Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Work Function”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2017

Sequestration of U(VI) from Acidic, Alkaline, and High Ionic-Strength Aqueous Media by Functionalized Magnetic Mesoporous Silica Nanoparticles: Capacity and Binding Mechanisms

Uranium(VI) exhibits little adsorption onto sediment minerals in acidic, alkaline or high ionic-strength aqueous media that often occur in U mining or contaminated sites, which makes U(VI) very mobile and difficult to sequester. In this work, magnetic mesoporous silica nanoparticles (MMSNs) were functionalized with several organic ligands. The functionalized MMSNs were highly effective and had large binding capacity for U sequestration from high salt water (HSW) simulant (54 mg U/g sorbent). The functionalized MMSNs, after U exposure in HSW simulant, pH 3.5 and 9.6 artificial groundwater (AGW), were characterized by a host of spectroscopic methods. Among the key novel findings in this work was that in the HSW simulant or high pH AGW, the dominant U species bound to the functionalized MMSNs were uranyl or uranyl hydroxide, rather than uranyl carbonates as expected. The surface functional groups appear to be out-competing the carbonate ligands associated with the aqueous U species. The uranyl-like species were bound with N ligand as η 2 bound motifs or phosphonate ligand as a monodentate, as well as on tetrahedral Si sites as an edge-sharing bidentate. Conclusively, the N and phosphonate ligand-functionalized MMSNs hold promise as effective sorbents for sequestering U from acidic, alkaline or high ionic-strength contaminated aqueous media.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2019

Microbial Ecology Toy Library

These are miscellaneous utility functions that I've developed and found useful in working with sequencing counts. Purpose: To collect often reused procedures in one open source location that can be shared and worked on publicly, and perhaps contributed back to other open source projects. Function: Adds, divides, filters, summarizes tables of counts. Capabilities: Currently, the main capability is to reformat count tables for use with the ALDEx2 package.

Herrera, AramAvila↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Experimental realization of Feynman’s ratchet

Feynman's ratchet is a microscopic machine in contact with two heat reservoirs, at temperatures T A and T B , that was proposed by Richard Feynman to illustrate the second law of thermodynamics. In equilibrium (T A = T B ), thermal fluctuations prevent the ratchet from generating directed motion. When the ratchet is maintained away from equilibrium by a temperature difference (T A ≠T B ), it can operate as a heat engine, rectifying thermal fluctuations to perform work. While it has attracted much interest, the operation of Feynman's ratchet as a heat engine has not been realized experimentally, due to technical challenges. In this work, we realize Feynman's ratchet with a colloidal particle in a one dimensional optical trap in contact with two heat reservoirs: one is the surrounding water, while the effect of the other reservoir is generated by a novel feedback mechanism, using the Metropolis algorithm to impose detailed balance. We verify that the system does not produce work when T A = T B , and that it becomes a microscopic heat engine when T A ≠T B . We analyze work, heat and entropy production as functions of the temperature difference and external load. As a result, our experimental realization of Feynman's ratchet and the Metropolis algorithm can also be used to study the thermodynamics of feedback control and information processing, the working mechanism of molecular motors, and controllable particle transportation.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Coupled Cluster Green's function formulations based on the effective Hamiltonians

In this work, we demonstrate that the effective Hamiltonians obtained with the downfolding procedure based on double unitary coupled cluster (DUCC) ansatz can be used in the context of Green’s function coupled cluster (GFCC) formalism to calculate spectral functions of molecular systems. This combined approach (DUCC-GFCC) provides a significant reduction of numerical effort and good agreement with the corresponding all-orbital GFCC methods in energy windows that are consistent with the choice of active space. These features are demonstrated on the example of two benchmark systems: H 2 O and N 2 , where DUCC-GFCC calculations were performed for active spaces of various sizes.

74 ATOMIC AND MOLECULAR PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Heisenberg-scaling measurement protocol for analytic functions with quantum sensor networks

Here we generalize past work on quantum sensor networks to show that, for d input parameters, entanglement can yield a factor O(d) improvement in mean-squared error when estimating an analytic function of these parameters. We show that the protocol is optimal for qubit sensors, and we conjecture an optimal protocol for photons passing through interferometers. Our protocol is also applicable to continuous variable measurements, such as one quadrature of a field operator. We outline a few potential applications, including calibration of laser operations in trapped ion quantum computing.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2025

Metagenome-assembled genomes from topsoils along a hillslope water gradient across early snowmelt to late summer in East River, CO

Drought is changing the American Mountain West at unprecedented rates with unknown consequences to soil microbiome composition and function. As a part of LBNL Watershed Science Focus Area (SFA), we investigated shifts in microbial community and transcriptional activity on a subalpine conifer-meadow transition zone throughout the summer of 2023 as soil dried down. This work took place in Crested Butte, CO on Snodgrass mountain, using a proxy for drought conditions.Here we present metagenome assembled genomes (MAGs) for the bacterial and archaeal community at 0-10cm from three sites along a hillslope water gradient across five timepoints from early snowmelt to late summer. 42 metagenomes were sequenced at Joint Genome Institute (JGI) and can be found under the JGI GOLD (Genomes Online Database) sequencing project Gs0166660. Metagenomes were assembled through an inhouse pipeline (see methods), binned using four autobinners (concoct, maxbin2, metabat2, and vamb) and consolidated using dastool. The consolidated bins from all metagenomes were pooled, filtered by completeness (>70%) and contamination (<10%), and dereplicated at 95% ANI using drep. This dataset (1) a zip file of 157 MAGs (as fasta files, Gs0166660_bins_tar.gz), (2) sample metadata file with sample IGSNs (International Generic Sample Numbers) (samples.csv), (3) bounding box coordinates for the sampled locations (Gs0166660.kml), (4) metagenome assembly and coassembly metadata file listing IMG/M (Integrated Microbial Genomes/Metagenomes) metagenome accessions linking samples to metagenomes (EastRiver_Drought_ESSDive_Metadata.csv), (5) location metadata file (locations.csv), (6) file-level metadata file (flmd.csv) and (7) data dictionary (dd.csv) file.This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Dissection of Grass Cell Wall Lignin Formation and their Associated Dirigent Protein

This Final Report describes work underway to establish why monocot (e.g. grasses) lignins are more readily (bio)degradable than their woody gymnosperm, angiosperm, and fern counterparts. Our hypothesis is that monocot specific dirigent protein (DP) sub-families are wholly or partly involved in generating these more readily (bio)degradable lignins. Three approaches are underway: metabolomics and lignin analyses of stem and leaf tissues of the grass, Brachypodium; Crispr/Cas9 gene editing of monocot specific DP sub-families in this species, and recombinant protein expression of Brachypodium’s 44 DPs. Metabolomic and lignin analyses were completed for 6 and 8 week old Brachypodium in order to establish the molecular diversity of its largely phenolic metabolites: Crispr/Cas9 gene editing has also been done on specific DPs known to be expressed in lignifying stems, and T 2 generation plant lines are now being generated, prior to establishing the effects on lignin composition and content; in the recombinant DP work (which addresses establishing the biochemical function of the monocot specific DPs and other DPOs as needed), all 44 constructs have been generated (in collaboration with DOE JGI) and are being systematically expressed in either E. coli or yeast (Pichia sp.) for future studies. Future work will be directed towards bringing the current studies to completion, and in establishing the biochemical basis as to how these more readily (bio)degradable lignins are generated/assembled.

(bio)degradability↗
DOE OSTI2024

Engineered mRNA–ribosome fusions for facile biosynthesis of selenoproteins

Ribosomes are often used in synthetic biology as a tool to produce desired proteins with enhanced properties or entirely new functions. However, repurposing ribosomes for producing designer proteins is challenging due to the limited number of engineering solutions available to alter the natural activity of these enzymes. In this study, we advance ribosome engineering by describing a novel strategy based on functional fusions of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) with messenger RNA (mRNA). Specifically, we create an mRNA–ribosome fusion called RiboU, where the 16S rRNA is covalently attached to selenocysteine insertion sequence (SECIS), a regulatory RNA element found in mRNAs encoding selenoproteins. When SECIS sequences are present in natural mRNAs, they instruct ribosomes to decode UGA codons as selenocysteine (Sec, U) codons instead of interpreting them as stop codons. This enables ribosomes to insert Sec into the growing polypeptide chain at the appropriate site. Our work demonstrates that the SECIS sequence maintains its functionality even when inserted into the ribosome structure. As a result, the engineered ribosomes RiboU interpret UAG codons as Sec codons, allowing easy and site-specific insertion of Sec in a protein of interest with no further modification to the natural machinery of protein synthesis. To validate this approach, we use RiboU ribosomes to produce three functional target selenoproteins in Escherichia coli by site-specifically inserting Sec into the proteins’ active sites. Overall, our work demonstrates the feasibility of creating functional mRNA–rRNA fusions as a strategy for ribosome engineering, providing a novel tool for producing Sec-containing proteins in live bacterial cells.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

High‐Temperature Single‐Photon Emission From Covalently Functionalized van der Waals Heterostructures

Two-dimensional (2D) transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) such as tungsten diselenide (WSe 2 ) are attractive nanomaterials for quantum information applications due to single-photon emission (SPE) from intrinsic atomic defects. Defect and strain engineering techniques have been developed to produce high purity, deterministically placed SPE in WSe 2 . However, a major challenge in the application of these techniques is the low temperature required to observe defect-bound TMD exciton emission, typically limiting SPE to T < 30 K. SPE at higher temperatures either loses purity or requires integration into complex devices such as optical cavities. Here, 2D heterostructure engineering and molecular functionalization are combined to achieve high purity (>90%) SPE in strained WSe 2 persisting to over T = 90 K. Covalent diazonium functionalization of graphite in layered WSe 2 /graphite heterostructures maintains high purity up to T = 90 K and single-photon source integrity up to T = 115 K. This method preserves the best qualities of SPE from WSe 2 while increasing working temperature to more than three times the typical range. This work demonstrates the versatility of surface functionalization and heterostructure design to synergistically improve the properties of quantum emission and offers new insights into the phenomenon of SPE from 2D materials.

2D materials↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nonprecious Single Atom Catalyst for Methane Pyrolysis

The development of a suitable catalytic system for methane pyrolysis reactions requires a detailed investigation of the activation energy of C-H bonds on catalysts, as well as their stability against sintering and coke formation. In this work, both single-metal Ni atoms and small clusters of Ni atoms deposited on titanium nitride (TiN) plasmonic nanoparticles were characterized for the C-H bond activation of a methane pyrolysis reaction using ab initio spin-polarized density functional theory (DFT) calculations. The present work shows the complete reaction pathway, including energy barriers for C-H bond activation and dehydrogenated fragments, during the methane pyrolysis reaction on catalytic systems. Interestingly, the C-H bond activation barriers were low for both Ni single-atom and Ni-clusters, showing the energy barriers of ~1.10 eV and ~0.88 eV, respectively. Additionally, single-atom Ni-TiN showed weaker binding to adsorbates, and a net endothermic reaction pathway indicated that the single-atom Ni-TiN was expected to resist coke formation on its surface. However, these Ni single-atom catalysts can sinter, aggregate into a small cluster, and form a coke layer from the highly exothermic reaction pathway that the cluster takes despite the facile reaction pathway.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2022

DFT-FE 1.0: A massively parallel hybrid CPU-GPU density functional theory code using finite-element discretization

In this work, we present DFT-FE 1.0, building on DFT-FE 0.6 [Comput. Phys. Commun. 246, 106853 (2020)], to conduct fast and accurate large-scale density functional theory (DFT) calculations (reaching ~ 100,000 electrons) on both many-core CPU and hybrid CPU-GPU computing architectures. This work involves improvements in the real-space formulation—via an improved treatment of the electrostatic interactions that substantially enhances the computational efficiency—as well high-performance computing aspects, including the GPU acceleration of all the key compute kernels in DFT-FE. We demonstrate the accuracy by comparing the ground-state energies, ionic forces and cell stresses on a wide-range of benchmark systems against those obtained from widely used DFT codes. Further, we demonstrate the numerical efficiency of our implementation, which yields ~ 20× CPU-GPU speed-up by using GPU acceleration on hybrid CPU-GPU nodes. Notably, owing to the parallel-scaling of the GPU implementation, we obtain wall-times of 80–140 seconds for full ground-state calculations, with stringent accuracy, on benchmark systems containing ~ 6, 000 – 15,000 electrons.

pseudopotential↗
DOE OSTI2024

Ultrafast Formation of Charge Transfer Trions at Molecular‐Functionalized 2D MoS 2 Interfaces

Abstract In this work, we investigate trion dynamics occurring at the heterojunction between organometallic molecules and a monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide (TMD) with transient electronic sum frequency generation (tr‐ESFG) spectroscopy. By pumping at 2.4 eV with laser pulses, we have observed an ultrafast hole transfer, succeeded by the emergence of charge‐transfer trions. This observation is facilitated by the cancellation of ground state bleach and stimulated emission signals due to their opposite phases, making tr‐ESFG especially sensitive to the trion formation dynamics. The presence of charge‐transfer trion at molecular functionalized TMD monolayers suggests the potential for engineering the local electronic structures and dynamics of specific locations on TMDs and offers a potential for transferring unique electronic attributes of TMD to the molecular layers.

Jing, Yuancheng↗
DOE OSTI2026

Vegetation classification map and covariates associated with NEON AOP survey, East River, CO 2018

This package includes geospatial data layers developed to investigate how environmental gradients—specifically topography and near-surface soil properties—drive the spatial arrangement of dominant plant communities in mountainous watersheds. The geospatial products, which support the analysis of these ecological relationships, are derived from airborne hyperspectral and LiDAR datasets acquired by the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) Airborne Observation Platform (AOP), in conjunction with an extensive ground field campaign conducted in summer 2018. This work is part of the DOE Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA) and features geospatial datasets developed based on observations and ground data collected at East River, Colorado, in collaboration with the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) Airborne Observation Platform (AOP) survey in June 2018. Classification Map: - Classification Map (PNG, GeoTIFF): Derived from hyperspectral and LiDAR airborne data using a machine learning approach. - Class Code Mapper (CSV): Associates pixel values with corresponding vegetation/non-vegetation classes. - Classification Reference Data (CSV): Reference data used in the machine learning procedure. LiDAR-Derived Products: - Topographical Metrics (GeoTIFFs): Elevation, slope, curvature, TWI, TPI, solar insolation, and canopy height model (CHM), smoothed with a 5x5 pixel window. Vegetation Indices: - GeoTIFFs of NDVI, NDNI, NDWI: Vegetation indices derived from hyperspectral data. Urban Masks: - Urban Mask (GeoTIFF): Applied to the mapping to convert bare soil classes to urban classes. Software Compatibility: GeoTIFFs: Can be visualized with GIS software or libraries that support GeoTIFF images. CSV Files: Can be opened with any software that handles comma-separated values. The FLMD file provides details and links to the source datasets used to derive the products. The manuscript (in the Method session) provides details on how each product was derived. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Update on 2026-03-25: Since the original dataset publication date of 02/28/2020, this package has a new classification map derived by an improved methodology. This update also includes additional ground data that improved the representation of some of the communities. See the methods for further details on what has changed between versions.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2025

Elucidating Gas Reduction Effects of Organosilicon Additives in Lithium-Ion Batteries

Lithium-ion batteries (LIBs) with nonaqueous liquid electrolytes are prone to gas generation at elevated voltages and temperatures, degrading battery performance and posing serious safety risks. Organosilicon (OS) additives are an emerging candidate solution for gassing problems in LIBs, but a detailed understanding of their functional mechanisms remains elusive. In this work, we present a combined computational and experimental study to elucidate the gasreducing effects of OS additives. Cell volume measurements and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry reveal that OS additives can substantially reduce gas evolution in LIBs, particularly CO 2 regardless of source. Through density functional theory calculations, we identify multiple plausible pathways for CO 2 evolution, including (1) nucleophile-induced ring-opening of ethylene carbonate (EC) and the subsequent electro-oxidation and (2) direct electro-oxidation of lithium carbonate (Li 2 CO 3 ). Correspondingly, we find that OS additives function via two primary mechanisms: (1) scavenging of nucleophiles such as superoxide (O 2 •– ), peroxide (O 2 2– ), and carbonate ion (CO 3 2– ); (2) oligomerization with ethylene carbonate oxide ion and ethylene dicarbonate ion. Moreover, we discover that OS additives possess strong lithium coordination affinity, which helps further reduce the nucleophilic reaction energies and hence increases their nucleophile-scavenging efficiency. Finally, we provide a mechanistic interpretation for the enhanced gasreduction effects observed with fluorinated OS compounds, corroborated by surface analysis results from X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. Our study offers the first molecular-level insights into how OS additives contribute to reduced gas formation in LIBs, paving the way for improved safety and performance of LIBs.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2020

Aryl Diazonium-Assisted Amidoximation of MXene for Boosting Water Stability and Uranyl Sequestration via Electrochemical Sorption

Despite that two-dimensional transition metal carbides and carbonitrides (MXenes) are burgeoning candidates for remediation of environmental pollutants, the construction of robust functionalized MXene nanosheets with a high affinity for target heavy metal ions and radionuclides remains a challenge. Here we report the successful placement of amidoxime chelating groups on Ti 3 C 2 T x MXene surface by diazonium salt grafting. The introduction of amidoxime functional groups significantly enhances the selectivity of Ti 3 C 2 T x nanosheets for uranyl ions and also greatly improves their stability in aqueous solution, enabling efficient, rapid, and recyclable uranium extraction from aqueous solutions containing competitive metal ions. Benefiting from the excellent conductivity of MXenes, the amidoxime functionalized Ti 3 C 2 T x nanosheets show outstanding electrochemical performance such that when loaded on carbon cloth the application of an electric field increases the uranium adsorption capacity from 294 to 626 mg/g, outperforming all organic electrochemical sorption materials reported previously. Finally, the present work provides an effective strategy to functionalize MXene nanosheets with fundamental implications for the design of MXene-based selective electrosorption electrode materials.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗