC, FDA, FBI, DHS) as well as integrated state, local, tribal, and territorial governments took part in Cobalt Magnet 22 (CM22), a large-scale, week-long radiological incident exercise in Austin, Texas, that linked several important national assets (National Search Program, Radiological Assistance Program, and Consequence Management [CM] personnel) into a single response effort. The exercise had nine (9) overarching Objectives and an additional 162 associated Critical Tasks for all the participating organizations. In total, 13 National Core Capabilities spanning 5 Mission Areas were represented in the final exercise. This exercise enabled a full range of capabilities to be fielded together and examine the operational connection between major assets, discover any resource shortages associated with conducting multiple mission areas simultaneously or in close succession, and identify any challenges related to leadership. This report summarizes nearly 100 successes and observations provided from players and controllers supporting the LA Division, Fly Away Laboratory (FAL) and Gamma Spectroscopist operations. The observations were categorized to align with the FRMAC programmatic functional areas to consider for future improvements: Logistics, CBRN Responder, Laboratory Analysis, Sampling and Monitoring, Health and Safety, Gamma Spectroscopist Operations, Fly Away Laboratory, and the FRMAC Interdivision Interoperability Group (FIIG).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

ECP ST Project 2.3.1.06-STPM08-RAJA (Final Report)

Modern high-performance computing architectures are diverse, with hardware designs that feature multicore CPUs and CPUs plus accelerators, such as GPUs or FPGAs. Achieving good application performance often requires using a programming model and managing application data in ways that are best suited to a particular platform. For large codes that are used daily in production, and are under continual development, architecture-specific ports are untenable. Maintainability requires single-source code that is performance portable across a range of architectures and programming model back-ends. This report describes RAJA, Umpire, and CHAI, three software libraries that provide complementary capabilities to enable application portability for high performance computing (HPC) platforms. In particular, these libraries provide software abstractions that insulate application source code from hardware architecture and programming model-specific implementation details. These development of these libraries was motivated by the needs of multiphysics applications in the Weapons Simulation and Computing Program (WSC) at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). Funding though the Exascale Computing Project (ECP) Software Technology (ST) project 2.3.1.06 RAJA has fostered outreach and collaboration with the ECP application and software technology development communities. In this report, we describe ECP adoption and integration of these tools to this point. The larger goal of the report is to describe to the ECP community what these projects offer, how they are used, and how to approach adoption and integration of them.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Position Papers for the ASCR Workshop on the Management and Storage of Scientific Data

The purpose of this workshop is to identify priority research directions in the area of data management for high-performance and scientific computing above and beyond HPC’s traditional "the parallel file system is the data-management system" model. Supporting the breadth of the DOE mission, including the explosion of AI uses and the growing needs of experimental and observational science, motivates revisiting our assumptions about data management. There are many facets of this topic to explore including: (1) Interfaces for accessing data that resides on traditional persistent storage as well as memory devices; (2) Storage-system architecture design that supports scientific workflows on varied hierarchical storage and networking devices; (3) Devising metadata management infrastructure to support FAIR principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability); (4) Capturing provenance information about scientific data; (5) Utilizing AI to learn I/O patterns of emerging workloads for efficient data management; (6) Providing data management support for AI and complex workflows; and (7) Understanding the overlap between traditional storage systems and I/O (SSIO) efforts and data management. While the program committee has identified these topics as important areas for discussion, we welcome position papers from the community that propose additional topics of interest for discussion at the workshop. The workshop agenda will include breakout sessions for discussing these and selected topic areas to inform priority research directions for data management for high-performance and scientific computing.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Report for the ASCR Workshop on the Management and Storage of Scientific Data

The purpose of this workshop is to identify priority research directions in the area of data management for high-performance and scientific computing above and beyond HPC’s traditional "the parallel file system is the data-management system" model. Supporting the breadth of the DOE mission, including the explosion of AI uses and the growing needs of experimental and observational science, motivates revisiting our assumptions about data management. There are many facets of this topic to explore including: (1) Interfaces for accessing data that resides on traditional persistent storage as well as memory devices; (2) Storage-system architecture design that supports scientific workflows on varied hierarchical storage and networking devices; (3) Devising metadata management infrastructure to support FAIR principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability); (4) Capturing provenance information about scientific data; (5) Utilizing AI to learn I/O patterns of emerging workloads for efficient data management; (6) Providing data management support for AI and complex workflows; and (7) Understanding the overlap between traditional storage systems and I/O (SSIO) efforts and data management. While the program committee has identified these topics as important areas for discussion, we welcome position papers from the community that propose additional topics of interest for discussion at the workshop. The workshop agenda will include breakout sessions for discussing these and selected topic areas to inform priority research directions for data management for high-performance and scientific computing.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2019

Evaluation of Fire Station 23-425, Mercury, Area 23, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) plans to modernize the Mercury town site at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet current and future National Weapons Science, Global and Homeland Security Programs, and Environmental Management mission requirements. These plans—including anticipated demolitions, consolidations, and rebuilding at Mercury—are considered an undertaking subject to review under Title 54 U.S.C. § 306108, commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, Title 54 U.S.C. § 300101, et seq., and its implementing regulations, 36 C.F.R. Part 800. Desert Research Institute (DRI) completed an architectural survey of Mercury. This effort resulted in the identification, recordation, and evaluation of the Mercury Historic District, including the identification of its contributing components. This district was recommended eligible for listing to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP or National Register) under Criteria A and C but was unevaluated under Criteria B and D at that time. The Mercury Historic District contains 153 individual landscapes, buildings, and structures. Of these resources, all except one are recommended as contributing elements of the historic district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1951 through 1992. During most of the Cold War, the land now called the NNSS was named the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This report concerns the proposed demolition of the 1966 Fire Station 23-425 in Mercury as a phase of the larger modernization program mentioned above. Further evaluation of this property indicates that it does not meet any of the Secretary of the Interior’s Significance Criteria for eligibility for the NRHP at either the national or local levels. However, it does remain an important contributing element of Mercury Historic District. This is part of a series of reports.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

The criticality safety program of the Swedish nuclear fuel and waste management Co (SKB)

SKB is co-owned by the owners of the Swedish nuclear power plants (NPP) and is responsible for the back-end of all Swedish spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste from the Swedish nuclear program. The responsibility starts from when the fuel leaves the NPP and ends at the planned final repository. That means that SKB has the responsible for the safety at the intermediate pool storage (Clab), the encapsulation plant (Clink), the Spent Fuel Repository and the transportation between these sites. In March 2011 SKB applied to the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM) for a permit to build a final repository for spent fuel and an encapsulation plant (Clink). The application contained a criticality safety analysis for the canisters to be used in Clink and the copper canister to be used in the final repository. In 2012 SSM requested several complements to the criticality safety analysis in the application and about the same time they also required Clab to modernise the Safety Analysis Report. Our owners (the NPPs) had also requested SKB to take care of higher enrichments and higher burnup fuel. A prerequisite to meet this was extended Burnable Absorber credit (peak reactivity) and Burn-up credit. Up to this stage SKB had relied heavily on consultants to do criticality safety analysis and had no specific criticality safety program or methodology. However it was now evident to SKB that we needed to take an overall view on the criticality safety area and not only lift the quality of the actual criticality analysis but also to handle organisational and competence issues. (authors)

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗