Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “AI”

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 1,063 records · Page 59

Digital Twin Framework for PIP-II Linac: AI-Driven Multi-Scale Modeling from Ion Source to 800 MeV

The PIP-II linac will enable >1.2 MW beam power for DUNE, requiring unprecedented operational reliability across its warm front-end (RFQ, MEBT) and five distinct SRF sections operating at 162.5/325/650 MHz. We present a comprehensive digital twin framework uniquely combining a fully differentiable fast beam transport code with neural network surrogates trained on high-fidelity PIC simulations, capturing space charge and nonlinear dynamics beyond traditional envelope codes while achieving 10⁴× speedup at <1% accuracy. End-to-end differentiability enables gradient-based optimization across 500+ parameters simultaneously—previously impossible with conventional tools—while the model incorporates static/dynamic errors and serves as a virtual commissioning platform for diverse hardware integration. The framework facilitates reinforcement learning for pulsed/CW mode transitions, predictive maintenance through anomaly detection, and autonomous tuning algorithm development with real-time execution capability. Validation against physics simulations shows excellent agreement for the front-end, with initial results demonstrating potential for 30% commissioning time reduction and proactive fault mitigation, providing a scalable blueprint for operating next-generation high-intensity accelerators.

Pathak, Abhishek [Fermilab] (ORCID:000000021704208↗

Integrating AI and Multi-sensor Technology for better Bioenergy Preprocessing

Integrating multi-sensor identification with machine learning significantly enhances bioenergy preprocessing by using non-destructive, multi-spectral sensors to improve feedstock purity and quality. This approach not only reduces preprocessing costs but also ensures a more efficient and sustainable bioenergy production process.

09 - BIOMASS FUELS↗

How efficiently can AI recognize Wireless Devices?

This poster presents a hardware benchmarking methodology for a 3-layer CNN waveform classifier deployed using ONNX Runtime on an NVIDIA Jetson AGX Orin. The dataset consist of 9 signal types, -30 to +30 dB SNR with 5dB increments. Benchmarking on the Jetson AGX Orin gave an accuracy of 91.9% and GPU throughput of 107,120 predictions/sec (23× faster than CPU). The Jetson GPU reached approximately 27M samples/sec with stable performance but fell below the 40 MHz rate needed for real-time radio feeds. Sustained testing of 5 minutes confirmed stable performance with no memory leaks, establishing a reproducible benchmarking baseline for future edge-deployment optimization.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

SABATH: Surrogate AI Benchmarking Applications' Testing Harness

SABATH provides benchmarking infrastructure for evaluating scientific ML/AI models. It contains support for scientific machine learning surrogates from external repositories. The software dependences are explicitly exposed in the surrogate model definition, which allows the use of advanced optimization, communication, and hardware features.

Luszczek, Piotr [Univ. of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN↗

Event Report for The Ethical Artificial Intelligence Quantification Workshop

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a powerful emerging technology area which requires special attention to using it ethically. AI ethics is still an emerging field, and the partners for this workshop and report seek to move AI ethics discussion ahead by experimenting with ways to measure AI ethics criteria. The following document describes the outcomes and learnings from The Ethical Artificial Intelligence Quantification Workshop held at the National Institute for Aerospace (NIA), Hampton, Virginia on May 12th, 2022. The purpose of the workshop was for participants to evaluate and experiment-with the methodology and process presented by AIEthics.World in cooperation with Intel Corporation. The meeting participants learned about the Ethical AI Certification and Maturity Model™ and applied the methodology to selected notional AI systems. The workshop facilitated the evaluation of the maturity of the AI system according to ethical considerations relevant to NASA, NIA and other participants. The workshop consisted of three main phases. The first phase focused on understanding and summarizing NASA’s ethical approaches, mission and values based on published documentation, discussions and individual insights & opinions of participants. This information was prioritized, weighted, ordered, and quantified in phase two, to formulate an alignment between human values (ethics) and their applicability to AI systems during all lifecycle phases. The first two phases were summarized as a form of ethical genealogy for artificial intelligence, specific to NASA’s ethical approaches. In the third and last phase of the workshop the participants evaluated notional examples of artificial intelligence to qualify and quantify its ability to adhere to the organizational ethics approaches, using the Ethical AI Certification and Maturity Model™. The workshop uses the concept of genealogy, in the traditional sense: the study and traceability of lines of ancestors in the process of evolutionary development from earlier forms. However, as it is applied to an Ethical AI definition, it is providing the insights to the necessary and mandatory traceability of content, data, metrics, telemetry, elements, and structures which are used in the AI’s lifecycle to foster and measure AI ethics in all steps of its lifecycle. The Ethical Artificial Intelligence Quantification Workshop provided NASA with the opportunity to apply the Ethical AI Certification and Maturity Model™, in combination with existing and well-known decision-making and quality control methods to identify the metrics and measurements for an Ethical AI and assess its ethical condition and quality aligned with NASA ethics approaches. The result of the workshop is the capacity for NASA to apply the maturity model assessment to its AI Systems as desired and if necessary, publish the ability of these AI Systems to adhere to the organizational ethical goals. AI ethics frameworks need to be customized for each application domain, for example, individual NASA Mission Directorates. General principles that work in one area such as AI/Machine Learning-based text analysis (the ethics of information-extraction) may need to be adapted for another such as sense-and-avoid decision-making in a flight environment. The workshop was conducted among approximately twenty NASA subject matter experts, so the elements noted above should be considered examples, not definitive NASA ethical AI principles, genealogy, etc. Generating a definitive AI ethics framework for an organization as diverse as NASA would require far more discussion, debate, review, etc. However, the workshop provided valuable insight into mechanisms and processes for quantifying AI ethical qualities.

Artificial Intelligence↗

Disaster risk and artificial intelligence: A framework to characterize conceptual synergies and future opportunities

Artificial intelligence (AI) methods have revolutionized and redefined the landscape of data analysis in business, healthcare, and technology. These methods have innovated the applied mathematics, computer science, and engineering fields and are showing considerable potential for risk science, especially in the disaster risk domain. The disaster risk field has yet to define itself as a necessary application domain for AI implementation by defining how to responsibly balance AI and disaster risk. (1) How is AI being used for disaster risk applications; and how are these applications addressing the principles and assumptions of risk science, (2) What are the benefits of AI being used for risk applications; and what are the benefits of applying risk principles and assumptions for AI-based applications, (3) What are the synergies between AI and risk science applications, and (4) What are the characteristics of effective use of fundamental risk principles and assumptions for AI-based applications? This study develops and disseminates an online survey questionnaire that leverages expertise from risk and AI professionals to identify the most important characteristics related to AI and risk, then presents a framework for gauging how AI and disaster risk can be balanced. This study is the first to develop a classification system for applying risk principles for AI-based applications. This classification contributes to understanding of AI and risk by exploring how AI can be used to manage risk, how AI methods introduce new or additional risk, and whether fundamental risk principles and assumptions are sufficient for AI-based applications.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Artificial Intelligence for Natural Gas Utilities: A Primer

Modern natural gas utilities face numerous challenges and competing priorities from various stakeholders. Policymakers, customers, and advocacy groups want to see gas utilities improve performance on safety, reliability, resilience, affordability, and environmental stewardship. State utility regulators — public utility commissions — are responsible for overseeing utility performance, ensuring that ratepayer funds are being spent in the public interest, and aligning utility goals with public goals. The use of new technologies is critical to enabling cost-effective performance on these attributes. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a widely used term among utilities and regulators, but the term means different things to different stakeholders, and it is often used to describe data analytics approaches that fall short of the formal definition of AI, which is: “…the ability of a machine to receive inputs and produce a behavior or reaction similar to that of an intelligent human being.” AI (and related tools, techniques, and technologies) can help utilities solve current and emerging challenges. By combining customer and system data with analytical tools and technologies, AI can augment human decision-makers by assisting in identifying problems and events before they occur, enabling resources to be more efficiently directed across utility infrastructure. The intended primary audience for this primer is state regulators, although utilities and other stakeholders might also find it useful and relevant to improve their awareness of AI. The objectives of this primer are to: (a) offer a set of broadly applicable definitions for AI and related terms, allowing regulators, utilities, and other stakeholders to speak the same language; (b) discuss how AI is currently being implemented in the gas utility sector; and (c) understand the challenges affecting AI solutions and how tools might be implemented in the future. This primer fits within NARUC’s goals of providing impartial information to improve the ability of public utility commissions to regulate in the public interest. As such, this primer does not seek to recommend AI over any other investment, nor does it endorse any particular vendor, product, or approach. It does seek to prepare state regulators to oversee AI investments by sharing information about the current landscape of commercially available tools. To these ends, the primer is organized as follows: Section I discusses the current environment in which natural gas utilities operate and how AI, when thoughtfully designed and implemented, can enable utilities to achieve performance goals; Section II offers definitions of AI and related terms within the data analytics discipline; Section III provides three current opportunities for which AI can offer solutions: replacing aging gas distribution infrastructure, preventing excavator damage to gas distribution infrastructure, and improving energy efficiency programs. This section discusses each problem statement in detail. Second, Section III includes a discussion of how costs and benefits of investments to solve each problem are measured. And third, this section offers real-world examples of utility implementation of AI solutions; Section IV discusses challenges with implementing AI, both from the perspective of utilities and regulators; Section V suggests areas in which AI could feasibly be implemented in the near future; Finally, Section VI offers concluding thoughts and areas for further research.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Safety in Artificial Intelligence: Challenges and Opportunities for the U.S. National Labs and Beyond

This report discusses the importance of the critical and underexplored topic of artificial intelligence (AI) safety, as highlighted during the “Strategy Alignment on AI Safety” workshop convened at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in April 2024. Through a summary of keynote talks, panel discussions, and breakout sessions, world-leading AI safety experts from academic, industry, national labs, and government agencies clearly agree on the need for and importance of large-scale investments for research and capabilities in AI safety. With the field innovating at unprecedented rates, there is increasing urgency to develop novel evaluation methodologies that allow full considerations of risks/threats of AI technologies in different domains. Quantitative metrics and effective methodologies that can evaluate and audit the “safeness” of how a given AI technology is trained, deployed, or regulated are, at best, nascent for certain scenarios or, more commonly, nonexistent. This maturation gap presents the possibility of serious threats to national security, and further inaction may have serious consequences. Additionally, the gap between the public’s and research community’s perceptions of AI risks/rewards is significant. While numerous voices from the AI community have expressed concern that the risks could be so high that future AI systems could inflict extinction-level damage to humanity if deployed incorrectly, the public largely is aware only of risk in low-impact scenarios. This discrepancy highlights the crucial need for researchers to articulate to governmental bodies what, why, and when various AI risks matter as part of motivating funding requests. Thus, the call to action for this community is to pursue AI safety as a “Big Science” project on a scale comparable to the Manhattan Project. High risks and high payoffs are on the table, but safe AI is a fast-moving target, and large-scale investments are needed to guide development of this technology in a responsible way. We highlight the need for a multilayered solution combining the development of new methods and algorithmic approaches to mitigate threats with an active participation of the government(s) in setting high industry standards and regulations based on state-of-the-art technology. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories have served as leading institutions for scientific innovation in the U.S. for more than 70 years. Drawing on their expertise in the AI community and their history of safeguarding critical and sensitive information, and as we look to the future, national labs are the best choice for evaluating and safeguarding AI technologies.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Considerations regarding the Use of Computer Vision Machine Learning in Safety-Related or Risk-Significant Applications in Nuclear Power Plants

With the advancements made to date in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), significant potential exists to utilize AI capabilities for nuclear power plant (NPP) applications. AI can replicate human decision making and it is usually faster and more accurate than humans. For implementations that impact critical NPP applications (e.g., safety-related or non-safety systems that potentially affect overall plant risk), a deeper safety analysis of the AI methods is necessary. AI applied to NPP operations could resemble the use of digital I&C (DI&C) because such applications involve digital computer hardware and custom-designed software that input plant data, execute complex software algorithms, and output the results to a system or licensed human operator to potentially provoke an action. For AI methods to be compliant with current safety requirements for DI&C, AI compatibility must be evaluated, and AI-related gaps may exist that prevent the prompt deployment of AI in NPPs. This effort aims to evaluate how example AI technologies align with the DI&C safety framework, and discusses how they could be analyzed, modeled, tested, and validated in a manner similar to typical DI&C technologies. Because AI is a broad field that encompasses areas such as machine learning (ML), natural language processing, and computer vision, this research focused on a subset of methods categorized as the computer vision ML (CVML) methods. This report explores two CVML use cases, gauge reading and fire watch, considered relevant to the DI&C standards, as they could play a safety-critical role. For the gauge reading use case, a CVML-enabled technology that can read gauges at oblique angles is utilized. For the fire watch use case, a CVML-enabled technology is utilized that migrates fire watch from a manual (human) approach to automated fire detection. These use cases are mainly intended to give context to the CVML system discussion. This effort assumes the worst-case scenario, with the CVML system being used to replace a safety-related or risk-significant system, thus requiring evaluation. Evaluating CVML against most of the relevant safety requirements for DI&C yielded several CVML-specific considerations due to the uniqueness of its characteristics in comparison with typical DI&C systems. For example, CVML models often employ commonly used (open-source) datasets, and it is not always possible to determine the level of overlap among open-source datasets. Therefore, the independence of the developed CVML models when demonstrating diversity is questionable, therefore creating vulnerability to common cause failure (CCF). The design verification process is also impacted since the data overlap could result in overestimation of the software validation and verification (V&V) performance results. Section 2 of this report evaluates a list of the identified CVML-specific characteristics and discusses the resulting considerations and potential solutions in the context of each referenced requirement. A summation is provided in Section 3. This report is not to be used as a guideline. It was developed to identify and consider issues in the implementation of ML technologies used to augment activities that may have a bearing on plant operation. The report draws parallels to the use of DI&C technologies, for which many standards are available to guide their use in nuclear plant operation. It considers the technologies and some of the potential implications of their use in safety-related applications but is not intended to address regulatory or licensing related issues.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗