Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Concurrent Verification”

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.

102 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2011

Base Flow Investigation of the Apollo AS-202 Command Module

In recent years, both Europe and the US are developing hypersonic research and operational vehicles. These include (re)entry capsules (both ballistic and lifting) and lifting bodies such as ExoMars, EXPERT, ARV, CEV and IXV. The research programs are meant to enable technology and engineering capabilities to support during the next decade the development of affordable (possibly reusable) space transportation systems as well as hypersonic weapons systems for time critical targets. These programs have a broad range of goals, ranging from the qualification of thermal protection systems, the assessment of RCS performances, the development of GNC algorithms, to the full demonstration of the performance and operability of the integrated vehicles. Since the aerothermodynamic characteristics influence nearly all elements of the vehicle design, the accurate prediction of the aerothermal environment is a prerequisite for the design of efficient hypersonic systems. Significant uncertainties in the prediction of the hypersonic aerodynamic and the aerothermal loads can lead to conservative margins in the design of the vehicle including its Outer Mould Line (OML), thermal protection system, structure, and required control system robustness. The current level of aerothermal prediction uncertainties results therefore in reduced vehicle performances (e.g., sub-optimal payload to mass ratio, increased operational constraints). On the other hand, present computational capabilities enable the simulation of three dimensional flow fields with complex thermo-chemical models over complete trajectories and ease the validation of these tools by, e.g., reconstruction of detailed wind tunnel tests performed under identified and controlled conditions (flow properties and vehicle attitude in particular). These controlled conditions are typically difficult to achieve when performing in flight measurements which in turn results in large associated measurement uncertainties. Similar problems arise when attempting to rebuild measurements performed in "hot" ground facilities, where the difficulty level is increased by the addition of the free-flow characterization itself. The implementation of ever more sophisticated thermochemical models is no obvious cure to the aforementioned problems since their effect is often overwhelmed by the large measurement uncertainties incurred in both flight and ground high enthalpy facilities. Concurrent to the previous considerations, a major contributor to the overall vehicle mass of re-entry vehicles is the afterbody thermal protection system. This is due to the large acreage (equal or bigger than that of the forebody) to be protected. The present predictive capabilities for base flows are comparatively lower than those for windward flowfields and offer therefore a substantial potential for improving the design of future re-entry vehicles. To that end, it is essential to address the accuracy of high fidelity CFD tools exercised in the US and EU, which motivates a thorough investigation of the present status of hypersonic flight afterbody heating. This paper addresses the predictive capabilities of after body flow fields of re-entry vehicles investigated in the frame of the NATO/RTO - RTG-043 Task Group and is structured as follows: First, the verification of base flow topologies on the basis of available wind-tunnel results performed under controlled supersonic conditions (i.e., cold flows devoid of reactive effects) is performed. Such tests address the detailed characterization of the base flow with particular emphasis on separation/reattachment and their relation to Mach number effects. The tests have been performed on an Apollo-like re-entry capsule configuration. Second, the tools validated in the frame of the previous effort are exercised and appraised against flight-test data collected during the Apollo AS-202 re-entry.

Walpot, Louis M. G.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Status of the Olympus experiment at CRC

The status of the Olympus Propagation Experiment of the Communications Research Centre in Ottawa, Canada, is briefly summarized. Path attenuation measurements at multiple frequencies correlated with concurrent dual polarized radar data provide a unique method to investigate propagation effects. An experiment of this type is being implemented by the Communications Research Centre (CRC) on the grounds of the National Research Council of Canada in Ottawa. Beacon receivers monitor signals from the Olympus satellite at 12.5, 19.77, and 29.66 GHz at a path elevation angle of 14.2 deg. Sky noise radiometers operating near the same frequencies and pointed along the same path provide additional propagation information. A colocated dual-polarized 9.6-GHz radar probes the precipitation state on the path, permitting identification of precipitation regimes that cause the observed impairments. The Olympus experiment configuration is displayed pictorially. Information on path propagation phenomena can be deduced by correlating the radar, beacon, and sky noise data. Melting layer effects and propagation losses for higher time percentages are prime interests. Data collected by Diversitel Communications during equipment verification tests are presented.

Rogers, David V.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Development of integrated screening, cultivar optimization, and verification research (DISCOVR): A coordinated research-driven approach to improve microalgal productivity, composition, and culture stability for commercially viable biofuels production

To address major knowledge gaps and barriers to the commercial development of algal biomass for biofuels and co-products, a collaborative consortium, Development of Integrated Screening, Cultivar Optimization, and Verification Research (DISCOVR), was established in 2016. Funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO), this consortium constitutes a partnership between four DOE national laboratories - Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) - and the Arizona Center for Algae Technology and Innovation (AzCATI) at Arizona State University. To address the barriers of strain selection for achieving high seasonal productivities with a suitable composition and culture resilience, a tiered strain down-selection pipeline is implemented. At Tier I, the temperature and salinity tolerance of strains is determined in flask cultures; at Tier II, the areal biomass productivity and composition is determined in climate-simulation photobioreactors; at Tier III, the productivity and culture stability are determined in outdoor raceways. The top performing strains move forward to long-term testing at the algae testbed site at AzCATI to generate annual biomass productivity data. Concurrent to the strain down-selection in the DISCOVR pipeline, hypotheses for increasing biomass productivity, shifting biomass composition to enhance intrinsic value, and improving culture stability and resistance to pests are also tested. Techno-economic analyses are carried out to determine whether promising findings from laboratory studies or proposed modifications in outdoor pond cultivation conditions translate into reductions in the minimum biomass selling price (MBSP). Notably, in the three years following the launch of DISCOVR, annual biomass productivity has increased from 11.7 to 17.6 g m -2 day -1 , resulting in an MBSP decrease from 824 to 611 $ ton -1 .

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
NASA NTRS2021

T0TEM - T0 Test Evaluation Module Development and Verification

Transition temperature testing of ferritic steels evaluates the ductile to brittle transition temperature, where the behavior of the steel changes from controlled ductile tearing to uncontrollable brittle fracture. This testing is governed by ASTM (American Society of Testing and Materials) E1921 standard. The calculations and plots required by this standard are iterative in nature and require significant effort to produce by standard hand calculations. In addition to analysis of a complete data set, intermediate analysis during testing is beneficial to determine optimal test temperatures. Given the exhaustive nature of calculating the transition temperature, being able to quickly update target temperatures is a significant benefit to not only the quality of tests, but the number of required tests as well. T0 Test Evaluation Module (T0TEM) v1.5 is a software application created under the Layered Pressure Vessel (LPV) certification effort. To reduce the analysis time of transition temperature test data sets producedfor this effort, T0TEM was created to calculate the E1921 Master Curve along with all required data and validity checks. By creating this program, hundreds of hours of analysis time were saved. In addition, the creation of a standard program provided a significant improvement in the consistency with which results were reported. T0TEM also calculates the results and plots required for the E1921 inhomogeneity annex to determine whether a material behaves in a homogenous manner. This program was created by Levi Shelton and Cameron Bosley at NASA, with input and review from the E1921 committee. The results generated by T0TEM were compared to the validation data sets provided by ASTM with good concurrence. ASTM committee members have reviewed and applied T0TEM to other data sets with satisfactory results. T0TEM was originally released to the NASA Software Repository and publicly via SourceForge in May of 2020. Version 1.5 was released in April of 2021 with minor functionality updates and additional statistical analysis methods.

Levi Shelton↗
NASA NTRS2003

Experimental Evaluation of Verification and Validation Tools on Martian Rover Software

We report on a study to determine the maturity of different verification and validation technologies (V&V) on a representative example of NASA flight software. The study consisted of a controlled experiment where three technologies (static analysis, runtime analysis and model checking) were compared to traditional testing with respect to their ability to find seeded errors in a prototype Mars Rover. What makes this study unique is that it is the first (to the best of our knowledge) to do a controlled experiment to compare formal methods based tools to testing on a realistic industrial-size example where the emphasis was on collecting as much data on the performance of the tools and the participants as possible. The paper includes a description of the Rover code that was analyzed, the tools used as well as a detailed description of the experimental setup and the results. Due to the complexity of setting up the experiment, our results can not be generalized, but we believe it can still serve as a valuable point of reference for future studies of this kind. It did confirm the belief we had that advanced tools can outperform testing when trying to locate concurrency errors. Furthermore the results of the experiment inspired a novel framework for testing the next generation of the Rover.

Brat, Guillaume↗
NASA NTRS2009

Ares I-X Roll Control System Development

Project Managers often face challenging technical, schedule and budget issues. This presentation will explore how the Ares I-X Roll Control System Integrated Product Team (IPT) mitigated challenges such as concurrent engineering requirements and environments and evolving program processes, while successfully managing an aggressive project schedule and tight budget. IPT challenges also included communications and negotiations among inter- and intra-government agencies, including the US Air Force, NASA/MSFC Propulsion Engineering, LaRC, GRC, KSC, WSTF, and the Constellation Program. In order to successfully meet these challenges it was essential that the IPT define those items that most affected the schedule critical path, define early mitigation strategies to reduce technical, schedule, and budget risks, and maintain the end-product focus of an "unmanned test flight" context for the flight hardware. The makeup of the IPT and how it would function were also important considerations. The IPT consisted of NASA/MSFC (project management, engineering, and safety/quality) and contractors (Teledyne Brown Engineering and Pratt and Whitney Rocketdyne, who supplied heritage hardware experience). The early decision to have a small focused IPT working "badgelessly" across functional lines to eliminate functional stove-piping allowed for many more tasks to be done by fewer people. It also enhanced a sense of ownership of the products, while still being able to revert back to traditional roles in order to provide the required technical independence in design reviews and verification closures. This presentation will highlight several prominent issues and discuss how they were mitigated and the resulting Lessons Learned that might benefit other projects.

Unger, Ronald J.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Locating Anomalies in Complex Data Sets Using Visualization and Simulation

The research goals are to create a simulation framework that can accept any combination of models written at the gate or behavioral level. The framework provides the ability to fault simulate and create scenarios of experiments using concurrent simulation. In order to meet these goals we have had to fulfill the following requirements. The ability to accept models written in VHDL, Verilog or the C languages. The ability to propagate faults through any model type. The ability to create experiment scenarios efficiently without generating every possible combination of variables. The ability to accept adversity of fault models beyond the single stuck-at model. Major development has been done to develop a parser that can accept models written in various languages. This work has generated considerable attention from other universities and industry for its flexibility and usefulness. The parser uses LEXX and YACC to parse Verilog and C. We have also utilized our industrial partnership with Alternative System's Inc. to import vhdl into our simulator. For multilevel simulation, we needed to modify the simulator architecture to accept models that contained multiple outputs. This enabled us to accept behavioral components. The next major accomplishment was the addition of "functional fault models". Functional fault models change the behavior of a gate or model. For example, a bridging fault can make an OR gate behave like an AND gate. This has applications beyond fault simulation. This modeling flexibility will make the simulator more useful for doing verification and model comparison. For instance, two or more versions of an ALU can be comparatively simulated in a single execution. The results will show where and how the models differed so that the performance and correctness of the models may be evaluated. A considerable amount of time has been dedicated to validating the simulator performance on larger models provided by industry and other universities.

Panetta, Karen↗
NASA NTRS2008

Web Based Tool for Mission Operations Scenarios

A conventional practice for spaceflight projects is to document scenarios in a monolithic Operations Concept document. Such documents can be hundreds of pages long and may require laborious updates. Software development practice utilizes scenarios in the form of smaller, individual use cases, which are often structured and managed using UML. We have developed a process and a web-based scenario tool that utilizes a similar philosophy of smaller, more compact scenarios (but avoids the formality of UML). The need for a scenario process and tool became apparent during the authors' work on a large astrophysics mission. It was noted that every phase of the Mission (e.g., formulation, design, verification and validation, and operations) looked back to scenarios to assess completeness of requirements and design. It was also noted that terminology needed to be clarified and structured to assure communication across all levels of the project. Attempts to manage, communicate, and evolve scenarios at all levels of a project using conventional tools (e.g., Excel) and methods (Scenario Working Group meetings) were not effective given limitations on budget and staffing. The objective of this paper is to document the scenario process and tool created to offer projects a low-cost capability to create, communicate, manage, and evolve scenarios throughout project development. The process and tool have the further benefit of allowing the association of requirements with particular scenarios, establishing and viewing relationships between higher- and lower-level scenarios, and the ability to place all scenarios in a shared context. The resulting structured set of scenarios is widely visible (using a web browser), easily updated, and can be searched according to various criteria including the level (e.g., Project, System, and Team) and Mission Phase. Scenarios are maintained in a web-accessible environment that provides a structured set of scenario fields and allows for maximum visibility across the project. One key aspect is that the tool was built for a scenario process that accounts for stakeholder input, review, comment, and concurrence. By creating well-designed opportunities for stakeholder input and concurrence and by making the scenario content easily accessible to all project personnel, we maximize the opportunities for stakeholders to both understand and agree on the concepts for how their mission is to be carried out.

Boyles, Carole A.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗
NASA NTRS2016

S&MA Internship to Support Orion and the European Service Module

As a University Space Research Association (USRA) intern for NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) during the summer 2016 work term, I worked on three main projects for the Space Exploration Division (NC) of the Safety and Mission Assurance (S&MA) Directorate. I worked on all three projects concurrently. One of the projects involved facilitating the status and closure of technical actions that were created during European Service Module (ESM) safety reviews by the MPCV Safety & Engineering Review Panel (MSERP). The two main duties included accurately collecting and summarizing qualitative data, and communicating that information to the European Space Agency (ESA) and Airbus (ESA's prime contractor) in a clear, succinct and precise manner. This project also required that I create a report on the challenges and opportunities of international S&MA. With its heavy emphasis on soft skills, this project taught me how to communicate better, by showing me how to present and share information in an easy-to-read and understandable format, and by showing me how to cooperate with and culturally respect international partners on a technical project. The second project involved working with the Orion Thermal Protection System (TPS) Process Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (PFMEA) Working Group to create the first full version of the Orion TPS PFMEA. The Orion TPS PFMEA Working Group met twice a week to analyze the Avcoat block installation process for failure modes, the failure modes effects, and how such failure modes could be controlled. I was in charge of implementing changes that were discussed in meeting, but were not implemented real time. Another major task included creating a significant portion of the content alongside another team member outside the two weekly meetings. This project caused me to become knowledgeable about TPS, heatshields, space-rated manufacturing, and non-destructive evaluation (NDE). The project also helped me to become better at working with a small team and helped improved my technical communication skills. My main duty for the third project was creating a Safety Verification Tracking Log (SVTL) for the Orbital Maneuvering System Engine (OMS-E), and contacting subject matter experts to close Hazard Report (HR) control verifications. This project also required me to support other OMS-E safety process tasks, like monitoring OMS-E vibration testing for Quality Assurance (QA) purposes. This project helped me become even more proficient in Excel. Throughout the project, I gained knowledge about the OMS-E system and improved my understanding of pressure systems and propellant systems. In terms of education goals, this work term has affirmed my desire to take a few more space-related courses, like orbital mechanics, so that I can have a better understanding of human spaceflight and the industry surrounding it. However, the work term did not persuade me to pursue a master's degree. In terms of career goals, this work term has helped me clarify the direction I would like to head in the future. The perspective of three summer terms working for NASA in S&MA has allowed me to observe that most S&MA employees joined S&MA after working in other NASA directorates, such as Engineering or Flight Operations. It is my belief that it would be advantageous for both NASA and I for me to broaden my knowledge base and technical skill set by completing hands-on technical work on human spaceflight projects, and for me to integrate my safety experience directly into technical work in other directorates. The other significant advantage to this proposed situation is that if I were to eventually return to S&MA, I would be returning with a substantial set of hands-on technical experience and knowledge, which would be a significant resource for S&MA tasks and projects.

Hutcheson, Connor↗
NASA NTRS2018

Overview of the Exploration Exercise Device Validation Study Plans

The NASA has determined that a multi-functional exercise device will be developed for use as an exercise device during exploration missions. The device will allow for full body resistance and metabolic exercise necessary to minimize physiological losses during space flight and to maintain fitness necessary to perform critical mission tasks. Prior to implementation as an exercise device on an Exploration vehicle, there will be verification and validation testing completed to determine device efficacy at providing the necessary training stimuli to achieve desired goals. Because the exploration device will be new device that has yet be specified, specific Verification and Validation (V&V) protocols have yet to be developed. Upon delivery of an exploration exercise device training unit, stakeholders throughout NASA will develop V&V plans that include ground-based testing and testing on the International Space Station (ISS). Stakeholders will develop test protocols that include success criterion for the device. Ground tests will occur at NASA Johnson Space Station prior to flight testing. The intents of the ground tests are to allow crew, spaceflight medicine, science, engineering, Astronaut Strength, Conditioning, and Reconditioning staff, and others to gain experience in the best utilization of the device. The goal is to obtain an evidence base for recommending use of the device on the ISS. The developed protocol will be created to achieve multiple objectives, including determining if the device provides an adequate training stimulus for 5th - 95th percentile males and females, allows for exercise modalities that protect functional capability, and is robust and can withstand extensive human use. Although protocols are yet to be determined, current expectations include use of the device by test subjects and current crew in order to obtain quantitative and qualitative feedback. Information obtained during the ground tests may be used to influence device modifications during design iterations. Assuming successful ground tests, the device will be installed on the ISS for testing during space flight. Spaceflight testing is envisioned to include an activation and checkout (ACO) phase and a V&V phase. During the ACO phase, 1-2 crewmembers will exercise with the device to ensure proper function. ACO is expected to last multiple months because of the many modes and methods of exercise that need to be assessed. However, the goal is to complete the ACO as quickly as possible. Once successful ACO occurs, the crew will be free to use the device for normal exercise pending concurrence from stakeholders. V&V tests on the ISS will ideally consist of crew using the device for all of their exercise for an entire mission. Exercise prescriptions will be supplied that replicate expected prescriptions during exploration missions. Crew that are not enrolled in the V&V studies would be also free to use the device as their schedule permits. As experience is gained by users, exercise protocols could change. The intent of all V&V testing is to ensure that all have thorough understanding of experience at optimizing device capability

DeWitt, J. K.↗
DOE OSTI2023

S4PST: Sustainability for Programming Systems and Tools: May Workshop Report

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Exascale Computing Project (ECP) has fostered and strengthened the use of modern software engineering practices for developing applications and libraries, and this effort has resulted in the coordinated and interoperable E4S1 and xSDK2 ecosystems. Although this approach is cost-effective, it relies on robust programming systems and tools (PST) as the underlying foundation for our HPC software. At present, our primary PST stack consists of traditional high-performance computing (HPC) languages, namely Fortran, C, C++, and the popular Python language for data analysis and AI workflows. These languages support various programming frameworks and run-time abstractions that enable parallelism and concurrency across multiple node architectures and thousands of nodes through a variety of interconnect systems. However, to accommodate users’ diverse needs, certain aspects of the HPC ecosystem are delegated to vendor-specific or third-party implementations that extend beyond a particular scientific domain. This broader scope results in a multitude of specifications and variations, which leads to a complex orchestration of many-ecosystems. Unfortunately, this complexity in the ecosystem imposes additional overhead costs on consumers during the latter stages of the development cycle. In addition to the software ecosystem challenge, the upcoming conclusion of the ECP by December 2023 has raised significant concerns within the HPC programming systems community, from both the economic and social perspectives. The ECP has implemented a management structure for software development and funding decisions across all ECP participants by following a conventional hierarchical and centralized approach. However, this structure has prompted certain considerations within the community, particularly in anticipation of the Software Sustainability initiative by the DOE’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research Program (ASCR). For the success of this new initiative, it is of utmost importance to secure consistent funding and foster close engagement with researchers and core developers of existing programming-system products. This collaboration is vital to maintaining the critical capabilities of the current software during the transition phase while proactively adapting to future technology and workforce trends. The community recognizes the significance of adapting to emerging trends and is aware of the inherent fragility of the HPC software ecosystem, particularly in relation to programming systems that cater to all users. The ability to adapt and evolve is essential to staying relevant and effectively addressing these technical, economic, and social challenges. The S4PST team, which represents one of the six ASCR Software Sustainability seedling projects, is dedicated to tackling these challenges through community-based approaches that go beyond the scope of the DOE. This involves collaboration between national laboratories with academia, non-DOE institutions, hardware and system vendors, and international partners. By fostering these partnerships, we aim to create a robust and sustainable HPC software ecosystem that can effectively meet the needs of the community. This new community effort, driven by the eight DOE labs, will take on the responsibility of guiding funding decisions for programming-systems development and maintenance with transparency and consistency across all decisions. Additionally, the team will offer common technical services to the programming systems community, irrespective of their funding situations, and facilitate community-wide incubation to proactively nurture the software ecosystem. By actively engaging with stakeholders and employing a collaborative approach, we can collectively shape the future of programming systems and ensure a robust and thriving HPC software landscape. On May 11–12, 2023, the S4PST team conducted its inaugural kick-off workshop at the Innovative Computing Laboratory (ICL) in the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, hosted by Hartwig Anzt. The workshop encompassed various sessions dedicated to presentations and discussions, with the aim of comprehending the team members’ perspectives on the vision of software sustainability. Additionally, the workshop aimed to identify the technical, economic, and social requirements for sustaining the programming-systems community in the field of HPC. This report provides a summary of the S4PST effort by highlighting five major thrust areas discussed during the workshop: (i) community, (ii) technical support, (iii) training and diversity, (iv) verification, validation and correctness, and (v) emerging technologies. It also encompasses an overview of the presentations and discussions held throughout the event, our views and potential synergies with other seedling efforts, along with the outcomes and key takeaways from our initial discussions.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗