SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “false positive analysis”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

114 records · Page 7

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Gamma-Ray and Cosmic Ray Muon Modalities for Cargo Inspection

Screening and inspection of cargo containers are two essential methods to nondestructively examine the contents of shipment. These methods enable the detection of illicit transportation of unauthorized materials such as nuclear and radioactive materials, explosives, drugs, and so on, typically at borders or secure facilities. Although high-energy X-ray transmission is a standard system and is widely used for cargo inspection, the inherent challenges of high false-positive rates and high attenuation factors necessitate the development of complementary techniques that can increase the detection efficiency and accuracy in large and dense materials. Gamma-rays, which possess higher penetration characteristics because of their high energy, offer an alternative nonintrusive modality for cargo scanning. They represent a promising inspection method when compared to X-rays for three reasons: (1) improved ability to detect nuclear and radioactive materials, (2) higher inspection throughput rates, and (3) lower false-positive rates. Currently, there are two main gamma-ray inspection techniques, active and passive interrogation. Active interrogation can be further grouped into (1) gamma-ray transmission imaging and (2) neutron-induced gamma-ray emission detection. Gamma-ray transmission imaging utilizes differences in material densities for mapping the shipment contents and detecting anomalies. It is analogous to the X-ray transmission method; however, the high-energy photons make it more difficult to shield against, which enables more efficient performance in large and dense material inspection. Neutron-induced gamma-ray emission inspection is designed for the detection of nuclear and radioactive material because those materials emit characteristic gamma-rays when they are activated by neutron absorption. On the other hand, passive interrogation techniques rely on high-efficiency detectors to detect radiation emitted from hidden special nuclear or other radioactive materials. Similar to passive interrogation, cosmic ray muon monitoring and imaging are relatively new techniques that do not require external radioactive sources. These techniques have received attention as a potential next-generation radiographic probe to identify illicit transportation of nuclear and radioactive materials in cargo containers. Cosmic ray muons have unique features, (1) much higher energies than X-rays or gamma-rays (on the order of 10−1—104 GeV), (2) enhanced penetration capability, and (3) natural occurrence, thereby eliminating the need for induced radiation sources. These features enable cosmic ray muons to be utilized for detection of special nuclear materials in high-background-noise environments. By analyzing incoming and outgoing muon trajectories, scattering angles, and energies, it has been shown that it would be possible to locate hidden and well-shielded materials in cargo containers via three-dimensional muon tomography images or signal analysis. Gamma-rays, cosmic ray muons, and other nonintrusive cargo inspection modalities are complementary to each other, allowing them to address various cargo inspection conditions (i.e., scanning time, cost, radiation exposure level, and types of target materials). This chapter presents a detailed review of the theoretical fundamentals and technical principles behind the current gamma-ray and cosmic ray muon modalities for cargo inspection. Additionally, critical assessments and suggestions for the future directions to advance the use of gamma and muon modalities are discussed.

Bae, Junghyun↗

NASA NTRS1994

Correlation approach to identify coding regions in DNA sequences

Recently, it was observed that noncoding regions of DNA sequences possess long-range power-law correlations, whereas coding regions typically display only short-range correlations. We develop an algorithm based on this finding that enables investigators to perform a statistical analysis on long DNA sequences to locate possible coding regions. The algorithm is particularly successful in predicting the location of lengthy coding regions. For example, for the complete genome of yeast chromosome III (315,344 nucleotides), at least 82% of the predictions correspond to putative coding regions; the algorithm correctly identified all coding regions larger than 3000 nucleotides, 92% of coding regions between 2000 and 3000 nucleotides long, and 79% of coding regions between 1000 and 2000 nucleotides. The predictive ability of this new algorithm supports the claim that there is a fundamental difference in the correlation property between coding and noncoding sequences. This algorithm, which is not species-dependent, can be implemented with other techniques for rapidly and accurately locating relatively long coding regions in genomic sequences.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2007

Benchtop Detection of Proteins

A process, and a benchtop-scale apparatus for implementing the process, have been developed to detect proteins associated with specific microbes in water. The process and apparatus may also be useful for detection of proteins in other, more complex liquids. There may be numerous potential applications, including monitoring lakes and streams for contamination, testing of blood and other bodily fluids in medical laboratories, and testing for microbial contamination of liquids in restaurants and industrial food-processing facilities. A sample can be prepared and analyzed by use of this process and apparatus within minutes, whereas an equivalent analysis performed by use of other processes and equipment can often take hours to days. The process begins with the conjugation of near-infrared-fluorescent dyes to antibodies that are specific to a particular protein. Initially, the research has focused on using near-infrared dyes to detect antigens or associated proteins in solution, which has proven successful vs. microbial cells, and streamlining the technique in use for surface protein detection on microbes would theoretically render similar results. However, it is noted that additional work is needed to transition protein-based techniques to microbial cell detection. Consequently, multiple such dye/antibody pairs could be prepared to enable detection of multiple selected microbial species, using a different dye for each species. When excited by near-infrared light of a suitable wavelength, each dye fluoresces at a unique longer wavelength that differs from those of the other dyes, enabling discrimination among the various species. In initial tests, the dye/antibody pairs are mixed into a solution suspected of containing the selected proteins, causing the binding of the dye/antibody pairs to such suspect proteins that may be present. The solution is then run through a microcentrifuge that includes a membrane that acts as a filter in that it retains the dye/antibody/protein complexes while allowing any remaining unbound dye/antibody pairs to flow away. The retained dye/antibody/protein complexes are transferred to a cuvette, wherein they are irradiated with light from a miniature near-infrared laser delivered via a fiber-optic cable. The resulting fluorescence from the dye(s) is measured by use of a miniature spectrometer, the output of which is digitized, then analyzed by laptop computer. The software running in the computer identifies the protein species by the wavelengths of their spectral peaks and determines the amounts of the proteins, and thus, one day, microbes of the various species from the intensities of the peaks. The abovementioned removal of the unbound dye/antibody pairs during centrifugation prevents false positive readings. The process proves successful in detecting proteins in solution and thus can now be employed for use in microbe detection.

Scardelletti, Maximilian C.↗

NASA NTRS2019

ISEP: A Joint SRAG/CCMC Collaboration to Improve Mitigation of Space Weather Effects on Crew Health in the Exo-LEO Era

The Space Radiation Analysis Group (SRAG) at Johnson Space Center (JSC) is tasked with monitoring changes to space weather and mitigating any resultant impacts to crew health and safety. As human spaceflight goals extend from Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) missions like the International Space Station (ISS) to the moon, Mars and beyond, SRAG will need to update their current approach for crew monitoring of and protection from radiation exposure due to energetic Solar Particle Events (ESPEs). Challenges faced in planning exo-LEO missions include the lack of protection from the Earth’s geomagnetic field employed by the ISS in addition to limited communication capability between the crew and the ground. In the event of an ESPE, the current ISS trajectory ensures that the vehicle is only traveling through fields of higher radiation exposure for a brief period of time; the Earth’s geomagnetic field prevents the penetration of the high-energy particles of concern throughout the majority of the orbit. Exo-LEO missions, on the other hand, require that the vehicle travel through free space, exposing vehicle and crew to the full impact of the ESPE. NASA has combined multiple approaches to resolve this radiation exposure issue. New vehicles are designed to take advantage of advances in particle transport modeling capabilities and shielding technology, allowing redistribution of mass throughout the vehicle to areas of thinner shielding when the energetic particle flux has increased to levels of concern. Although vehicle shielding is an important aspect of radiation exposure protection, there is a continued requirement to monitor and predict the space weather environment. To this end, SRAG maintains a console position in Mission Control with 24/7 mission support capability. In the event of increased solar activity, SRAG collaborates with the Flight Control Team (FCT) to determine if crew action (i.e., shelter) is required. During any increase in solar activity, the FCT needs three pieces of information to effectively decide the crew response in light of other required mission tasks: if an event (ESPE) will occur, how ‘intense’ an observed event will be, and how long will an observed event will last. An ideal alert system limits false alarms, therefore causing the crew to take action unnecessarily, without ignoring events that pose a hazard to the crew. SRAG’s current operational concept for ISS missions focuses on short-term forecasts, best described as ‘now-casting’. Console operators are in daily communication with the Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC) for situational awareness purposes. When conditions exist that may lead to increased solar activity, operators receive notifications from SWPC. In the case of a well-connected ESPE, the console operator may only have on the order of minutes to several hours to notify the FCT of the event and provide a recommendation for crew action. As NASA shifts to exo-LEO missions, the increased time in free space as well as the reduced ability to communicate with the crew will force a transition in crew protection strategy that emphasizes improvments to both the accuracy and the lead time in forecasting capabilities.

Barzilla, Janet E.↗

DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

CERF↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Does Collection Time Bias the Ecology of Cleanroom Air Samples?

Microbial monitoring of astromaterials collections has taken on increased importance with the return of biologically sensitive samples from the asteroids Ryugu and Bennu and the initiation of the Mars Sample Return Program. Terrestrial bacteria and fungi can alter the mineralogy and organic composition of our collections causing irreversible contamination of pristine samples and increasing the risk of false positives for life detection measurements. NASA has conducted routine microbial monitoring of its existing collections since 20181. Initial monitoring focused on surface samples collected with foam swabs. Although, airborne microbiology is often decoupled from surface microbiology in the built environment2 culture-based air sampling techniques like impactors were not compliant with existing contamination control requirements. Bringing organic rich media, gelatin or liquids into curation cleanrooms presents an unacceptable risk to pristine samples. In 2022 NASA purchased a materials complaint air sampler and began collecting air samples from the cleanrooms in addition to surface samples3. The new instrument uses an electret filter to collect samples that are suitable for cultivating organisms or for direct DNA sequencing. Preliminary DNA sequencing results appeared to indicate that longer sampling times biased the microbial community in favor of hearty, spore-forming bacteria3. We present the results of a study comparing overnight sampling (17 hours) to short (1 hour) sampling of unoccupied curation cleanrooms. The results will help us optimize our monitoring protocols and develop a more detailed inventory of the ecology of astromaterials curation cleanrooms. Methods: We analyzed 72 paired air samples from six different cleanrooms including the meteorite processing lab (ISO 7 equivalent, 16 samples), the lunar lab (ISO 6 equivalent, 10 samples), the stardust lab (ISO 5 equivalent 14 samples), the OSIRIS-REx lab (ISO 5 equivalent, 12 samples), the Hayabusa2 lab (ISO 5 equivalent, 14 samples), and the Genesis lab (ISO 4 equivalent, 6 samples). All the samples were collected with an InnovaPrep Bobcat air sampler operating at a sampling rate of 200 L/min. The sampler operates for 5 minutes out of every 20 minute period. Half of the samples were collected by filtering 3,000L (15 min. of active sampling) of air across an electret filter for one hour. The rest of the samples were collected by filtering approximately 51,000 L air across the filter overnight (~17 hours, 255 min. of active sampling). Cells were eluted from the filter using 6-7 ml of pressurized 0.15% tween 20 in PBS (phosphate buffered saline). This liquid was used to cultivate bacteria according to previously published methods1,4,5 and for DNA extraction and next generation sequencing. DNA was extracted with a Qiagen MagAttract PowerMicrobiome kit6. To identify bacteria and archaea, the 16S rRNA gene was amplified using Earth Microbiome primers for the V4 region 7. The amplified DNA was sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq using a V3 reagent kit. The resulting sequences were processed using DADA2 and QIIME2 as implemented on the EDGE bioinformatics platform8–10. Results: Only two of the 72 samples had no amplifiable DNA. Amplified DNA concentrations ranged from 2.67 – 0.272 ng/µl. The median concentration of amplified DNA for the 1 hour samples was 0.770 ± 0.368 ng/µl. The median concentration of amplified DNA for the overnight samples was 0.877 ± 0.434 ng/µl. On average the overnight samples had slightly more sequences (58,960 vs. 59,456) and ASV’s (amplicon sequence variants) (60 vs 64.5) than the one hour samples, but these differences are not statistically significant. The most abundant ASV in every sample mapped to the genus Cupravidus. ASV’s mapping to the genuses Bacillus, Schlegelella, Thermus, and Staphylococcus were also common. Discussion and Future Work: Alpha diversity statistics like Shannon Entropy and Faith Phylogenetic Diversity are used to describe the diversity of organisms in a single sample. If a longer sampling time was biasing the data, we would expect to see a change in these diversity statistics vs. sample time. However, we did not observe this in our data. The median Shannon entropy was slightly higher for the overnight samples (3.773 vs 3.611) as was the Faith Phylogenetic Diversity (4.042 vs 3.596), but both values were within a standard deviation of each other for the two sampling times (Fig. 1). It is unlikely, that the longer sampling time is introducing bias into our data. We do observe a significant decrease in diversity when comparing the air samples by lab. The Genesis lab (ISO 4 equivalent) has a lower median number of ASV’s (45.5) than the other labs (62). Median values for Shannon Entropy (3.717 vs. 3.430) and Faith Phylogenetic Diversity (3.796 vs. 3.548) are also lower for Genesis, but those values are with one standard deviation of each other for the different sampling times. This is consistent with previous culture-based results suggesting that the environment in cleanrooms tends to select for a core group of organisms capable of surviving under dry, low nutrient, conditions. The presence of the ASV’s mapping to Cupravidus and Thermus in our sequencing blanks and controls suggests that several of the most common organisms in our samples represent contaminants from the reagents used to perform the DNA extractions and sequencing. Further work is needed to identify these contaminants, remove them from our data and recalculate the diversity statistics. This is a systematic error. Therefore, we do not expect removing the sequencing contaminants to change our conclusions. Longer air sample collection times appear to result in slightly higher diversity and do not bias the results towards “hardy” bacteria like spore-formers. Based on these preliminary results we conclude that sampling at least 3,000 liters of air is sufficient to capture the microbial diversity of cleanrooms, and that air samples can also be collected overnight without negatively impacting diversity. These results allow us to be flexible when designing microbial monitoring plans so that they do not interfere with routine lab activity. References: 1. Regberg, A. B. et al. 49th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2018). 2. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. USP General Chapter <1116> (2013). 3. Regberg, A. B., et al. 54th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2023). 4. Regberg, A. B. et al. 53rd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference ( 2022). 5. Davis, R. E.,et al. 50th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2019). 6. Qiagen. MagAttract® PowerMicrobiome® DNA/RNA EP Kit Handbook. (2018). 7. Walters, W. et al. mSystems 1, (2015). 8. Callahan, B. J. et al. Nat. Methods 13, 581–583 (2016). 9. Hall, M. & Beiko, R. G. Microbiome Analysis: Methods and Protocols113–129 (Springer, 2018). 10. Philipson, C. et al. Bio-Protoc. 7, e2622 (2017).

A. B. Regberg↗