Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “full field uncertainty”

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 145 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Computational tools and data integration to accelerate vaccine development: challenges, opportunities, and future directions

The development of effective vaccines is crucial for combating current and emerging pathogens. Despite significant advances in the field of vaccine development there remain numerous challenges including the lack of standardized data reporting and curation practices, making it difficult to determine correlates of protection from experimental and clinical studies. Significant gaps in data and knowledge integration can hinder vaccine development which relies on a comprehensive understanding of the interplay between pathogens and the host immune system. In this review, we explore the current landscape of vaccine development, highlighting the computational challenges, limitations, and opportunities associated with integrating diverse data types for leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) techniques in vaccine design. We discuss the role of natural language processing, semantic integration, and causal inference in extracting valuable insights from published literature and unstructured data sources, as well as the computational modeling of immune responses. Furthermore, we highlight specific challenges associated with uncertainty quantification in vaccine development and emphasize the importance of establishing standardized data formats and ontologies to facilitate the integration and analysis of heterogeneous data. Through data harmonization and integration, the development of safe and effective vaccines can be accelerated to improve public health outcomes. Looking to the future, we highlight the need for collaborative efforts among researchers, data scientists, and public health experts to realize the full potential of AI-assisted vaccine design and streamline the vaccine development process.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Lyman- α forest from LBGs: First 3D correlation measurement with DESI and prospects for cosmology

The Lyman-α (Lyα) forest is a key tracer of large-scale structure at redshifts z > 2, traditionally studied using the spectra of luminous but relatively rare quasars. In this work, we explore the viability of using the fainter yet significantly more abundant Lyman Break Galaxies (LBGs) as alternative background sources for Lyα forest studies. We analyze 4,151 Lyα forest skewers extracted from LBG spectra obtained in the DESI pilot surveys conducted in the COSMOS and XMM-LSS fields. From this dataset, we present the first measurement of the Lyα forest auto-correlation function derived exclusively from LBG spectra, probing comoving separations up to 48 h -1 Mpc at an effective redshift of z eff = 2.70. The measured LBG Lyα forest auto-correlation is consistent with that derived from DESI DR2 quasar Lyα forest spectra at a comparable redshift, validating the use of LBGs as reliable background sources for Lyα forest analyses. In addition, we measure the cross-correlation between the LBG Lyα forest and the positions of 13,362 galaxies, demonstrating that this observable serves as a sensitive diagnostic for assessing the precision and accuracy of galaxy redshift estimates, and for identifying and correcting systematic offsets. Finally, using both synthetic LBG spectra and Fisher matrix forecasts, we show that a future wide-area survey covering ∼5,000 deg 2 , targeting 1,000 LBGs per square degree at signal-to-noise levels comparable to our sample, could enable LBG-based Lyα forest baryon acoustic oscillation (BAO) measurements with expected uncertainties of σ α ISO = 0.4% (isotropic) and σ α AP = 1.3% (Alcock-Paczynski). This performance is further enhanced when combining the BAO analysis with a Lyα forest Full Shape (FS) approach, yielding a predicted uncertainty of σ α ISO FS = 0.6%. These results open a new avenue for precision cosmology at high redshift using the Lyα forest in dense LBG samples.

Lyman alpha forest↗
DOE OSTI2022

Robust Carbon Dioxide Plume Imaging Using Joint Tomographic Inversion of Seismic Onset Time and Distributed Pressure and Temperature Measurements (Final Report)

We develop and demonstrate rapid and cost-effective methodologies for spatiotemporal tracking of CO2 plumes during geologic sequestration using joint inversion of seismic data and distributed pressure and temperature measurements. Key elements of our methodology are: (a) a computationally efficient approach to pressure and temperature propagation, (b) analysis of time lapse seismic data using a novel ‘seismic onset time’ approach to detect fluid front propagation, and (c) data assimilation and uncertainty assessment via joint inversion of pressure, temperature and time lapse seismic data, and (d) validating the numerical tomographic inversion using a CO2 injection demonstration projects, specifically data collected from the from the Petra Nova Parish Holdings CCUS project in the West Ranch Field, Texas and the Chester-16 reef CO2 injection site in Northern Michigan which is part of the DOE Midwestern Carbon Sequestration Project. The research team is led by Texas A&M University and includes Battelle as a subcontractor with support from Shell, Anadarko, Chevron and JX Nippon. A carbon dioxide (CO2) water-alternating-gas (WAG) pilot was conducted to gain insights into tertiary oil recovery potential via CO2 flood in the West Ranch Field as part of the Petra Nova project, the world’s largest post-combustion CO2 capture and utilization initiative. With a fluvial formation geology and large contrasts in permeability, this is a challenging and novel application of CO2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR). We build a predictive dynamic model of the subsurface that incorporates the multiphase and compositional data acquired during the pilot operation. The calibrated model is used for the carbon dioxide plume imaging. The study began with an initialization of the pilot sector model extracted from a calibrated full-field model. The pilot model calibration follows a two-step hierarchical workflow. First, we performed a large-scale update of the permeability distribution by integrating available bottomhole pressure and multiphase production data. In the second step, local permeability field is fine-tuned using a streamline-based method to match CO2 breakthrough times at the producers. The predictive capability of the calibrated model was verified through two blind validation tests: (1) the model showed good agreement with saturation logs acquired at two observation wells; and (2) the model reproduced the CO2 recovery as a fraction of the injected CO2. The use of seismic onset times has shown great promise for integrating near-continuous seismic surveys for updating geologic models. In this study, we analyze the impact of seismic survey frequency on the onset time approach aiming to extend the application of onset time to infrequent seismic surveys. In addition, we quantitatively examine the nonlinearity of the onset time method and compare it to the commonly used amplitude inversion method. We carry out a sensitivity analysis of seismic survey frequency based on the complete seismic survey data (over 175 surveys) of steam injection in a heavy oil reservoir (Peace River Unit) in Canada. Our results show that an adequate onset time map can be obtained from the infrequent seismic surveys by interpolation between seismic surveys as long as there is no change in the dominant underlying physics between the successive surveys. The study also shows that nonlinearity of the onset time method can be -smaller than that of the amplitude inversion method by several orders of magnitude. Application to the Brugge benchmark case shows that the onset time method obtains comparable permeability update as the traditional seismic amplitude inversion method with faster computation and improved convergence characteristics. We extend the streamline-based data integration approach to incorporate distributed temperature sensor (DTS) data using the concept of thermal tracer travel time. Then, a hierarchical workflow composed of evolutionary and streamline methods is employed to jointly history match the DTS and pressure data. Finally, CO2 saturation and streamline maps are used to visualize the CO2 plume movement during the sequestration process. The hierarchical workflow is applied to a carbon sequestration project in a carbonate reef reservoir within the Northern Niagaran Pinnacle Reef Trend in Michigan, USA. The monitoring data set consists of distributed temperature sensing (DTS) data acquired at the injection well and a monitoring well, flowing bottom-hole pressure data at the injection well, and time-lapse pressure measurements at several locations along the monitoring well. The history matching results indicate that the CO2 movement is mostly restricted to the intended zones of injection which is consistent with an independent warm-back analysis of the temperature data. In addition to employing simulation models and inverse methods for CO2 plume imaging, we also initialized a data-driven technology for detecting inter-well connectivity based on production and pressure data. Our machine-learning framework is built on the statistical recurrent unit (SRU) model and interprets well-based injection/production data into inter-well connectivity without relying on a geologic model. We test it on synthetic and field-scale CO2 EOR projects utilizing the water-alternating-gas (WAG) process. The validation of the proposed data-driven inter-well connectivity assessment is performed using synthetic data from simulation models where inter-well connectivity can be easily measured using the streamline-based flux allocation. The SRU model is shown to offer excellent prediction performance on the synthetic case. Despite significant measurement noise and frequent well shut-ins imposed in the field-scale case, the SRU model offers good prediction accuracy, the overall relative error of the phase production rates at most producers ranges from 10% to 30%. It is shown that the dominant connections identified by the data-driven method and streamline method are in close agreement. Texas A&M University, the lead organization in the project, was primarily responsible for the development of tomographic approaches for CO2 plume mapping in conjunction with distributed pressure, temperature and seismic onset time data. Battelle, as a subcontractor, was primarily responsible for the development of analytical and empirical methods for analyzing transient injection rate and pressure data from point/line sources such as injection and monitoring wells. An additional area of emphasis for Battelle was the use of machine learning for such tasks as inferring reservoir connectivity information from injection-production data, and identifying variable importance for machine learning-based proxy models developed from full-physics simulations. The two organizations also collaborated on the application of the tomographic inversion methodology for a field data set.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2022

Raman and infrared spectra of plutonium (IV) oxalate and its thermal degradation products

For over 80 years, plutonium dioxide has been routinely produced via thermal decomposition of hydrated plutonium(IV) oxalate. Despite the longstanding utility of this process, the chemical structures of starting materials and intermediates produced during this thermal conversion remain ill-defined. To help resolve this uncertainty, we measured high-resolution Raman and infrared spectra of Pu(C 2 O 4 ) 2 ·6H 2 O that was heated to 25, 100, 220, 250, 350, and 450 °C in air. Our measurements show that Pu(C 2 O 4 ) 2 ·6H 2 O has a rich vibrational spectrum with at least 15 Raman bands between 180 cm -1 and 1900 cm -1 and 9 infrared bands between 800 cm -1 and 4000 cm -1 . As Pu(C 2 O 4 ) 2 ·6H 2 O is heated, water is liberated, and the oxalate ligand decomposes to produce plutonium oxycarbide species. When heated to 350 °C or higher, vibrational spectra are consistent with PuO 2 with some residual carbon-containing species. Full vibrational spectra, powder X-ray diffraction, and scanning electron microscopy measurements of Pu(C 2 O 4 ) 2 ·6H 2 O and its thermal degradation products are presented herein along with approximate assignments for observed spectral bands. These data can be used to validate and potentially improve existing computational models that describe the chemical structure of compounds produced during thermal degradation of plutonium (IV) oxalate. Given the utility of plutonium (IV) oxalate in synthesizing plutonium dioxide, these results are expected to provide value in the fields of nuclear fuel processing, nuclear nonproliferation, and nuclear forensics.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2023

Full spectrum (350-2500 nm) leaf and canopy spectral reflectance, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2019

Full-range (350 - 2500 nm) leaf and canopy reflectance spectra of various Arctic tundra ecosystem endmembers, including species-level leaf reflectance, canopy-scale species endmember spectra, plot-scale spectra, and transect spectra. These data were collected in support of ongoing NASA ABoVE AVIRIS data synthesis work. The datasets were collected at the NGEE-Arctic watershed sites, Kougarok MM64 and MM80, and Teller MM27 on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. The data were collected in July 2019 using a full-range Spectra Vista Corporation (SVC) HR-1024i spectroradiometer. Leaf-level spectra were collected with the original SVC leaf clip/plant probe connected to the spectrometer through a 1.15 meter long fiber optic cable, while canopy-scale reflectance was collected with an 8-degree field-of-view (FOV) foreoptic lens. All spectral measurements were collected as calibrated surface radiance and converted to surface reflectance using a 99.99% reflective Spectralon white reference standard. For those canopy spectra collected with associated functional trait data, the FOV of the instrument was positioned to include the same leaves harvested for functional trait measurements, including leaf mass per area (LMA) and foliar carbon and nitrogen content (see leaf trait data package for these data). Canopy spectra were obtained for 23 different species, and leaf spectra for 8 species. This data package includes processed canopy and leaf spectra (*.csv), processed dGPS locations (*.csv and *.kmz), digital photographs of spectral targets (*.jpg) and raw data from spectroradiometer and dGPS instruments (compressed as tar.gz). Metadata files include data descriptions (_dd.csv) for tabular data and a key to species symbols used in data files. All included files are listed and described in NGA212_flmd.csv.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a 15-year research effort (2012-2027) to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Chemically Enabled CO 2 -Enhanced Oil Recovery in Multi-Porosity, Hydrothermally Altered Carbonates in the Southern Michigan Basin (Final Technical Report)

This is the Final Technical Report for the project "Chemically Enabled CO 2 -Enhanced Oil Recovery in Multi-Porosity, Hydrothermally Altered Carbonates in the Southern Michigan Basin." Over the course of six years of collaboration between Battelle and project partners, all stated objectives of the program have been completed, including full geological characterization of the TBR trend (See companion report for Task2), laboratory and modeling experiments to determine the optimum composition and design of CO 2 -EOR operations in the TBR trend, execution of a field test of chemically-enhanced CO 2 in a TBR well, and integration of the data and learnings gathered during these efforts into a full-trend development plan. Detailed reporting on these activities, their outcomes, and implications for trend-wide development is provided in the report. This report and encompassed data will provide TBR field operators with detailed information on what worked, what did not work, and how to proceed with production optimization of their TBR assets using chemically-enhanced CO 2 -EOR. CO 2 -EOR is a relatively well understood and broadly implemented strategy for increasing incremental production across the oil and gas industry, but its application has been primarily focused on reservoirs with limited heterogeneity. The intention of this project was show first that the same physical mechanisms that improve recovery factors in homogeneous reservoirs (namely wettability alteration, viscosity alteration, oil swelling, and mobility control) are at play in heterogeneous reservoirs. This was proven by the project’s laboratory studies and dynamic simulations, with the potential exception of mobility control, which needs further study. The second intention was to demonstrate via direct field testing that CO 2 -EOR can work in a strongly heterogeneous reservoir. While the field test strategy implemented during this project did not succeed in producing oil, data gathered during the test sheds light on what may work for field operators who try chemically-enhanced CO 2 -EOR within their own reservoirs, significantly reducing the level of uncertainty carried by first-of-a-kind commercial efforts that could (and should) follow this test. Simultaneously, the project has identified several large-volume ethanol plants and other sources of CO 2 emissions in the region and provided a handrail that CO 2 emitters and field operators can leverage to capture, transport, and inject that CO 2 into their fields. This project has also shown that, in many cases, the economics of CO 2 -EOR in the TBR are attractive. And finally, by completing a project of this scope in the southern Michigan Basin, the project has contributed to the knowledge base and operational experience of field operators, state regulatory agencies, local service companies, and state universities, with CO 2 -EOR projects which should allow follow-on projects to proceed safely and efficiently.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluating the Effects of Detector Modeling Uncertainties on Sterile Neutrino Oscillation Analysis with the ICARUS Detector

he ICARUS T600 LArTPC detector was refurbished after an initial run at the underground LNGS labs and is currently taking data within its experimental hall at Fermilab after full commissioning. Regular data taking began in May 2021 with neutrinos from the Booster Neutrino Beam (BNB) and the Neutrinos at the Main Injector (NuMI) off-axis beam. As the far detector of the Short-Baseline Neutrino (SBN) Program, the ICARUS detector's capability in searching for both muon neutrino disappearance and electron neutrino appearance will allow for unprecedented sensitivity to light sterile neutrinos with eV-scale mass. The ultimate sensitivity of the detector to sterile neutrino oscillations depends on the understanding of the detector response and the uncertainties remaining after calibrating the detector model. This poster will review how detector-model-related uncertainties are quantified, evaluated and their impact on expected sterile neutrino oscillation sensitivities using the existing ICARUS data. The work pursued here is broadly applicable to other ICARUS analysis pathways such as neutrino-argon cross-sections and Beyond the Standard Model physics searches. It will finally discuss improvement pathways to reduce the systematic uncertainties to the level needed for the joint sterile neutrino oscillation analysis with the Short Baseline Near Detector (SBND) within the SBN Program.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Model uncertainty in accelerator application simulations

Monte-Carlo nuclear reaction and transport codes are widely used to devise accelerator-based nuclear physics experiments; at the same time, many experiments are performed to validate the Monte-Carlo codes, which can be used for the design of full-scale nuclear power applications or the design of new benchmark experiments. Dedicated model benchmark studies investigate a broad range of nuclear reactions and quantities. Examples of these include isotope formation or secondary particle fluxes that result from the interactions of GeV-range hadrons with monoisotopic targets, which can be used to assess the respective systematic uncertainty of models. Such benchmark studies, as well as many nuclear application experiments and simulations carried out by various groups over the last few decades, enable us to draw methodological lessons. In this work, model uncertainty determined based on available experimental data allow us to identify the effects of practitioner expertise as well as the design of codes (user access to micro-scale parameters) on the range of uncertainties. We found that in cases when simulations are performed by code developers or users that are very experienced in performing simulations, the model to experiment quantity ratios generally agree with the limits determined by dedicated benchmark studies. In other cases, the ratios generally tend to be either smaller (underestimation of model error) or larger (overestimation of model error). A plausible explanation of the aforementioned effects is suggested.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Substantial and overlooked greenhouse gas emissions from deep Arctic lake sediment - supporting data and code

This data package contains data, descriptions, and code-based analyses that were used to support conclusions drawn in “Substantial and overlooked greenhouse gas emissions from deep Arctic lake sediment”, by Freitas et al. (2025) (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01614-y). The study evaluated greenhouse gas production along a deep sediment core (20 m) taken in 2018 from below Goldstream Lake, a field site approximately 15 km north of Fairbanks, Alaska.The file “ESSDive_NFreitas_2024_flmd.csv” includes an overview of all other csv files in this data package, namely: sediment descriptions (depth and type of sediment), sediment characterizations (bulk density, gravimetric water content, total carbon, etc.), calculated respiration and temperature sensitivity values associated with year-long incubations of the sediment core, and the R code used to process the dataset. Additional details regarding the content of these files and how the calculations were performed are described in the Methods section of this archive. The “data_dictionary_ESSDive_NFreitas_2024_dd.csv” is a data dictionary for all files included in the data package. Each row in the data dictionary represents a column name in a given file. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).Data package updates- August 2024: Title was updated, R code now includes a process for calculating potential production across the whole sediment column, the "sediment_column_production_potentials_ESSDive_NFreitas_2024.csv" is the associated data output file, and the file level metadata and data dictionaries were updated to reflect the contents of the additional csv file.- October 2024: Title was updated, and a statement was added to Step 2 of the Methods that describes that samples were collected (and exported) in a responsible manner and in accordance with relevant permits and local laws.- January 2025: Updated the associated manuscript details in the Abstract (manuscript title, publication date, DOI link) and in the Related References section (full citation).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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 OSTI2024

DECOVALEX-2023: Task F2 Salt Final Report

The subject of Task F of DECOVALEX-2023 concerns performance assessment modelling of radioactive waste disposal in deep mined repositories. The primary objectives of Task F are to build confidence in the models, methods, and software used for performance assessment (PA) of deep geologic nuclear waste repositories, and/or to bring to the fore additional research and development needed to improve PA methodologies. In Task F2- (salt), these objectives have been accomplished through staged development and comparison of the models and methods used by participating teams in their PA frameworks. Coupled-process submodels and deterministic simulations of the entire PA model for a reference scenario for waste disposal in domal salt have been conducted. The task specification has been updated continuously since the initiation of the project to reflect the staged development of the conceptual repository model and performance metrics. Thermal, hydrological, mechanical, and chemical properties of individual components of the engineered and natural system were chosen for relevance by participating teams. The salt reference case system was characterized using data and measurements collected at relevant underground research laboratories (URLs), field sites, and simulation results from teams with specialized modelling capability. Participating teams made a wide range of model assumptions from compartmentalized networks to full 3D models of the salt formation. No single contributed model includes full-fidelity representation of all the features, events, and processes (FEPs) detailed in the task specification, but almost all features and processes are represented in at least one model. Despite differences in the modelling strategies developed by participating teams, all models indicate that salt compaction and radionuclide diffusion are key processes in the repository, and for the FEPs and model scenario considered, little of the disposed radionuclides will migrate beyond the repository seal over the 100,000 year simulations. In general, the model output quantities have the largest differences over the short term and near the waste. The models tend to be more similar further from waste and at later time. Disparities between the models are believed to be due to differing simplifications from the task specification, some of which are chosen simplifications to reduce complexity, and some are restrictions imposed by the modelling tools. A second round of this task has been accepted for DECOVALEX-2027 in conjunction with Task F1 on crystalline PA modelling. The future round includes waste package heating, improved modelling of salt creep closure, additional comparisons of coupled-process sub-models, and the impact of repository engineering design on radionuclide migration in the repository. Participants will also propose and finalize a set of uncertain inputs for the reference case simulations, propagate these uncertainties in a set of realizations, and conduct sensitivity analyses on the simulation results.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimization of algorithmic errors in analog quantum simulations

Due to rapidly improving quantum computing hardware, Hamiltonian simulations of relativistic lattice field theories have seen a resurgence of attention. Furthermore, this computational tool requires turning the formally infinite-dimensional Hilbert space of the full theory into a finite-dimensional one. For gauge theories, a widely used basis for the Hilbert space relies on the representations induced by the underlying gauge group, with a truncation that keeps only a set of the lowest dimensional representations. This works well at large bare gauge coupling, but becomes less efficient at small coupling, which is required for the continuum limit of the lattice theory. In this work, we develop a new basis suitable for the simulation of an SU(2) lattice gauge theory in the maximal tree gauge. In particular, we show how to perform a Hamiltonian truncation so that the eigenvalues of both the magnetic and electric gauge-fixed Hamiltonian are mostly preserved, which allows for this basis to be used at all values of the coupling. Little prior knowledge is assumed, so this may also be used as an introduction to the subject of Hamiltonian formulations of lattice gauge theories.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Semileptonic form factors for $$B\rightarrow D^*\ell \nu $$ at nonzero recoil from $$2+1$$-flavor lattice QCD: Fermilab Lattice and MILC Collaborations

Abstract We present the first unquenched lattice-QCD calculation of the form factors for the decay $$B\rightarrow D^*\ell \nu $$ B → D ∗ ℓ ν at nonzero recoil. Our analysis includes 15 MILC ensembles with $$N_f=2+1$$ N f = 2 + 1 flavors of asqtad sea quarks, with a strange quark mass close to its physical mass. The lattice spacings range from $$a\approx 0.15$$ a ≈ 0.15 fm down to 0.045 fm, while the ratio between the light- and the strange-quark masses ranges from 0.05 to 0.4. The valence b and c quarks are treated using the Wilson-clover action with the Fermilab interpretation, whereas the light sector employs asqtad staggered fermions. We extrapolate our results to the physical point in the continuum limit using rooted staggered heavy-light meson chiral perturbation theory. Then we apply a model-independent parametrization to extend the form factors to the full kinematic range. With this parametrization we perform a joint lattice-QCD/experiment fit using several experimental datasets to determine the CKM matrix element $$|V_{cb}|$$ | V cb | . We obtain $$\left| V_{cb}\right| = (38.40 \pm 0.68_{\text {th}} \pm 0.34_{\text {exp}} \pm 0.18_{\text {EM}})\times 10^{-3}$$ V cb = ( 38.40 ± 0 . 68 th ± 0 . 34 exp ± 0 . 18 EM ) × 10 - 3 . The first error is theoretical, the second comes from experiment and the last one includes electromagnetic and electroweak uncertainties, with an overall $$\chi ^2\text {/dof} = 126/84$$ χ 2 /dof = 126 / 84 , which illustrates the tensions between the experimental data sets, and between theory and experiment. This result is in agreement with previous exclusive determinations, but the tension with the inclusive determination remains. Finally, we integrate the differential decay rate obtained solely from lattice data to predict $$R(D^*) = 0.265 \pm 0.013$$ R ( D ∗ ) = 0.265 ± 0.013 , which confirms the current tension between theory and experiment.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Front-End Engineering and Design: Project Tundra Carbon Capture System (Final Report)

As the next phase of Project Tundra, Minnkota Power Cooperative (MPC) completed a front-end engineering and design (FEED) study to install a post-combustion CO 2 capture system (CCS) at the MPC operated (Square Butte Electric Cooperative-owned) Milton R. Young Station (MRYS) Unit 2 (MRY2), a 477-MW power plant fueled by North Dakota lignite. The project team completed the FEED with Fluor’s Econamine FG Plus℠ (EFG+) technology and is taking the next steps leading up to start of construction. Team members included FEED technical lead Fluor Enterprises (Fluor); owner’s engineer and balance of plant (BOP) engineer Burns & McDonnell (BMcD); leading carbon capture consultants (David Greeson Consulting, Hunt International Energy Services); environmental consultants (AECOM, Agora Environmental), other BOP engineering consultants (Golder Associates, Nels); cost-share funding agency, the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC); and the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC). Project Tundra’s goal is to implement carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) in North Dakota, while preserving the use of lignite. Future options could lead to revitalizing legacy oil fields and creating a new CO 2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) industry. The topic of this report is the FEED study for the carbon dioxide capture portion of Project Tundra. Building on the findings of a pre-FEED study for MRY2, the key deliverables contained in this FEED study are: a) design, costing, and performance data needed to commence project financing activities; b) engineering and material balances required to file for all project permits; and c) a final project schedule. Based on the results of the previous pre-FEED study, MPC and its team evaluated two options to provide the large amount of steam needed to operate the CCS: 1) installation of new natural gas package boilers and a new pipeline to supply natural gas to the facility and 2) extraction of steam from the existing MRYS steam turbine generator. The FEED study was performed using the package boilers option, as it was deemed to have the lowest technical risk, overall cost, and cost uncertainty. A key feature of the design, however, was the mixing the natural gas boilers’ flue gas with the MRY2 flue gas. This increased the size of the CCS system. This design also enabled the tie-in of Unit 1 flue gas for times when Unit 2 is offline. The CCS was designed to capture a combined 12,978 short tons per day (STPD) of CO 2 from the flue gases produced by the existing MRY Unit 2 along with flue gas produced by the new boiler package within the CCS. The 12,978 STPD CO 2 capture is achieved by normally processing 100% of the total available MRY Unit 2 flue gas (considering full load operation) and 100% of the boiler package flue gas, then removing 90% of the CO 2 available from the processed flue gas streams.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

Measurement of the transverse momentum distribution of Drell–Yan lepton pairs in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

This paper describes precision measurements of the transverse momentum $p_\mathrm {T}^{\ell \ell }$ ($\ell =e,\mu $) and of the angular variable $\phi ^{*}_{\eta }$ distributions of Drell–Yan lepton pairs in a mass range of 66–116 GeV. The analysis uses data from 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of proton–proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13\,$TeV collected by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC in 2015 and 2016. Measurements in electron-pair and muon-pair final states are performed in the same fiducial volumes, corrected for detector effects, and combined. Compared to previous measurements in proton–proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ and $8\,$TeV, these new measurements probe perturbative QCD at a higher centre-of-mass energy with a different composition of initial states. They reach a precision of 0.2$\%$ for the normalized spectra at low values of $p_\mathrm {T}^{\ell \ell }$. The data are compared with different QCD predictions, where it is found that predictions based on resummation approaches can describe the full spectrum within uncertainties.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗