Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “shared error”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

Scalable tuning of building models to hourly data

Energy models of existing buildings are unreliable unless calibrated so they correlate well with actual energy usage. Manual tuning requires a skilled professional, is prohibitively expensive for small projects, imperfect, non-repeatable, non-transferable, and not scalable to the dozens of sensor channels that smart meters, smart appliances, and cheap/ubiquitous sensors are beginning to make available today. A scalable, automated methodology is needed to quickly and intelligently calibrate building energy models to all available data, increase the usefulness of those models, and facilitate speed-and-scale penetration of simulation-based capabilities into the marketplace for actualized energy savings. The "Autotune'' project is a novel, model-agnostic methodology which leverages supercomputing, large simulation ensembles, and big data mining with multiple machine learning algorithms to allow automatic calibration of simulations that match measured experimental data in a way that is deployable on commodity hardware. This paper shares several methodologies employed to reduce the combinatorial complexity to a computationally tractable search problem for hundreds of input parameters. Furthermore, accuracy metrics are provided which quantify model error to measured data for either monthly or hourly electrical usage from a highly-instrumented, emulated-occupancy research home.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Outcomes of WPEC SG47 on "Use of Shielding Integral Benchmark Archive and Database for Nuclear Data Validation"

The Working Party on International Nuclear Data Evaluation Co-operation Subgroup 47 (WPECSG47) entitled "Use of Shielding Integral Benchmark Archive and Database for Nuclear Data Validation" was organised from 2019 and 2022 with the objectives to promote more systematic and wider use of shielding benchmark experiments in nuclear data (ND) and transport code validation and development, to provide feedback on the Shielding Integral Benchmark Archive and Database (SINBAD), and to promote its further development in coordination with the Expert Group on Physics of Reactor Systems (EGPRS). Altogether 9 meetings, the large majority (8) held remotely, were organised during the past 3 years to discuss the experience on the use of SINBAD, evaluation of new benchmarks and improvements to be contributed to the database which was severely neglected and lacking maintenance over the past ← 10+ years. Several proposals for new or updated benchmark evaluation were presented and discussed, such as FNG copper, LLNL pulsed spheres, CIAE iron sphere, KFK 1977 gamma measurements, Rez Fe sphere, ASPIS, ORNL Oxygen broomstick, TIARA and others. Complementing the database with new features was also discussed, for example providing the nuclear data sensitivity profiles more systematically would facilitate and better guide the use of data. Information on the geometry, (radiation source) and materials available in CAD format is expected to allow an easier and less error prone reference for computational model preparation and a potential input to CAD based workflows. Inputs for various transport codes and other benchmark data from participants have been shared via the NEA GitLab which could hopefully in the future evolve and form a bases for critically checked and validated benchmark data. Future development of SINBAD will be monitored by EGPRS and the newly created SINBAD Task Force.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2014

MO-C-BRD-01: SBRT I: Overview of Simulation, Planning, and Delivery

SBRT is having a dramatic impact on radiation therapy of early-stage, locally advanced cancers. Treatment planning of SBRT is characterized by precise target volume delineation, highly conformal dose distribution, sharp dose gradient outside the target volume, and meticulous tumor motion management. Stringent dose volume constraints of SBRT require the treatment planning to be highly personalized. Not only the complete patient's medical information (anatomy, tumor size/shape/location/motion, breathing pattern, health status) should be taken into consideration during planning, but also a wide range of factors including imaging techniques (imaging modality, breathing control, immobilization, patient position, etc.), treatment planning techniques (3D-conformal, dynamic conformal arcs, IMRT, VMAT, etc.), image guidance techniques (CBCT, orthogonal X-Ray, fiducial marker tracking, fluoroscopy, etc.), and delivery techniques (FFF, gating, tracking, etc.). In addition, potential pitfalls may exist in SBRT techniques and processes, such as target volume error in 4DCT and image registration error in image guidance. How to manage these affecting factors to achieve optimal, personalized SBRT treatment plans remains a great challenge. In this proposal, we will review technologies, share experiences, and discuss strategies concerning SBRT simulation, planning, and delivery. Learning Objectives: Understand requirements and challenges of SBRT treatment planning Discuss information-driven strategies of developing optimal SBRT plans Discuss practical considerations and potential pitfalls of SBRT treatment planning.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

ObstacleSense: Low-Power Neuromorphic Vision for Corridor Obstacle Awareness in Low-Level ADAS

The automotive industry’s pursuit of Level 5 autonomy is constrained by substantial perception-compute power requirements, often reaching 1, 000 + watts in full autonomy stacks. Reducing this energy burden requires rethinking perception not only at the high-end autonomy level, but also at the foundational Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) level where low-power, safety-critical sensing can have broad impact. Neuromorphic vision provides a promising starting point: HD Dynamic Vision Sensors (DVS) can operate below 100 mW at the sensor level by reporting only asynchronous brightness changes. However, low-power sensing alone is insufficient if downstream perception reintroduces dense, energy-intensive computation. In particular, many event-driven object-detection pipelines still rely on CNN backbones, while purely spiking alternatives often trade away accuracy or ignore deployment constraints. We introduce ObstacleSense, a highly compact, CNN-free hybrid ANN–SNN framework for Level 0–1 forward-corridor obstacle awareness. Instead of performing full-scene object detection with a convolutional feature backbone, ObstacleSense targets the safety-critical question of whether the ego corridor is occupied and how far the nearest obstacle is. The architecture combines polarity-conditioned event encoding, lightweight temporal spiking dynamics, axial spatial mixing, and coarse-to-fine range estimation within a regular fixed-grid compute pattern. This design avoids the dense CNN backbone commonly used in event-based detection while maintaining a small state footprint suitable for eventual small-FPGA deployment. Before hardware mapping, we evaluate the software implementation using a model-side power proxy derived from MACs, weight and activation traffic, and spiking state updates under shared FP16 assumptions. On simulated CARLA event corpora, the deployment-oriented model achieves 0.9464 objectness F1, 0.9978 grid-level mAP, and 0.8987 m distance Mean Absolute Error at an estimated 1.92 mW proxy cost, while maintaining performance on unseen generalization test sequences.

Johnson-Scott, Zac [ORNL]↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-BRD-00: Incident Learning / RO-ILS

It has long been standard practice in radiation oncology to report internally when a patient’s treatment has not gone as planned and to report events to regulatory agencies when legally required. Most potential errors are caught early and never affect the patient. Quality assurance steps routinely prevent errors from reaching the patient, and these “near misses” are much more frequent than treatment errors. A growing number of radiation oncology facilities have implemented incident learning systems to report and analyze both errors and near misses. Using the term “incident learning” instead of “event reporting” emphasizes the need to use these experiences to change the practice and make future errors less likely and promote an educational, non-punitive environment. There are challenges in making such a system practical and effective. Speakers from institutions of different sizes and practice environments will share their experiences on how to make such a system work and what benefits their clinics have accrued. Questions that will be addressed include: How to create a system that is easy for front line staff to access How to motivate staff to report How to promote the system as positive and educational and not punitive or demeaning How to organize the team for reviewing and responding to reports How to prioritize which reports to discuss in depth How not to dismiss the rest How to identify underlying causes How to design corrective actions and implement change How to develop useful statistics and analysis tools How to coordinate a departmental system with a larger risk management system How to do this without a dedicated quality manager Some speakers’ experience is with in-house systems and some will share experience with the AAPM/ASTRO national Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). Reports intended to be of value nationally need to be comprehensible to outsiders; examples of useful reports will be shown. There will be ample time set aside for audience members to contribute to the discussion. Learning Objectives: Learn how to promote the use of an incident learning system in a clinic. Learn how to convert “event reporting” into “incident learning”. See examples of practice changes that have come out of learning systems. Learn how the RO-ILS system can be used as a primary internal learning system. Learn how to create succinct, meaningful reports useful to outside readers. Gary Ezzell chairs the AAPM committee overseeing RO-ILS and has received an honorarium from ASTRO for working on the committee reviewing RO-ILS reports. Derek Brown is a director of http://TreatSafely.org . Brett Miller has previously received travel expenses and an honorarium from Varian. Phillip Beron has nothing to report.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-BRD-01: Making Incident Learning Practical and Useful: Challenges and Previous Experiences

It has long been standard practice in radiation oncology to report internally when a patient’s treatment has not gone as planned and to report events to regulatory agencies when legally required. Most potential errors are caught early and never affect the patient. Quality assurance steps routinely prevent errors from reaching the patient, and these “near misses” are much more frequent than treatment errors. A growing number of radiation oncology facilities have implemented incident learning systems to report and analyze both errors and near misses. Using the term “incident learning” instead of “event reporting” emphasizes the need to use these experiences to change the practice and make future errors less likely and promote an educational, non-punitive environment. There are challenges in making such a system practical and effective. Speakers from institutions of different sizes and practice environments will share their experiences on how to make such a system work and what benefits their clinics have accrued. Questions that will be addressed include: How to create a system that is easy for front line staff to access How to motivate staff to report How to promote the system as positive and educational and not punitive or demeaning How to organize the team for reviewing and responding to reports How to prioritize which reports to discuss in depth How not to dismiss the rest How to identify underlying causes How to design corrective actions and implement change How to develop useful statistics and analysis tools How to coordinate a departmental system with a larger risk management system How to do this without a dedicated quality manager Some speakers’ experience is with in-house systems and some will share experience with the AAPM/ASTRO national Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). Reports intended to be of value nationally need to be comprehensible to outsiders; examples of useful reports will be shown. There will be ample time set aside for audience members to contribute to the discussion. Learning Objectives: Learn how to promote the use of an incident learning system in a clinic. Learn how to convert “event reporting” into “incident learning”. See examples of practice changes that have come out of learning systems. Learn how the RO-ILS system can be used as a primary internal learning system. Learn how to create succinct, meaningful reports useful to outside readers. Gary Ezzell chairs the AAPM committee overseeing RO-ILS and has received an honorarium from ASTRO for working on the committee reviewing RO-ILS reports. Derek Brown is a director of http://TreatSafely.org . Brett Miller has previously received travel expenses and an honorarium from Varian. Phillip Beron has nothing to report.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-BRD-02: Henry Ford Hospital System Experience, with Focus On Motivating and Reviewing

It has long been standard practice in radiation oncology to report internally when a patient’s treatment has not gone as planned and to report events to regulatory agencies when legally required. Most potential errors are caught early and never affect the patient. Quality assurance steps routinely prevent errors from reaching the patient, and these “near misses” are much more frequent than treatment errors. A growing number of radiation oncology facilities have implemented incident learning systems to report and analyze both errors and near misses. Using the term “incident learning” instead of “event reporting” emphasizes the need to use these experiences to change the practice and make future errors less likely and promote an educational, non-punitive environment. There are challenges in making such a system practical and effective. Speakers from institutions of different sizes and practice environments will share their experiences on how to make such a system work and what benefits their clinics have accrued. Questions that will be addressed include: How to create a system that is easy for front line staff to access How to motivate staff to report How to promote the system as positive and educational and not punitive or demeaning How to organize the team for reviewing and responding to reports How to prioritize which reports to discuss in depth How not to dismiss the rest How to identify underlying causes How to design corrective actions and implement change How to develop useful statistics and analysis tools How to coordinate a departmental system with a larger risk management system How to do this without a dedicated quality manager Some speakers’ experience is with in-house systems and some will share experience with the AAPM/ASTRO national Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). Reports intended to be of value nationally need to be comprehensible to outsiders; examples of useful reports will be shown. There will be ample time set aside for audience members to contribute to the discussion. Learning Objectives: Learn how to promote the use of an incident learning system in a clinic. Learn how to convert “event reporting” into “incident learning”. See examples of practice changes that have come out of learning systems. Learn how the RO-ILS system can be used as a primary internal learning system. Learn how to create succinct, meaningful reports useful to outside readers. Gary Ezzell chairs the AAPM committee overseeing RO-ILS and has received an honorarium from ASTRO for working on the committee reviewing RO-ILS reports. Derek Brown is a director of http://TreatSafely.org . Brett Miller has previously received travel expenses and an honorarium from Varian. Phillip Beron has nothing to report.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-BRD-03: UCSD Experience, with Focus On Implementing Change

It has long been standard practice in radiation oncology to report internally when a patient’s treatment has not gone as planned and to report events to regulatory agencies when legally required. Most potential errors are caught early and never affect the patient. Quality assurance steps routinely prevent errors from reaching the patient, and these “near misses” are much more frequent than treatment errors. A growing number of radiation oncology facilities have implemented incident learning systems to report and analyze both errors and near misses. Using the term “incident learning” instead of “event reporting” emphasizes the need to use these experiences to change the practice and make future errors less likely and promote an educational, non-punitive environment. There are challenges in making such a system practical and effective. Speakers from institutions of different sizes and practice environments will share their experiences on how to make such a system work and what benefits their clinics have accrued. Questions that will be addressed include: How to create a system that is easy for front line staff to access How to motivate staff to report How to promote the system as positive and educational and not punitive or demeaning How to organize the team for reviewing and responding to reports How to prioritize which reports to discuss in depth How not to dismiss the rest How to identify underlying causes How to design corrective actions and implement change How to develop useful statistics and analysis tools How to coordinate a departmental system with a larger risk management system How to do this without a dedicated quality manager Some speakers’ experience is with in-house systems and some will share experience with the AAPM/ASTRO national Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). Reports intended to be of value nationally need to be comprehensible to outsiders; examples of useful reports will be shown. There will be ample time set aside for audience members to contribute to the discussion. Learning Objectives: Learn how to promote the use of an incident learning system in a clinic. Learn how to convert “event reporting” into “incident learning”. See examples of practice changes that have come out of learning systems. Learn how the RO-ILS system can be used as a primary internal learning system. Learn how to create succinct, meaningful reports useful to outside readers. Gary Ezzell chairs the AAPM committee overseeing RO-ILS and has received an honorarium from ASTRO for working on the committee reviewing RO-ILS reports. Derek Brown is a director of http://TreatSafely.org . Brett Miller has previously received travel expenses and an honorarium from Varian. Phillip Beron has nothing to report.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

TU-CD-BRD-04: UCLA Experience, with Focus On Developing Metrics and Using RO-ILS

It has long been standard practice in radiation oncology to report internally when a patient’s treatment has not gone as planned and to report events to regulatory agencies when legally required. Most potential errors are caught early and never affect the patient. Quality assurance steps routinely prevent errors from reaching the patient, and these “near misses” are much more frequent than treatment errors. A growing number of radiation oncology facilities have implemented incident learning systems to report and analyze both errors and near misses. Using the term “incident learning” instead of “event reporting” emphasizes the need to use these experiences to change the practice and make future errors less likely and promote an educational, non-punitive environment. There are challenges in making such a system practical and effective. Speakers from institutions of different sizes and practice environments will share their experiences on how to make such a system work and what benefits their clinics have accrued. Questions that will be addressed include: How to create a system that is easy for front line staff to access How to motivate staff to report How to promote the system as positive and educational and not punitive or demeaning How to organize the team for reviewing and responding to reports How to prioritize which reports to discuss in depth How not to dismiss the rest How to identify underlying causes How to design corrective actions and implement change How to develop useful statistics and analysis tools How to coordinate a departmental system with a larger risk management system How to do this without a dedicated quality manager Some speakers’ experience is with in-house systems and some will share experience with the AAPM/ASTRO national Radiation Oncology Incident Learning System (RO-ILS). Reports intended to be of value nationally need to be comprehensible to outsiders; examples of useful reports will be shown. There will be ample time set aside for audience members to contribute to the discussion. Learning Objectives: Learn how to promote the use of an incident learning system in a clinic. Learn how to convert “event reporting” into “incident learning”. See examples of practice changes that have come out of learning systems. Learn how the RO-ILS system can be used as a primary internal learning system. Learn how to create succinct, meaningful reports useful to outside readers. Gary Ezzell chairs the AAPM committee overseeing RO-ILS and has received an honorarium from ASTRO for working on the committee reviewing RO-ILS reports. Derek Brown is a director of http://TreatSafely.org . Brett Miller has previously received travel expenses and an honorarium from Varian. Phillip Beron has nothing to report.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Analyzing Hardware and Software Common Cause Failures in Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems using Dual Error Propagation Method

This paper develops a methodology for quantifying software common cause failures (CCFs) in digital instrumentation and control (I&C) systems of nuclear power plants. To support the transition of analog I&C systems to digital in nuclear power plants, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) techniques are used. The hardware components of the I&C systems have reliability databases that can be used in the PRA studies. However, the failure data for redundant software components of the systems is sparse. Failure of components constitutes a CCF, wherein two or more components or systems fail due to a single shared cause and coupling mechanism. This paper proposes a quantification approach that can simultaneously model hardware and software components, incorporate the CCFs of software systems in the models, and bridge the gap between the failure quantification of models and the development of CCF parametric databases. We demonstrate the dual error propagation method (DEPM) by developing I&C systems failure models for a representative digital reactor trip system. The DEPM models are built to simulate the control and data flows within the systems and can accommodate failure states. By expanding DEPM to software CCFs, we generated alpha factor parameter estimates for each of the modeled error propagation mechanisms.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Waveform Data Quality Assessment

Healthy seismoacoustic sensors and accurate metadata are critical to all the science objectives of both the Source Physics Experiment (SPE) Rock Valley Direct Comparison (RV/DC) and LowYield Physics Experiment-1 (LYNM PE-1). Both projects share similar seismoacoustic stations. We provide a plan on how to move forward with waveform data quality assessments (QA) to the working groups. The identification of stations with instrument response errors will be useful to researchers using amplitudes to study source effects and Earth attenuation. The data QA can also be useful for field technicians to help identify and correct problem sites.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2013

DOMINO: A fast 3D cartesian discrete ordinates solver for reference PWR simulations and SPN validation

As part of its activity, EDF R and D is developing a new nuclear core simulation code named COCAGNE. This code relies on DIABOLO, a Simplified PN (SPN) method to compute the neutron flux inside the core for eigenvalue calculations. In order to assess the accuracy of SPN calculations, we have developed DOMINO, a new 3D Cartesian SN solver. The parallel implementation of DOMINO is very efficient and allows to complete an eigenvalue calculation involving around 300 x 10{sup 9} degrees of freedom within a few hours on a single shared-memory supercomputing node. This computation corresponds to a 26-group S{sub 8} 3D PWR core model used to assess the SPN accuracy. At the pin level, the maximal error for the SP{sub 5} DIABOLO fission production rate is lower than 0.2% compared to the S{sub 8} DOMINO reference for this 3D PWR core model. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Heterogeneous catalysis: Optimal performance at a phase boundary?

Most of the industrially used heterogeneous catalysts have been discovered by trial and error, and despite decades of experience, the discovery of new catalysts continues to be extremely challenging. The drive to uncover guiding principles in catalyst design is more present than ever. We share a series of observations indicating that optimal catalysts typically function at characteristic phase boundaries (e.g., abrupt changes in adsorbate coverage, catalyst structure, etc.) accessed in the reaction conditions. The catalyst exploits the associated instability—the desire to exist in multiple states simultaneously—as a driving force for chemical transformations. In other words, phase boundaries are good places to start the catalyst search, and indeed, we should focus on at least two phases at once rather than just one. Here, we substantiate this claim with several studies that combine statistical operando modeling and experiments. Transpiring from these observations is a hitherto unrecognized vector in catalyst discovery.

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

MCR Container Tools

MathWorks' MATLAB is widely used in academia and industry for prototyping, data analysis, data processing, etc. Many users compile their programs using the MATLAB Compiler to run on workstations/computing clusters via the free MATLAB Compiler Runtime (MCR). The MCR facilitates the execution of code calling Application Programming Interfaces (API) functions from both base MATLAB and MATLAB toolboxes. In a Linux environment, a sizable number of third-party runtime dependencies (i.e. shared libraries) are necessary. Unfortunately, to the MTLAB community's knowledge, these dependencies are not documented, leaving system administrators and/or end-users to find/install the necessary libraries either as runtime errors resulting from them missing or by inspecting the header information of Executable and Linkable Format (ELF) libraries of the MCR to determine which ones are missing from the system. To address various shortcomings, Docker Images based on Community Enterprise Operating System (CentOS) 7, a derivative of Redhat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 7, containing recent (2015-2017) MCR releases and their dependencies were created. These images, along with a provided sample Docker Compose YAML Script, can be used to create a simulated computing cluster where MATLAB Compiler created binaries can be executed using a sample Slurm Workload Manager script.

Haas, NicholasQ↗
DOE OSTI2013

NREL Launches Collaborative Resource for Field Test Best Practices [Fact Sheet]

Dynamic portal documents and shares state-of-the-art residential field test tools and techniques. Field testing is a science and an art—a tricky process that develops through a lot of trial and error. Researchers in the Advanced Residential Buildings group at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) regularly conduct field experiments and long-term monitoring in occupied and unoccupied houses throughout the United States. The goal is to capture real-world performance of energy-efficient systems, in support of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Building America program. In addition to the technical challenges of making accurate field measurements, NREL researchers realized another problem: the vast body of field test know-how based on years of collective experience is currently scattered throughout the building science community. To address this need, NREL developed the Field Test Best Practices website, a dynamic, collaborative resource that documents practical “lessons from the field” for building scientists nationwide.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2015

Brahman

The Adversary & Interdiction Methods (AIM) program provides training and capability assessment services to government agencies around the country. Interdisciplinary teams equipped with gear and radioactive sources are repeatedly fielded to offsite events to collaborate with law enforcement agencies at all levels of government. AIM has grown rapidly over the past three years. A knowledge management system as evolved along with the program but it has failed to keep pace. A new system is needed. The new system must comply with cybersecurity and information technology solutions already in place at an institutional level. The offsite nature of AIM activities must also be accommodated. Cost and schedule preclude the commissioning of new software and the procurement of expensive hardware. The new system must exploit in-house capabilities and be established quickly. A novel system is proposed. This solution centers on a recently introduced institutional file sharing capability called Syncplicity. AIM-authored software will be combined with a dedicated institutional account to vastly extend the capability of this resource. The new knowledge management system will reduce error and increase efficiency through automation and be accessible offsite via mobile devices.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demonstration of OpenMC as a framework for atomic transport and plasma interaction

Modern tooling is demanded for predicting the transport and reaction characteristics of atoms and molecules, especially in the context of magnetic confinement fusion. DEGAS2, among the most common and capable tools currently in use, shares many fundamental similarities with the OpenMC framework, which was primarily developed for neutron and photon transport. In this work, we demonstrate that OpenMC is suitable for atomic transport calculations. The relative error between the models is small, and the performance of OpenMC is at least comparable to DEGAS2. This is the case even without taking advantage of heterogeneous computing architecture, which is only one of the several remarkable new capabilities that this demonstration heralds.

Monte Carlo↗
DOE OSTI2016

Privacy-Assured Aggregation Protocol for Smart Metering: A Proactive Fault-Tolerant Approach [Proactive Fault-Tolerant Aggregation Protocol for Privacy-Assured Smart Metering]

Smart meters are integral to demand response in emerging smart grids, by reporting the electricity consumption of users to serve application needs. But reporting real-time usage information for individual households raises privacy concerns. Existing techniques to guarantee differential privacy (DP) of smart meter users either are not fault tolerant or achieve (possibly partial) fault tolerance at high communication overheads. In this paper, we propose a fault-tolerant protocol for smart metering that can handle general communication failures while ensuring DP with significantly improved efficiency and lower errors compared with the state of the art. Our protocol handles fail-stop faults proactively by using a novel design of future ciphertexts, and distributes trust among the smart meters by sharing secret keys among them. We prove the DP properties of our protocol and analyze its advantages in fault tolerance, accuracy, and communication efficiency relative to competing techniques. We illustrate our analysis by simulations driven by real-world traces of electricity consumption.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗