Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Parallel Process Execution”

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.

154 records · Page 9

Vadose Zone Model for C-9 Pond Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Vadose Zone Model for S Farms Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed "dry" in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chloiine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thmium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time struts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases ( eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user's guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User 's Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Hanford Site Composite Analysis: LLBG-200-W B Vadose Zone Model

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates to the CA saturated zone model (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP 1 ) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the saturated zone model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m saturated zone model grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Developing And Scaling an OpenFOAM Model to Study Turbulent Flow in a HFIR Coolant Channel

Improving the understanding of how computational fluid dynamics (CFD) direct numerical simulations (DNS) of flows in the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) perform when run in parallel using the high performance computing (HPC) platform Summit at the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) is of particular importance to boost the computational tools used to support HFIR conversion to low enriched fuel (LEU). Evaluation of scaling performance was driven by the increasing importance of graphics processing unit (GPU) usage in HPC, which is becoming the standard for modern supercomputers such as Summit. The desired results are to obtain a strong positive correlation between the computational resources dedicated to a problem and the relative speed-up of the simulation in comparison to a benchmark. This capability will allow substantially improvement in HFIR flow analytical capabilities, specifically when predicting turbulence properties at high Reynolds numbers. The study leverages previous simulation results performed with code PHASTA (finite element) on HPC platforms Cori (NERSC) and Theta (ALCF) [1] with computing options provided in the computing platform OpenFOAM (finite volume) at OLCF. Transitioning from PHASTA to OpenFOAM will (1) eliminate dependence on third-party software for mesh generation and manipulation, (2) reduce resource needs by employing modern architectures, and (3) build expertise for future modeling of HFIR-specific problems like heat transfer in involute geometry, entrance effects, flow structure in channel corners, and so on—all important issues when defining the available thermal margins in the transition to LEU. CPUs and GPUs differ significantly in their architecture and utilization, as discussed in the literature [2]. The most important differences are in the approach to computations and their memory. A single GPU contains a large quantity of cores, enabling it to perform with a much higher throughput than a CPU, but execution requires a different approach. GPU codes execute instructions using the Single-Instruction Multiple-Thread (SIMT) approach in which a single instruction is used for groups of threads called warps. A warp typically consists of 32 threads which must execute the same set of instructions, although on separate threads. Alternately, a CPU has far fewer cores that are much more flexible in their operation, excelling at quickly performing more complex serial computations. This is why GPUs have greater throughput when properly utilized. The second important difference is seen when comparing their memory spaces. Limited memory allocations and CPU–GPU communications cause a significant bottleneck in GPU-accelerated programs. Further study was required to properly take advantage of GPU resources. A comprehensive analysis of code performance and the model-specific features of turbulence constitutes the core of this work. In this study, a DNS simulation of HFIR channel turbulence was performed with the finite volume CFD code OpenFOAM v2112 and CUDA v11.0 on Red Hat Enterprise Linux v8.2. The OpenFOAM installation had AMGx integrated to enable GPU acceleration and utilizes the PETSc4FOAM library. The computational resources and the problem size were scaled on CPU and CPU + GPU architectures to gain a better understanding of the performance of a DNS problem on modern computing hardware. The study aimed to analyze the scaling of the code exclusively on CPUs and then to examine the scaling of the codes with GPU acceleration enabled. Scaling studies included CPU and GPU acceleration on a mesh of varying resolution to analyze the impact of problem size relative to computational resources. In the course of preparing the GPU configuration on Summit, mainly using the AMGX solvers, difficulties were encountered stemming from constant changes resulting from extensive ongoing development activities and the changing environment. This resulted in the inability to complete the GPU portion of the work. The code was compiled and tested, but production runs to assess acceleration were not performed because the used discretional compute time allocation expired as year-end approached. The Summit HPC platform is scheduled for decommissioning in 2024, making it unattractive for future use with Nvidia-based GPUs. Therefore, the work will be moved onto NERSC machines in FY24. An application was prepared and submitted, and sufficient node-hours were awarded to continue the research in the next calendar year. This report summarizes work performed thus far, which mostly focused on CPU OpenFOAM computing.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

High Temperature Anode Recycle Blower for Solid Oxide Fuel Cell, Phase II (Final Report)

Broad commercialization of solid oxide fuel cells (SOFCs) requires anode offgas recycle blowers (ARCB) that are specifically designed for handling the challenging operating conditions presented by the SOFC process gases. Otherwise, they can be susceptible to frequent maintenance, low reliability, and short life. This report presents details of a DOE-funded Phase II effort conducted by Mohawk Innovative Technology, Inc. (MiTi®) for the development and testing of an oil-free, low cost, high-temperature centrifugal ARCB based on compliant foil bearing (CFB) technology for support of a 100 kW solid oxide fuel cell power plant. This Phase II builds on the results of a successful Phase I development project that resulted in the demonstration of a low TRL-6 prototype, shown in Figure 1. This Phase II final report presents design improvements over the Phase I prototype, presents the assembled test ARCBs, and discusses the advantages of this novel technology, particularly its long life and maintenance-free operation, which are derived from the use of CFBs. Also included are preliminary techno-economic analysis considerations for cost-effective deployment of the technology. The specific objectives of this project, as stated in the statement of program objectives (SOPO) were 1) to follow the methodology of design for manufacturing (or manufacturability) and assembly for implementing improvements identified as part of the Phase I effort with the purpose of reducing cost, enabling mass production, and facilitating the commercialization of a revised ARCB design, and 2) to fabricate four complete ARCB units based on the revised design and demonstrating their performance in both a laboratory setting and in an actual SOFC power plant. Execution of this SOPO would be supported by a number of technical tasks resulting in the fabrication and testing of the prototypes. To this end, MiTi continued the teaming relationship started during Phase I of the program with subcontracting partner FuelCell Energy, Inc. (FCE), which integrated (under a parallel effort funded by DOE Award DE-FE0026199) a modular 200 kWe SOFC power plant. MiTi and FCE coordinated to ultimately incorporate one of MiTi’s ARCB prototypes into one of the 100 kWe SOFC Modular Power Blocks (MPB) that constitute the core of FCE’s SOFC power plant for in-situ long-duration testing. Additionally, MiTi would explore the scalability and extendibility of the technology to other applications, as well as conduct a basic techno-economic analysis.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Combining Sparse Approximate Factorizations with Mixed-precision Iterative Refinement

The standard LU factorization-based solution process for linear systems can be enhanced in speed or accuracy by employing mixed-precision iterative refinement. Most recent work has focused on dense systems. We investigate the potential of mixed-precision iterative refinement to enhance methods for sparse systems based on approximate sparse factorizations. In doing so, we first develop a new error analysis for LU- and GMRES-based iterative refinement under a general model of LU factorization that accounts for the approximation methods typically used by modern sparse solvers, such as low-rank approximations or relaxed pivoting strategies. We then provide a detailed performance analysis of both the execution time and memory consumption of different algorithms, based on a selected set of iterative refinement variants and approximate sparse factorizations. Our performance study uses the multifrontal solver MUMPS, which can exploit block low-rank factorization and static pivoting. We evaluate the performance of the algorithms on large, sparse problems coming from a variety of real-life and industrial applications showing that mixed-precision iterative refinement combined with approximate sparse factorization can lead to considerable reductions of both the time and memory consumption.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Hexagonal Distributed Embedded Energy Converters (HexDEECs)

Distributed Embedded Energy Converter Technologies (DEEC-Tec) is a new domain for marine renewable energy research that utilizes a conglomeration of small distributed embedded energy converters (DEECs) that, in aggregate, form larger metamaterial frameworks. These resulting DEEC-Tec metamaterials can then, in turn, be used to construct flexible ocean wave energy converters called flexWECs. DEEC-Tec enables flexWECs: (i) to be inherently broad-banded ocean wave frequency energy converters and (ii) to have an inherent lack of highly loaded rigid bodies. The DEEC-Tec domain also benefits the marine renewable energy domain by inherently availing ways that marine energy can be harvested and converted that heretofore has not yet been considered possible: real-time execution of transforming topologies (e.g., actively changing a flexWEC's shape and form) and morphologies (e.g., actively changing a flexWEC's stiffness and damping throughout its entire structure). Presented, is one specific type of DEEC, a HexDEEC, that shows promise in aiding the adoption and further development of the DEEC-Tec domain - it is a small energy transducer being developed by the United States National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The HexDEEC is a small (characteristic length approximating a centimeter) energy transducer that converts the dynamic deformations of an elastomer into electricity through a charging-discharging cycle of a capacitor whose capacitance is varied by those elastic deformations. The HexDEEC is composed of a hyperelastic hexagonal housing (nominally silicon rubber) with six electrodes on its inner faces. The upper three electrodes share the same charge while the lower three electrodes oppose the upper electrode charges. Externally, the HexDEEC has two arms extending away from the middle vertices of the hexagon. Via principles governing the relationship between electrical capacitance and electrical potential (voltage and charge), electricity is generated when the HexDEEC's arms are dynamically pulled or released under tensile loading as doing so causes the distance between the upper and lower sets of electrodes to change - varying the energy converter's overall capacitance. Analytical and numerical modeling have already been used to estimate the electrical energy produced by a HexDEEC. The cursory models approximate the HexDEEC as a parallel plate variable capacitor - simplifying from six to two opposing plates with a constant dielectric volume between those two plates. To account for the elastic HexDEEC material properties, software such as SolidWorks and STAR-CCM+ have been used to generate hyperelastic models; notably, Mooney-Rivlin based models. Individual HexDEECs have been fabricated by drawing uncured liquid silicon rubber into molds via vacuum pressure. To simplify manufacturing, HexDEEC sub-components - e.g., electrodes, wires - can be placed within those molds such that they are directly embedded into the hexagonal housing during the curing process. Furthermore, DEEC-Tec metamaterials can be created by interweaving or sequentially layering multiple HexDEEC strands together. The HexDEEC based metamaterial could then generate electricity through its gross deformations. Ultimately, HexDEECs represent a specific type of energy transducer that can be leveraged, by the DEEC-Tec domain, to create metamaterials used to construct novel flexWECs.

DEEC-Tec↗

Considerations regarding the Use of Computer Vision Machine Learning in Safety-Related or Risk-Significant Applications in Nuclear Power Plants

With the advancements made to date in the field of artificial intelligence (AI), significant potential exists to utilize AI capabilities for nuclear power plant (NPP) applications. AI can replicate human decision making and it is usually faster and more accurate than humans. For implementations that impact critical NPP applications (e.g., safety-related or non-safety systems that potentially affect overall plant risk), a deeper safety analysis of the AI methods is necessary. AI applied to NPP operations could resemble the use of digital I&C (DI&C) because such applications involve digital computer hardware and custom-designed software that input plant data, execute complex software algorithms, and output the results to a system or licensed human operator to potentially provoke an action. For AI methods to be compliant with current safety requirements for DI&C, AI compatibility must be evaluated, and AI-related gaps may exist that prevent the prompt deployment of AI in NPPs. This effort aims to evaluate how example AI technologies align with the DI&C safety framework, and discusses how they could be analyzed, modeled, tested, and validated in a manner similar to typical DI&C technologies. Because AI is a broad field that encompasses areas such as machine learning (ML), natural language processing, and computer vision, this research focused on a subset of methods categorized as the computer vision ML (CVML) methods. This report explores two CVML use cases, gauge reading and fire watch, considered relevant to the DI&C standards, as they could play a safety-critical role. For the gauge reading use case, a CVML-enabled technology that can read gauges at oblique angles is utilized. For the fire watch use case, a CVML-enabled technology is utilized that migrates fire watch from a manual (human) approach to automated fire detection. These use cases are mainly intended to give context to the CVML system discussion. This effort assumes the worst-case scenario, with the CVML system being used to replace a safety-related or risk-significant system, thus requiring evaluation. Evaluating CVML against most of the relevant safety requirements for DI&C yielded several CVML-specific considerations due to the uniqueness of its characteristics in comparison with typical DI&C systems. For example, CVML models often employ commonly used (open-source) datasets, and it is not always possible to determine the level of overlap among open-source datasets. Therefore, the independence of the developed CVML models when demonstrating diversity is questionable, therefore creating vulnerability to common cause failure (CCF). The design verification process is also impacted since the data overlap could result in overestimation of the software validation and verification (V&V) performance results. Section 2 of this report evaluates a list of the identified CVML-specific characteristics and discusses the resulting considerations and potential solutions in the context of each referenced requirement. A summation is provided in Section 3. This report is not to be used as a guideline. It was developed to identify and consider issues in the implementation of ML technologies used to augment activities that may have a bearing on plant operation. The report draws parallels to the use of DI&C technologies, for which many standards are available to guide their use in nuclear plant operation. It considers the technologies and some of the potential implications of their use in safety-related applications but is not intended to address regulatory or licensing related issues.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

Research Reactors Division Infrastructure Investment Plan for the High Flux Isotope Reactor

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) is a unique national asset. Operational for nearly 60 years, continued investment into the aging infrastructure is necessary to ensure operation for another 6 decades. Additionally, growing missions require HFIR as well as important upgrades. Consequently, carefully integrated planning is required to ensure that infrastructure investments are timely executed to ensure long-term, reliable operation of HFIR. Concerns about challenges to the operational reliability of HFIR resulted in a recommendation from the 2023 Operations Review by the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Basic Energy Sciences that a HFIR management strategy be developed to address the infrastructure needs. This report defines the investment needs, which are evolving as new upgrade efforts are better defined. HFIR is part of the three-source strategy within the Neutron Sciences Directorate (NScD) and contributes to the five strategic science areas outlined in the NScD 10 Year Strategic Science Plan: quantum materials, soft matter, materials and engineering, chemistry, and biosciences. Fundamental to this strategy are three core values: operational excellence, responsible stewardship, and servant leadership. These values guide our mission of safe and reliable operation of the reactor and require a strong and just nuclear safety culture, a solemn respect for responsible care of the facility, good workforce development, robust procedures and processes, an effective communication strategy, world-class asset management, a determined customer focus, and a commitment to protecting the environment, the safety and health of the public and our people, and the quality of work performed within our facility. These principles are all essential to operate HFIR at a world-class level. The Research Reactors Division (RRD) will lead a new era of neutron science and isotope production at HFIR through responsible and purposeful leadership and unwavering support of the science community. The approach outlined in this plan highlights the direction leadership is taking to ensure that HFIR is ready to support the science challenges and national needs of the future and that the United States maintains world leadership in neutron sciences. The plan is in alignment with the DOE’s desire to continue operating HFIR and with the NScD strategic science goals for the future. HFIR is an aging facility with numerous infrastructure challenges and needs. It has an aging workforce in relation to the general population of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), with many expected retirements over the next 5–10 years. With an increase in work scope caused by changing national priorities and science goals, several critical hires have been identified. To manage HFIR’s infrastructure needs, a prioritized list of equipment upgrades has been identified along with an analysis of future staffing requirements. A desire to operate HFIR at eight cycles per year will necessarily require some significant changes to procedures and processes currently in place as well as targeted staffing additions. Many of the equipment upgrades identified in this plan will significantly increase the reliability of the plant, thus contributing to the effort to reach the goal of safely operating eight cycles per year. A plan to attain eight-cycle operation is being prepared in parallel with the activities identified in this plan, although the actions identified to satisfy both plans will overlap. This plan identifies new infrastructure needs—for both plant equipment and staffing—thus necessitating formulation of future budget requests to fund the increased work scope and improvement activities. Some activities are currently being scheduled with the expectation that funding will be received. Any delays to funding or reductions of funding from the identified cost estimations will directly and negatively affect the plan’s implementation.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗