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 1,189 records · Page 66
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

On the Sensitivity to Density-Functional Approximations for CO Binding Energies of Single-Atom Catalysts in Nitrogen-Doped Graphene

Density functional theory (DFT) methods are the working horse in screening new catalytic materials. They are widely used to predict trends in binding energies, which are then used to compare the activity of different materials. Here, the binding strength of CO is an important descriptor to the CO 2 reduction catalytic activity of the single transition metal atoms embedded on nitrogen-doped graphene (TM/NG). In this work, however, we show that CO binding strengths in different TM/NG has very different sensitivity to DFT methods. Specifically, Fe/NG CO binding energy changes dramatically with the percentage of exact exchange in the functional; Co/NG does less so, while Ni/NG nearly has no change. Such varying behaviors is a direct result of different local spin configurations, similar to the performance of DFT methods for metal porphyrin complexes. Therefore, caution should be exercised when using DFT binding energies for quantitative predictions in TM/NG single atom catalysis.

77 NANOSCIENCE AND NANOTECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Metagenome-assembled genomes from East River floodplain sediments near Crested Butte, CO, USA (June to September 2019)

Microorganisms play a key role in cycling nutrients and contaminants in the terrestrial environment depending on their genetic potential. Here, we present metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) for the bacterial and archaeal community in floodplain sediment samples taken in 2019 in June (flooded conditions) and September (drained conditions) at two locations (MCB1 and MCB3) near the Meander C/Pumphouse floodplain sites of the East River. Sediment cores were collected from 2 depths, a near-surface, generally unsaturated depth (30-40 centimeter (cm) depth below surface) and a deeper depth influenced by flooding with redoximorphic features (70-80 cm depth below surface). Sediments were homogenized from the 10 cm core for microbial analyses. A total of 24 metagenomes were sequenced through the Joint genome institute (JGI) corresponding to 8 samples sequenced in triplicate. These metagenomes can be found under Genomes Online Database (GOLD) sequencing project: Gs0141020. Metagenomes were assembled, binned, and refined using metawrap to generate MAGs (>50% complete and < 10% contamination based on checkM scores). This dataset includes a zip file of 436 MAG fasta files and a csv file with quality, taxonomic classification (Genome Taxonomy Database Release RS220), and metagenome accessions for MAGs. This dataset also includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type.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. Part of this work was performed at SLAC Accelerator Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Metagenome-assembled genomes from East River floodplain sediments near Crested Butte, CO, USA (June to September 2017)

Microorganisms play a key role in cycling nutrients and contaminants in the terrestrial environment depending on their genetic potential. Here, we present metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) for the bacterial and archaeal community in floodplain sediment samples taken in 2017 in June (flooded conditions) and September (drained conditions) at two locations (MCB1 and MCB3) in an active meander (Meander C) of the East River. Sediment cores were collected from 2 depths, a near-surface, generally unsaturated depth (15-40 centimeter (cm) depth below surface) and a deeper depth influenced by flooding with redoximorphic features (50-88 cm depth below surface). Sediments were homogenized from the ~10 cm cores for microbial analyses. A total of 24 metagenomes were sequenced through the Joint genome institute (JGI) corresponding to 8 samples sequenced in triplicate. These metagenomes can be found under Genomes Online Database (GOLD) sequencing project: Gs0151851. Metagenomes were assembled, binned, and refined using metawrap to generate MAGs (>50% complete and < 10% contamination based on checkM scores). This dataset includes a zip file of 405 MAG fasta files and a csv file with quality, taxonomic classification (Genome Taxonomy Database Release RS220), and metagenome accessions for MAGs. This dataset also includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type.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. Part of this work was performed at SLAC Accelerator Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Metagenome-assembled genomes from East River floodplain sediments near Crested Butte, CO, USA (May to September 2018)

Microorganisms play a key role in cycling nutrients and contaminants in the terrestrial environment depending on their genetic potential. Here, we present metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) for the bacterial and archaeal community in floodplain sediment samples taken in 2018 in May (flooded conditions) and September (drained conditions) at two locations (MCB1 and MCB3) near the Meander C/Pumphouse floodplain sites of the East River. Sediment cores were collected from 2 depths, a near-surface, generally unsaturated depth (30-40 centimeter (cm) depth below surface) and a deeper depth influenced by flooding with redoximorphic features (70-80 cm depth below surface). Sediments were homogenized from the 10 cm core for microbial analyses. A total of 24 metagenomes were sequenced through the Joint genome institute (JGI) corresponding to 8 samples sequenced in triplicate. These metagenomes can be found under Genomes Online Database (GOLD) sequencing project: Gs0141020. Metagenomes were assembled, binned, and refined using metawrap to generate MAGs (>50% complete and < 10% contamination based on checkM scores). This dataset includes a zip file of 478 MAG fasta files and a csv file with quality, taxonomic classification (Genome Taxonomy Database Release RS220), and metagenome accessions for MAGs. This dataset also includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type.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. Part of this work was performed at SLAC Accelerator Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Surface Water Quality Data from Beaver-Impacted Streams; Trail Creek and East River, Colorado 2025

This data package contains surface water chemistry measurements collected in 2025 to evaluate how beaver damming and low-tech process-based stream restoration influence water quality and metal mobility in mountainous headwater systems of the Upper Colorado River Basin. Sampling was conducted at Trail Creek (Taylor Park watershed, Colorado), a tributary undergoing restoration through installation of low-tech process-based structures (i.e., beaver dam analogs), and at off-channel beaver ponds within the East River floodplain (East River watershed, Colorado). Samples were collected along longitudinal transects spanning upstream control reaches, beaver-influenced ponded reaches, and downstream segments. Additional samples were collected from near-surface pore waters within a beaver dam seepage face. The dataset includes concentrations of major and trace elements measured by inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) and inductively coupled plasma–optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES), major anions measured by ion chromatography (IC), and dissolved organic carbon (DOC; reported as non-purgeable organic carbon, NPOC). Samples were size-fractionated at 0.45 micrometers (µm), 0.22 µm, and 0.02 µm to distinguish particulate (>0.45 µm), colloidal (0.22–0.02 µm), and dissolved (<0.02 µm) fractions. The data package consists of comma-separated value (.csv) files containing tabulated chemical concentration data, sample metadata (site identifiers, geographic coordinates, sampling dates, fraction type), and quality control flags. All files are provided in open, non-proprietary formats that can be accessed using standard data analysis software such as Microsoft Excel, R, Python, MATLAB, or other programs capable of reading .csv files. Units, detection limits, and analytical methods are documented in accompanying metadata files. The dataset is designed to support analyses of (1) how beaver impoundment and restoration structures alter elemental partitioning and transport, (2) the role of iron and organic carbon in mediating trace metal mobility, and (3) reach-scale changes in water quality across restoration gradients. 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. Part of this work was performed at SLAC Accelerator Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515.

Anions↗
DOE OSTI2018

Cadherin profiling for therapeutic interventions in Epithelial Mesenchymal Transition (EMT) and tumorigenesis

The major hallmarks of Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition (EMT) is the loss of epithelial cell polarity and loss of expression of the cell- cell adhesion molecule like E-cadherin and acquired mesenchymal cells marker called N-Cadherin. This phenotypical changes of E-M plasticity of cells is extensively considered to be a crucial factor for tumor cells invasion and cancer metastasis; landmark events for transforming a locally growing tumor (benign tumor) into a systemic and live-threatening disease (malignant tumor). Cadherin molecules are adherens junction proteins and expressed as multiple isoforms. Cadherin switching occurs during normal tissue developmental processes; also recapitulates the increasing aggressive behavior and metastatic nature of cancer cells when E-Cadherin converts to N-Cadherin, in particular. There are several mechanisms established that cadherin switching and some of the underlying pathways involves multiple steps associated with migration and invasion of cancer cells, and finally colonization of micro metastatic lesions to form macro-metastasis. Inhibition of metastasis is complicated by the plasticity of cancer cells behaviors and the evolving nature of microenvironment. Although there is no clear evidence how that dynamic structural switching of cadherin family member occurs, stabilized and eventually influence cell behavior, phenotypic transformations and initiate tumorigenesis. Therefore, we emphasize here the major functions of over 20 existing human cadherins in tissue integrity and stability as well as mechanistic understanding on recent work of cadherin ectodomain-mediated adhesion, functional studies of the cell-cell adhesion through key signaling intermediates interacting with other binding partners. We hope understanding on how the dynamic all existing cadherins influence the cell behavior can be targeted to design possible therapeutic interventions to combat its activity and prevent tumor cell growth, invasion and metastasis.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Single-Molecule Electron Transport in Peptoids

Peptoids are structural analogs of peptides in which side chains are appended to the backbone nitrogen rather than the α-carbon. The sequence-defined modularity of peptoids enables precise control over structure−function relationships, enabling applications in energy storage and biomedical materials. Despite recent progress, the role of sequence and conformation on electron transport in peptoid molecules is not fully understood. Here, we synthesize a library of peptoid oligomers and characterize their molecular electronic properties using the scanning tunneling microscope-break junction (STM-BJ) technique. Our results show well-defined electron transport behavior for peptoid sequences containing aromatic side groups lacking hydrogen bonds (H-bonds) and without chemical substitutions at the N−C α position. This behavior fundamentally differs from electron transport in peptides, where H-bond interactions give rise to higher conductance states. All-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations are used to understand the conformational heterogeneity of peptoids, and molecular conformations obtained from MD simulations are used in quantum mechanical calculations based on the nonequilibrium Green’s function−density functional theory (NEGF-DFT) formalism. In all cases, computational results are in reasonable qualitative agreement with experiments. Our work demonstrates that the conductance behavior of peptoids depends on monomer identity, including side-chain aromaticity and substitution at the N−C α position. Overall, this work provides new insights into the structure−function relationships governing electron transport in peptoid-based materials and establishes design rules for peptoid-based molecular junctions.

Charge transport↗
DOE OSTI2024

Extending GPU-accelerated Gaussian integrals in the TeraChem software package to f type orbitals: Implementation and applications

Here, the increasing availability of graphics processing units (GPUs) for scientific computing has prompted interest in accelerating quantum chemical calculations through their use. However, the complexity of integral kernels for high angular momentum basis functions often limits the utility of GPU implementations with large basis sets or for metal containing systems. In this work, we report the implementation of f function support in the GPU-accelerated TeraChem software package through the development of efficient kernels for the evaluation of Hamiltonian integrals. The high efficiency of the resulting code is demonstrated through density functional theory (DFT) calculations on increasingly large organic molecules and transition metal complexes, as well as coupled cluster singles and doubles calculations on water clusters. Preliminary investigations into Ni(I) catalysis with DFT and the photochemistry of MnH(CH 3 ) with complete active space self-consistent field are also carried out. Overall, our GPU-accelerated software appears to be well-suited for fast simulation of large transition metal containing systems, as well as organic molecules.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

What is the gradient of a scalar function defined on a subspace of square matrices?

We illustrate a technique to calculate the gradient of scalar functions that are defined on any arbitrary matrix subspace. It generalizes our earlier work titled “What is the gradient of a scalar function of a symmetric matrix ?”(Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics (2022), doi:10.1007/s13226-022-00313-x), in which we considered the special case of the subspace of symmetric matrices. Extant methods to calculate the gradient in such cases have an inherent flaw which leads to spurious results that populate several publications, as well as respected textbooks and handbooks on matrix calculus. We examine these sources and results in a rigorous and concrete mathematical setting of a finite-dimensional inner-product space and discover the inherent flaw and also a remedy. We demonstrate two ways to calculate the derivative/gradient and second derivative for scalar functions of matrices defined over an arbitrary matrix subspace; the first method is by considering any (differentiable) extension to the space of square matrices and projection of its gradient onto the given subspace. The second method utilizes an ordered basis and computes each component of the gradient through evaluation of the directional derivative. All the ideas presented are illustrated by non-trivial examples, namely, considering the subspace of 3 × 3 circulant and Toeplitz matrices and presenting the results of gradient-descent with both the spurious and correct gradients. Moreover, our bibliography makes it clear that a rigorous approach to matrix calculus is not common in practice, and our presentation of matrix calculus in the language of inner-product spaces will be significant and meaningful for applied mathematicians, engineers and researchers working in inter-disciplinary fields to avoid the conceptual pitfalls that exist.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

What is the gradient of a scalar function defined on a subspace of square matrices?

We illustrate a technique to calculate the gradient of scalar functions that are defined on any arbitrary matrix subspace. It generalizes our earlier work titled “What is the gradient of a scalar function of a symmetric matrix ?”(Indian Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics (2022), https://doi.org/10.1007/s13226-022-00313-x), in which we considered the special case of the subspace of symmetric matrices. Extant methods to calculate the gradient in such cases have an inherent flaw which leads to spurious results that populate several publications, as well as respected textbooks and handbooks on matrix calculus. Here, we examine these sources and results in a rigorous and concrete mathematical setting of a finite-dimensional inner-product space and discover the inherent flaw and also a remedy. We demonstrate two ways to calculate the derivative/gradient and second derivative for scalar functions of matrices defined over an arbitrary matrix subspace; the first method is by considering any (differentiable) extension to the space of square matrices and projection of its gradient onto the given subspace. The second method utilizes an ordered basis and computes each component of the gradient through evaluation of the directional derivative. All the ideas presented are illustrated by non-trivial examples, namely, considering the subspace of 3 x 3 circulant and Toeplitz matrices and presenting the results of gradient-descent with both the spurious and correct gradients. Moreover, our bibliography makes it clear that a rigorous approach to matrix calculus is not common in practice, and our presentation of matrix calculus in the language of inner-product spaces will be significant and meaningful for applied mathematicians, engineers and researchers working in inter-disciplinary fields to avoid the conceptual pitfalls that exist.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

A fusion of the Bacteroides fragilis ferrous iron import proteins reveals a role for FeoA in stabilizing GTP-bound FeoB

Iron is an essential element for nearly all organisms, and under anoxic and/or reducing conditions, Fe 2+ is the dominant form of iron available to bacteria. The ferrous iron transport (Feo) system is the primary prokaryotic Fe 2+ import machinery, and two constituent proteins (FeoA and FeoB) are conserved across most bacterial species. However, how FeoA and FeoB function relative to one another remains enigmatic. In this work, we explored the distribution of feoAB operons encoding a fusion of FeoA tethered to the N-terminal, G-protein domain of FeoB via a connecting linker region. We hypothesized that this fusion poises FeoA to interact with FeoB to affect function. To test this hypothesis, we characterized the soluble NFeoAB fusion protein from Bacteroides fragilis, a commensal organism implicated in drug-resistant infections. Using X-ray crystallography, we determined the 1.50-Å resolution structure of BfFeoA, which adopts an SH3-like fold implicated in protein–protein interactions. Using a combination of structural modeling, small-angle X-ray scattering, and hydrogen–deuterium exchange mass spectrometry, we show that FeoA and NFeoB interact in a nucleotide-dependent manner, and we mapped the protein–protein interaction interface. Finally, using guanosine triphosphate (GTP) hydrolysis assays, we demonstrate that BfNFeoAB exhibits one of the slowest known rates of Feo-mediated GTP hydrolysis that is not potassium-stimulated. Importantly, truncation of FeoA from this fusion demonstrates that FeoA–NFeoB interactions function to stabilize the GTP-bound form of FeoB. Taken together, our work reveals a role for FeoA function in the fused FeoAB system and suggests a function for FeoA among prokaryotes.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2018

Fabricating Reactive Surfaces with Brush-like and Crosslinked Films of Azlactone-Functionalized Block Co-Polymers

Here in this work, fabrication methods that generate novel surfaces using the azlactone-based block co-polymer, poly (glycidyl methacrylate)-block-poly (vinyl dimethyl azlactone) (PGMA-b-PVDMA), are presented. Due to the high reactivity of azlactone groups towards amine, thiol, and hydroxyl groups, PGMA-b-PVDMA surfaces can be modified with secondary molecules to create chemically or biologically functionalized interfaces for a variety of applications. Previous reports of patterned PGMA-b-PVDMA interfaces have used traditional top-down patterning techniques that generate non-uniform films and poorly controlled background chemistries. Here, we describe customized patterning techniques that enable precise deposition of highly uniform PGMA-b-PVDMA films in backgrounds that are chemically inert or that have biomolecule-repellent properties. Importantly, these methods are designed to deposit PGMA-b-PVDMA films in a manner that completely preserves azlactone functionality through each processing step. Patterned films show well-controlled thicknesses that correspond to polymer brushes (~90 nm) or to highly crosslinked structures (~1-10 μm). Brush patterns are generated using either the parylene lift-off or interface directed assembly methods described and are useful for precise modulation of overall chemical surface reactivity by adjusting either the PGMA-b-PVDMA pattern density or the length of the VDMA block. In contrast, the thick, crosslinked PGMA-b-PVDMA patterns are obtained using a customized micro-contact printing technique and offer the benefit of higher loading or capture of secondary material due to higher surface area to volume ratios. Lastly, detailed experimental steps, critical film characterizations, and trouble-shooting guides for each fabrication method are discussed.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
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 OSTI2016

ROM-based Subset Selection Algorithm for Efficient Surrogate Modeling

This summary discusses a new methodology to support the construction of surrogate models for computationally expensive models with many input parameters and output responses. In realistic engineering calculations, such as thermal-hydraulics simulation, the cost of the simulation is typically expensive, especially when detailed models are employed to describe system behavior, thereby justifying the need for surrogate models. The cost of surrogate model construction is typically a function of the number of model parameters and the degree of model nonlinearity. For sufficiently complex models, the cost of constructing the surrogate model could be by itself overwhelmingly expensive, thereby diminishing its value. One key requirement of surrogate model construction is the ability to preselect the best parametric form to describe the model behavior over the expected range of parameter variations. This summary presents a new algorithm to help select the best approximation out of a template of functions using recent advances in reduced order modeling (ROM) techniques. The idea of selecting functions out of a template is typically referred to as subset selection in the statistical and applied mathematics community. Different from existing subset selection algorithms, we rely on ROM to help identify the most influential functions for the surrogate model. Previous work has shown that ROM can help reduce the effective dimensionality of the parameter space, which can help reduce the cost of surrogate model construction. In this summary, we adopt a different philosophy, where the fitting functions are treated as pseudo parameters and ROM is applied on the pseudo parameter space, with the result now being a ranked list of the pseudo parameters along with their contribution to the quality of the surrogate model fit. This approach allows the analyst to discard all terms that have negligible impact on the quantity of interest. A relap5 model is employed to demonstrate the application of the proposed methodology. (authors)

42 ENGINEERING↗