Results for “space vector modulation” — Page 8

NASA NTRS2005

Adaptive Thresholding and Parameter Estimation for PPM

A method of adaptive setting of a threshold level for the detection of pulses in a pulse-position modulation (PPM) free-space optical communication system has been developed. In simplified terms, it is desirable to set a threshold value high enough to greatly reduce the probability (PFA as defined below) of erroneously detecting noise as signal pulses but not so high as to greatly reduce the probability (PD as defined below) of detecting any signal pulses that may be present along with noise. In the present method, the threshold level is varied with time, in response to changing conditions in the optical-communication channel, in an effort to maintain a balance between the aforesaid competing requirements. An integral part of this adaptation scheme is a scheme for estimating key parameters of the optical-communication channel in particular, parameters that describe the fading and total attenuation in the channel, and parameters that characterize spreading of pulses by atmospheric and other effects. The method can be implemented by software processing of digitized optoelectronic-detector output, and has been tested by computational simulation. In the first stage of processing by this method, the digitized values of the detector output during noise-only time slots of received PPM symbols are averaged to obtain a background level. This background level is subtracted from the detector output in the hope of reducing or eliminating the noise component in the remaining signal. (This background level should not be confused with the detection threshold, which is computed in the last stage of processing.) Next, the remaining signal - in effect, a vector of pulse samples - is normalized by dividing it by its L1 norm (in general, the L1 norm of a vector is defined as the sum of absolute magnitudes of its orthogonal components).

Arabshahi, Payman↗

NASA NTRS2015

Attitude Design for the LADEE Mission

The Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) satellite successfully completed its 148-day science investigation in a low-altitude, near-equatorial lunar orbit on April 18, 2014. The LADEE spacecraft was built, managed and operated by NASA's Ames Research Center (ARC). The Mission Operations Center (MOC) was located at Ames and was responsible for activity planning, command sequencing, trajectory and attitude design, orbit determination, and spacecraft operations. The Science Operations Center (SOC) was located at Goddard Space Flight Center and was responsible for science planning, data archiving and distribution. This paper details attitude design and operations support for the LADEE mission. LADEE's attitude design was shaped by a wide range of instrument pointing requirements that necessitated regular excursions from the baseline one revolution per orbit "Ram" attitude. Such attitude excursions were constrained by a number of flight rules levied to protect instruments from the Sun, avoid geometries that would result in simultaneous occlusion of LADEE's two star tracker heads, and maintain the spacecraft within its thermal and power operating limits. To satisfy LADEE's many attitude requirements and constraints, a set of rules and conventions was adopted to manage the complexity of this design challenge and facilitate the automation of ground software that generated pointing commands spanning multiple days of operations at a time. The resulting LADEE Flight Dynamics System (FDS) that was developed used Visual Basic scripts that generated instructions to AGI's Satellite Tool Kit (STK) in order to derive quaternion commands at regular intervals that satisfied LADEE's pointing requirements. These scripts relied heavily on the powerful "align and constrain" capability of STK's attitude module to construct LADEE's attitude profiles and the slews to get there. A description of the scripts and the attitude modeling they embodied is provided. One particular challenge analysts faced was in the design of LADEE maneuver attitudes. A flight rule requiring pre-maneuver verification of in-flight maneuver conditions by ground operators prior to burn execution resulted in the need to accommodate long periods in the maneuver attitude. This in turn complicated efforts to satisfy star tracker interference and communication constraints in lunar orbit. In response to this challenge, a graphical method was developed and used to survey candidate rotation angles about the thrust vector. This survey method is described and an example of its use on a particular LADEE maneuver is discussed. Finally, the software and methodology used to satisfy LADEE's attitude requirements are also discussed in the context of LADEE's overall activity planning effort. In particular, the way in which strategic schedules of instrument and engineering activities were translated into actual attitude profiles at the tactical level, then converted into precise quaternion commands to achieve those pointing goals is explained. In order to reduce the risk of time-consuming re-planning efforts, this process included the generation of long-term projections of constraint violation predictions for individual attitude profiles that could be used to establish keep-out time-frames for particular attitude profiles. The challenges experienced and overall efficacy of both the overall LADEE ground system and the attitude components of the Flight Dynamics System in meeting LADEE's varied pointing requirements are discussed.

LADEE↗

NASA NTRS1997

Kinematic principles of primate rotational vestibulo-ocular reflex. I. Spatial organization of fast phase velocity axes

The spatial organization of fast phase velocity vectors of the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) was studied in rhesus monkeys during yaw rotations about an earth-horizontal axis that changed continuously the orientation of the head relative to gravity ("barbecue spit" rotation). In addition to a velocity component parallel to the rotation axis, fast phases also exhibited a velocity component that invariably was oriented along the momentary direction of gravity. As the head rotated through supine and prone positions, torsional components of fast phase velocity axes became prominent. Similarly, as the head rotated through left and right ear-down positions, fast phase velocity axes exhibited prominent vertical components. The larger the speed of head rotation the greater the magnitude of this fast phase component, which was collinear with gravity. The main sequence properties of VOR fast phases were independent of head position. However, peak amplitude as well as peak velocity of fast phases were both modulated as a function of head orientation, exhibiting a minimum in prone position. The results suggest that the fast phases of vestibulo-ocular reflexes not only redirect gaze and reposition the eye in the direction of head motion but also reorient the eye with respect to earth-vertical when the head moves relative to gravity. As further elaborated in the companion paper, the underlying mechanism could be described as a dynamic, gravity-dependent modulation of the coordinates of ocular rotations relative to the head.

Non-NASA Center↗

NASA NTRS2018

Orion Optical Navigation Progress Toward Exploration: Mission 1

Optical navigation of human spacecraft was proposed on Gemini and implemented successfully on Apollo as a means of autonomously operating the vehicle in the event of lost communication with controllers on Earth. It shares a history with the "method of lunar distances" that was used in the 18th century and gained some notoriety after its use by Captain James Cook during his 1768 Pacific voyage of the HMS Endeavor. The Orion emergency return system utilizing optical navigation has matured in design over the last several years, and is currently undergoing the final implementation and test phase in preparation for Exploration Mission 1 (EM-1) in 2019. The software development is being worked as a Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) project delivered as an application within the Core Flight Software of the Orion camera controller module. The mathematical formulation behind the initial ellipse fit in the image processing is detailed in Christian. The non-linear least squares refinement then follows the technique of Mortari as an estimation process of the planetary limb using the sigmoid function. The Orion optical navigation system uses a body fixed camera, a decision that was driven by mass and mechanism constraints. The general concept of operations involves a 2-hour pass once every 24 hours, with passes specifically placed before all maneuvers to supply accurate navigation information to guidance and targeting. The pass lengths are limited by thermal constraints on the vehicle since the OpNav attitude generally deviates from the thermally stable tail-to-sun attitude maintained during the rest of the orbit coast phase. Calibration is scheduled prior to every pass due to the unknown nature of thermal effects on the lens distortion and the mounting platform deformations between the camera and star trackers. The calibration technique is described in detail by Christian, et al. and simultaneously estimates the Brown-Conrady coefficients and the Star Tracker/Camera interlock angles. Accurate attitude information is provided by the star trackers during each pass. Figure 1 shows the various phases of lunar return navigation when the vehicle is in autonomous operation with lost ground communication. The midcourse maneuvers are placed to control the entry interface conditions to the desired corridor for safe landing. The general form of optical navigation on Orion is where still images of the Moon or Earth are processed to find the apparent angular diameter and centroid in the camera focal plane. This raw data is transformed into range and bearing angle measurements using planetary data and precise star tracker inertial attitude. The measurements are then sent to the main flight computer's Kalman filter to update the onboard state vector. The images are, of course, collected over an arc to converge the state and estimate velocity. The same basic technique was used by Apollo to satisfy loss-of-comm, but Apollo used manual crew sightings with a vehicle-integral sextant instead of autonomously processing optical imagery. The software development is past its Critical Design Review, and is progressing through test and certification for human rating. In support of this, a hardware-in-the-loop test rig was developed in the Johnson Space Center Electro-Optics Lab to exercise the OpNav system prior to integrated testing on the Orion vehicle. Figure 2 shows the rig, which the test team has dubbed OCILOT (Orion Camera In the Loop Optical Testbed). Analysis performed to date shows a delivery that satisfies an allowable entry corridor as shown in Figure 3.

Holt, Greg N.↗

NASA NTRS2023

Neural-Based Compression Scheme for Solar Image Data

Studying the solar system and especially the Sun relies on the data gathered daily from space missions. These missions are data-intensive and compressing this data to make them efficiently transferable to the ground station is a twofold decision to make. Stronger compression methods, by distorting the data, can increase data throughput at the cost of accuracy which could affect scientific analysis of the data. On the other hand, preserving subtle details in the compressed data requires a high amount of data to be transferred, reducing the desired gains from compression. In this work, we propose a neural network-based lossy compression method to be used in NASA’s data-intensive imagery missions. We chose NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) mission which transmits 1.4 terabytes of data each day as a proof of concept for the proposed algorithm. In this work, we propose an adversarially trained neural network, equipped with local and non-local attention modules to capture both the local and global structure of the image resulting in a better trade-off in rate-distortion (RD) compared to conventional hand-engineered codecs. The RD variational autoencoder used in this work is jointly trained with a channel-dependent entropy model as a shared prior between the analysis and synthesis transforms to make the entropy coding of the latent code more effective. We also studied how optimizing perceptual losses could help our neural compressor to preserve high-frequency details of the data in the reconstructed compressed image. Our neural image compression algorithm outperforms currently-in-use and state-of-the-art codecs such as JPEG and JPEG-2000 in terms of the RD performance when compressing extreme-ultraviolet (EUV) data. As a proof of concept for use of this algorithm in SDO data analysis, we have performed coronal hole (CH) detection using our compressed images, and generated consistent segmentations, even at a compression rate of ∼ 0.1 bits per pixel (compared to 8 bits per pixel on the original data) using EUV data from SDO.

Image coding↗

DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a collection of objects stored within an RDate file, stateWaterRightsHarmonized.RData. Each object either describes how one should interact with the other objects, or contains the harmonized water rights data. Here is each object described in detail: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. The column headers for each data frame are: waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. allocatedFlow - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. rightsByState_surface: A list of the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, these lists are the merging of rightsByState_ground and rightsByState_surface by state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page.

Economics↗

NASA NTRS2011

Solar Dynamics Observatory Guidance, Navigation, and Control System Overview

The Solar Dynamics Observatory (SDO) was designed and built at the Goddard Space Flight Center, launched from Cape Canaveral on February 11, 2010, and reached its final geosynchronous science orbit on March 16, 2010. The purpose of SDO is to observe the Sun and continuously relay data to a dedicated ground station. SDO remains Sun-pointing throughout most of its mission for the instruments to take measurements of the Sun. The SDO attitude control system (ACS) is a single-fault tolerant design. Its fully redundant attitude sensor complement includes sixteen coarse Sun sensors (CSSs), a digital Sun sensor (DSS), three two-axis inertial reference units (IRUs), and two star trackers (STs). The ACS also makes use of the four guide telescopes included as a part of one of the science instruments. Attitude actuation is performed using four reaction wheels assemblies (RWAs) and eight thrusters, with a single main engine used to provide velocity-change thrust for orbit raising. The attitude control software has five nominal control modes, three wheel-based modes and two thruster-based modes. A wheel-based Safehold running in the attitude control electronics box improves the robustness of the system as a whole. All six modes are designed on the same basic proportional-integral-derivative attitude error structure, with more robust modes setting their integral gains to zero. This paper details the final overall design of the SDO guidance, navigation, and control (GN&C) system and how it was used in practice during SDO launch, commissioning, and nominal operations. This overview will include the ACS control modes, attitude determination and sensor calibration, the high gain antenna (HGA) calibration, and jitter mitigation operation. The Solar Dynamics Observatory mission is part of the NASA Living With a Star program, which seeks to understand the changing Sun and its effects on the Solar System, life, and society. To this end, the SDO spacecraft carries three Sun-observing instruments: Helioseismic and Magnetic Imager (HMI), led by Stanford University; Atmospheric Imaging Assembly (AIA), led by Lockheed Martin Space and Astrophysics Laboratory; and Extreme Ultraviolet Variability Experiment (EVE), led by the University of Colorado. The basic mission is to observe the Sun for a very high percentage of the 5-year mission (10-year goal) with long stretches of uninterrupted observations and with constant, high-data-rate transmission to a dedicated ground station to be located in White Sands, New Mexico. These goals guided the design of the spacecraft bus that will carry and service the three-instrument payload. Overarching design goals for the bus are geosynchronous orbit, near-constant Sun observations with the ability to fly through eclipses, and constant HGA contact with the dedicated ground station. A three-axis stabilized ACS is needed both to point at the Sun accurately and to keep the roll about the Sun vector correctly positioned with respect to the solar north pole. This roll control is especially important for the magnetic field imaging of HM I. The mission requirements have several general impacts on the ACS design. Both the AIA and HMI instruments are very sensitive to the blurring caused by jitter. Each has an image stabilization system (ISS) with some ability to filter out high frequency motion, but below the bandwidth of the ISS the control system must compensate for disturbances within the ACS bandwidth or avoid exciting jitter at higher frequencies. Within the ACS bandwidth, the control requirement imposed by AIA is to place the center of the solar disk no more than 2 arc sec, 3 , from a body-defined target based on one of the GTs that accompany the instrument. This body-defined target, called the science reference boresight (SRB), was determined from the postlaunch orientation of the GTs by averaging the bounding telescope boresights for pitch to get a pitch SRB coordinate, and by averaging the bounding boresights for yaw toet the yaw SRB coordinate. The location of this SRB in the 0.5-deg field-of-view for each GT then becomes the central target for each telescope; one GT is selected for use as the ACS controlling guide telescope (CGT) at any given time. Fine Sun-pointing is effected based on this SRB for all three instruments when the Sun is within the linear range of the CGT. In addition to limiting jitter, HMI science requires averaging several observations, making the instrument sensitive to low frequency motion that induces differential motion between each observation. This requires the spacecraft attitude to be stable about the roll axis to approximately 10 arcsec over a ten-minute period. Instrument calibrations require that the spacecraft point the SRB up to 2.5 degrees in pitch and yaw away from the center of the Sun, placing the Sun outside the field-of-view of the guide telescopes. In such instances, when the GTs cannot provide the definitive target for the ACS, on-board attitude determination combined with ephemeris prediction of the Sun direction must provide the definitive target. EVE is capable of observing the Sun with less dependence on attitude control. However, the ground data processing needs for calibrations result in the most strict attitude knowledge requirements for the mission: [35,70,70] arcsec, 3 , of knowledge with respect to the center of the solar disk. In addition to driving the ACS sensor selection, the knowledge requirements, which have their effect primarily during Inertial mode calibrations, drive the accuracy requirements for the solar ephemeris. The need to achieve and maintain geosynchronous orbit (GEO) drove the need for high-efficiency propulsive systems and appropriate attitude control. The main engine provided high specific impulse for the maneuvers to attain GEO, while the smaller ACS thrusters managed the disturbance torques of the larger engine and provided the capability for much smaller adjustment burns on orbit. SDO s large solar profile means that solar radiation pressure is a large torque disturbance, and the momentum buildup from this disturbance and the GEO altitude drives the ACS to use thrusters to manage vehicle momentum. The demanding data capture budget for the mission, however, requires SDO to avoid frequent thruster maneuvers, while concerns about on-orbit jitter restrict the maximum desired wheel speeds desired from the RWAs. The plan for on-orbit wheel speed and momentum management will be discussed as well as what is now being done in operation after the jitter environment was characterized. The SDO ACS hardware complement is single-fault tolerant. Two main processors carry virtually identical copies of the command and data handling and ACS software, and two identical attitude control electronics (ACE) boxes carry Coldfire processors with contingency ACS software and other hardware interface cards; the ACE structure allows reaction wheels to be commanded by the Sun-pointing Safehold independent of the Mil Std 1553 data bus. The sixteen Adcole CSSs are grouped into primary and backup sets of eight sensors, each set providing the ability to calculate a sun vector. Each set of eight eyes provides full 4 -steradian coverage. The Adcole DSS comprises an optics head and a separate electronics box providing a 1553 data interface. The electronics box is mounted inside the Faraday cage created by the spacecraft bus module. The DSS head with its 32- deg square FOV is mounted on the instrument module with its boresight along the spacecraft X axis, nearly aligned with the Sun during observations. Adcole has designed the DSS calibration parameters so that the accuracy is 0.24 arcminutes within 10 deg of the boresight, and diminishes to 3 arcminutes as the Sun moves towards the edges of its FOV . This DSS calibration scheme provides higher accuracy attitude determination over the range of the instrument calibration maneuvers.

Morgenstern, Wendy M.↗

DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗