Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “sampling variability”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 1,441 records · Page 80
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2016

Mass spectrometry-based monitoring of millisecond protein–ligand binding dynamics using an automated microfluidic platform

Characterizing protein-ligand binding dynamics is crucial for understanding protein function and developing new therapeutic agents. We have developed a novel microfluidic platform that features rapid mixing of protein and ligand solutions, variable incubation times, and on-chip electrospray ionization to perform label-free, solution-based monitoring of protein-ligand binding dynamics. This platform offers many advantages including automated processing, rapid mixing, and low sample consumption.

Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory↗
DOE OSTI2015

A compact and low-weight sputtering unit for in situ investigations of thin film growth at synchrotron radiation beamlines

In this work, we report on a highly variable, compact, and light high-vacuum sputter deposition unit designed for in situ experiments using synchrotron radiation facilities. The chamber can be mounted at various synchrotron beamlines for scattering experiments in grazing incidence geometry. The sample position and the large exit window allow to perform x-ray experiments up to large q values. The sputtering unit is easy to mount on existing experimental setups and can be remote-controlled. In this paper, we describe in detail the design and the performance of the new sputtering chamber and present the installation of the apparatus at different 3rd generation light sources. Furthermore, we describe the different measurement options and present some selected results. The unit has been successfully commissioned and is now available for users at PETRA III at DESY.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2025

Search for an Anomalous Production of Charged-Current 𝜈 𝑒 Interactions without Visible Pions across Multiple Kinematic Observables in MicroBooNE

This Letter presents an investigation of low-energy electron-neutrino interactions in the Fermilab Booster Neutrino Beam by the MicroBooNE experiment, motivated by the excess of electron-neutrino-like events observed by the MiniBooNE experiment. This is the first measurement to use data from all five years of operation of the MicroBooNE experiment, corresponding to an exposure of 1.11 × 10 21 protons on target, a 70% increase on past results. Two samples of electron neutrino interactions without visible pions are used, one with visible protons and one without any visible protons. The MicroBooNE data show reasonable agreement with the nominal prediction, with 𝑝 values ≥26.7% when the two 𝜈 𝑒 samples are combined, though the prediction exceeds the data in limited regions of phase space. The data are further compared to two empirical models that modify the predicted rate of electron-neutrino interactions in different variables in the simulation to match the unfolded MiniBooNE low energy excess. In the first model, this unfolding is performed as a function of electron neutrino energy, while the second model aims to match the observed shower energy and angle distributions of the MiniBooNE excess. This measurement excludes an electronlike interpretation of the MiniBooNE excess based on these models at >99% CLs in all kinematic variables.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2016

WE-FG-206-05: New Arterial Spin Labeling Method for Simultaneous Estimation of Arterial Cerebral Blood Volume, Cerebral Blood Flow and Arterial Transit Time

Purpose: To demonstrate the feasibility of a novel Arterial Spin Labeling (ASL) method for simultaneously measuring cerebral blood flow (CBF), arterial transit time (ATT), and arterial cerebral blood volume (aCBV) without the use of a contrast agent. Methods: A series of multi-TI ASL images were acquired from one healthy subject on a 3T Siemens Skyra, with the following parameters: PCASL labeling with variable TI [300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500, 3000, 3500, 4000] ms, labeling bolus 1400 ms when TI allows, otherwise 100 ms less than TI, TR was minimized for each TI, two sinc shaped pre-saturation pulses were applied in the imaging plane immediately before 2D EPI acquisition. 64×64×24 voxels, 5 mm slice thickness, 1 mm gap, full brain coverage, 6 averages per TI, no crusher gradients, 11 ms TE, scan time of 4:56. The perfusion weighted time-series was created for each voxel and fit to a novel model. The model has two components: 1) the traditional model developed by Buxton et al., accounting for CBF and ATT, and 2) a box car function characterizing the width of the labeling bolus, with variable timing and height in proportion to the aCBV. All three parameters were fit using a nonlinear fitting routine that constrained all parameters to be positive. The main purpose of the high-temporal resolution TI sampling for the first second of data acquisition was to precisely estimate the blood volume component for better detection of arrival time and magnitude of signal. Results: Whole brain maps of CBF, ATT, and aCBV were produced, and all three parameters maps are consistent with similar maps described in the literature. Conclusion: Simultaneous mapping of CBF, ATT, and aCBV is feasible with a clinically tractable scan time (under 5 minutes).

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2019

Multivariate analysis of x-ray scattering using a stochastic source

The normalization of scattered intensity by incident flux is a crucial step in analyzing data from stochastic x-ray free electron laser sources and is complicated by non-linearities traditionally attributed to detector saturation. Here we show that such non-linearities can also arise when the sample spectra are non-uniform within the monochromator bandwidth. A method for modeling and removing this non-linearity using multivariate regression with shot-by-shot x-ray photon energy as an independent variable is presented. In conclusion, this approach demonstrates the benefit of event building and will allow for a reconsideration of data which has proven challenging to normalize.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Demonstration of microfluidics for synthesis of sol-gel feedstocks

This report details the design and processing conditions for producing hydrous cerium oxide surrogate microspheres using a microfluidics-based approach. Variables such as microfluidic chip design, exit tubing diameter, temperature, and flow rate continue to be investigated. A washing and drying procedure to remove gelation media, unreacted starting material, and unwanted reaction byproducts is under development. Samples are imaged and characterized for analysis.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2016

Quasars as a tracer of large-scale structures in the distant universe

We study the dependence of the number density and properties of quasars on the background galaxy density using the currently largest spectroscopic data sets of quasars and galaxies. We construct a galaxy number density field smoothed over the variable smoothing scale of between approximately 10 and 20 h {sup −1} Mpc over the redshift range 0.46 < z < 0.59 using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) Data Release 12 (DR12) Constant MASS galaxies. The quasar sample is prepared from the SDSS-I/II DR7. We examine the correlation of incidence of quasars with the large-scale background density and the dependence of quasar properties such as bolometric luminosity, black hole mass, and Eddington ratio on the large-scale density. We find a monotonic correlation between the quasar number density and large-scale galaxy number density, which is fitted well with a power-law relation, n{sub Q}∝ρ{sub G}{sup 0.618}. We detect weak dependences of quasar properties on the large-scale density such as a positive correlation between black hole mass and density, and a negative correlation between luminosity and density. We discuss the possibility of using quasars as a tracer of large-scale structures at high redshifts, which may be useful for studies of the growth of structures in the high-redshift universe.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
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 OSTI2025

The Imprint of Southern Ocean Storms on Modeled Surface Chlorophyll, Their Drivers and Satellite Biases

Southern Ocean (SO) phytoplankton chlorophyll is highly variable on sub-seasonal time scales. Although the SO is the windiest ocean basin globally, it is not conclusively understood how storms impact SO phytoplankton dynamics. Much of our existing knowledge stems from satellites, but biases due to data gaps from cloud cover and low solar angles remain unquantified. Here, we use ocean–sea-ice simulations with the Community Earth System Model to quantify the climatological 1997–2018 imprint of storms on chlorophyll and phytoplankton dynamics in the ice-free SO. Additionally, by comparing the full-field model output to synthetic satellite observations, we quantify sampling biases in satellite-derived estimates. We find that both the sign and the magnitude of the average surface chlorophyll imprint vary substantially across storms but last for at least 4 days after the storm passing. Based on our analysis, more than one third of the storms explain the majority of local non-seasonal chlorophyll variability, but satellite-derived storm imprints are often too large in magnitude. On the day of the storm passing, changes in vertical mixing predominantly cause surface chlorophyll anomalies, and reduced light availability due to enhanced cloud cover outweighs the enhanced nutrient availability due to entrainment. Interestingly, storms imprint differently on total net primary production than on surface chlorophyll, demonstrating the difficulty to derive carbon-cycle impacts from a surface-chlorophyll assessment. With SO future storm activity projected to increase, complementing satellite observations with other observing technologies, for example, profiling floats, is necessary to better constrain how storms impact biological carbon cycling in the SO.

Nissen, Cara [University of Colorado, Boulder, CO ↗
DOE OSTI2015

The effect of changes in sea surface temperature on linear growth of Porites coral in Ambon Bay

Coral is one of the most important organisms in the coral reef ecosystem. There are several factors affecting coral growth, one of them is changes in sea surface temperature (SST). The purpose of this research is to understand the influence of SST variability on the annual linear growth of Porites coral taken from Ambon Bay. The annual coral linear growth was calculated and compared to the annual SST from the Extended Reconstructed Sea Surface Temperature version 3b (ERSST v3b) model. Coral growth was calculated by using Coral X-radiograph Density System (CoralXDS) software. Coral sample X-radiographs were used as input data. Chronology was developed by calculating the coral’s annual growth bands. A pair of high and low density banding patterns observed in the coral’s X-radiograph represent one year of coral growth. The results of this study shows that Porites coral extents from 2001-2009 and had an average growth rate of 1.46 cm/year. Statistical analysis shows that the annual coral linear growth declined by 0.015 cm/year while the annual SST declined by 0.013°C/year. SST and the annual linear growth of Porites coral in the Ambon Bay is insignificantly correlated with r=0.304 (n=9, p>0.05). This indicates that annual SST variability does not significantly influence the linear growth of Porites coral from Ambon Bay. It is suggested that sedimentation load, salinity, pH or other environmental factors may affect annual linear coral growth.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

Statistical Analyses of Post Irradiation Experiments of the BWR Forsmark

Computer codes which are to be used in nuclear safety research need to be validated prior to their application. For depletion codes, this validation can be done using data from post irradiation experiments (PIE). These experiments consist of a radiochemical analysis of small parts of a fuel rod (FR), which has been irradiated in a nuclear power plant as part of a fuel assembly (FA). This analysis allows the deduction of the isotopic composition of nuclides important for the desired application case. In addition the operation history at the sample location needs to be known and reported with the analysis results. In our work, we perform uncertainty and sensitivity analyses of a model based on a sample from the boiling water reactor (BWR) Forsmark-3 in order to deduce the influence of uncertain system parameters on the nuclide composition of the depleted fuel. In a second step we compare the resulting uncertainties of the nuclide densities with the deviation between their calculated and experimental values. The goal is to obtain quantitative uncertainty data which can be accounted for in a validation procedure. We use the Monte Carlo sampling approach, i.e. repeating the model calculation using statistically varied sets of the uncertain input parameters and analyzing the distributions of the result values statistically. BWR depletion calculations are especially demanding due to the increased complexity and heterogeneity compared to pressurized water reactors (PWR): extensively variable enrichments, complex FA geometries, partial length FRs, strong axially varying moderator density and the common use of gadolinium as burnable absorber in some of the FRs. However, the precise and correct calculation of BWR-depletion is extremely important in view of a possible application in burnup credit for BWR FAs. Therein credit is taken for the reduced reactivity of spent fuel due to the depletion of {sup 235}U for transport and intermediate or final storage.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Exploration of multifidelity UQ sampling strategies for computer network applications.

Network modeling is a powerful tool to enable rapid analysis of complex systems that can be challenging to study directly using physical testing. Here, two approaches are considered: emulation and simulation. The former runs real software on virtualized hardware, while the latter mimics the behavior of network components and their interactions in software. Although emulation provides an accurate representation of physical networks, this approach alone cannot guarantee the characterization of the system under realistic operative conditions. Operative conditions for physical networks are often characterized by intrinsic variability (payload size, packet latency, etc.) or a lack of precise knowledge regarding the network configuration (bandwidth, delays, etc.); therefore uncertainty quantification (UQ) strategies should be also employed. UQ strategies require multiple evaluations of the system with a number of evaluation instances that roughly increases with the problem dimensionality, i.e., the number of uncertain parameters. It follows that a typical UQ workflow for network modeling based on emulation can easily become unattainable due to its prohibitive computational cost. In this paper, a multifidelity sampling approach is discussed and applied to network modeling problems. The main idea is to optimally fuse information coming from simulations, which are a low-fidelity version of the emulation problem of interest, in order to decrease the estimator variance. By reducing the estimator variance in a sampling approach it is usually possible to obtain more reliable statistics and therefore a more reliable system characterization. Several network problems of increasing difficulty are presented. For each of them, the performance of the multifidelity estimator is compared with respect to the single fidelity counterpart, namely, Monte Carlo sampling. For all the test problems studied in this work, the multifidelity estimator demonstrated an increased efficiency with respect to MC.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Detecting Magnon-phonon coupling in yttrium iron garnet with variable temperature STEM-EELS

Magnons, quanta of spin wave excitations in magnetically ordered materials, have been identified as candidates for several potentially transformative technologies in recent years. Macroscopic techniques, such as neutron scattering or Raman spectroscopy, can be used to identify and analyze magnons, but provide relatively delocalized information about the sample. Understanding how the bonding and local structure of a material interacts with, and influences, the magnon population in a material is a crucial step toward the ability to produce any real-world application utilizing magnons. By leveraging the combined spatial resolution of scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) and the energy resolution of monochromated electron energy-loss spectroscopy (EELS) nanoscale analysis of magnons can be performed. While the weak interaction of magnons with the electron beam makes magnon EELS challenging on reasonable timescales, magnon-phonon coupling can be leveraged to understand magnons through their effect on the more easily measured phonons. Here, we examine yttrium iron garnet (YIG) flakes, and demonstrate non-linear, temperature-dependent shifts in the phonon frequencies, consistent with previously described magnon-phonon coupling effects. The ability to measure the temperature-dependence of vibrational frequencies with high precision in individual nanoscale flakes, demonstrates the ability to study magnon-phonon coupling in the STEM with unprecedented spatial resolution.

Reifsnyder, Alexander [ORNL]↗
DOE OSTI2023

Exploring unsupervised top tagging using Bayesian inference

Recognizing hadronically decaying top-quark jets in a sample of jets, or even its total fraction in the sample, is an important step in many LHC searches for Standard Model and Beyond Standard Model physics as well. Although there exists outstanding top-tagger algorithms, their construction and their expected performance rely on Montecarlo simulations, which may induce potential biases. For these reasons we develop two simple unsupervised top-tagger algorithms based on performing Bayesian inference on a mixture model. In one of them we use as the observed variable a new geometrically-based observable \tilde{A}_{3} A ̃ 3 , and in the other we consider the more traditional \tau_{3}/\tau_{2} τ 3 / τ 2 N N -subjettiness ratio, which yields a better performance. As expected, we find that the unsupervised tagger performance is below existing supervised taggers, reaching expected Area Under Curve AUC \sim 0.80-0.81 ∼ 0.80 − 0.81 and accuracies of about 69% - − 75% in a full range of sample purity. However, these performances are more robust to possible biases in the Montecarlo that their supervised counterparts. Our findings are a step towards exploring and considering simpler and unbiased taggers.

Alvarez, Ezequiel↗
DOE OSTI2026

ComStock Measure Documentation: Variable-Speed Pumps

Building on the 3-year End-Use Load Profiles project to calibrate and validate the U.S. Department of Energy's ResStock and ComStock models, this work produces national data sets that enable cities, states, utilities, and other stakeholders to answer a broad range of questions regarding their commercial building stock. ComStock is a highly granular, bottom-up model that uses various data sources, statistical sampling methods, and advanced building energy simulations to estimate the annual subhourly energy consumption of the commercial building stock across the United States. The "baseline" model intends to represent the U.S. commercial building stock as it existed in 2018. The methodology of the baseline model is discussed in the ComStock Reference Documentation. The goal of this work is to develop energy efficiency and demand flexibility measures that cover market-ready technologies and study their mass adoption impact on the baseline building stock. "Measures" refers to various "what-if" scenarios that can be applied to buildings. The results for the baseline and measure scenario simulations are published in public data sets that provide insights into building stock characteristics, operational behaviors, utility bill impacts, and annual and sub-hourly energy usage by fuel type and end use. This report describes the modeling methodology for a single ComStock measure scenario - variable speed pumps - and briefly introduces key results. The full public data set can be accessed on the ComStock data lake or via the Data Viewer at comstock.nlr.gov. The public data set enables users to create custom aggregations of results for their use case (e.g., filter to a specific county or building type).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2015

A multi-century tree-ring record of spring flooding on the Mississippi River

Widespread destructive flooding is a common phenomenon along the Lower Mississippi River, and river managers have long sought to understand the temporal variability and relevant climatic factors of the system. One of the important drawbacks to better understanding the flood regime of this and similar large river systems is the relatively short instrumental record of flooding. In this study, we present a novel, annually-resolved tree-ring record of spring flooding based on anatomically anomalous “flood rings” preserved in trees growing about 60 km downstream of the Mississippi and Ohio River confluence. Our chronology records 39 flood-ring years between 1770 and 2009 including nearly all of the observed significant floods of the 20th century as well as severe floods documented in prior centuries. Comparison of the flood ring record with stream gage observations suggests that large-magnitude floods lasting for more than 10 days, during the spring flood season, are most likely to cause a flood ring in sampled trees. Instrumental and paleo-proxy records of atmospheric circulation features relevant to spring flooding on the Lower Mississippi were also examined. Results of this research suggest that similar flood-ring records could provide important insight into flood history elsewhere in the Mississippi River system and perhaps climate variability over North America.

Engineering↗