Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Common data models”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Deformable phrase level attention: A flexible approach for improving AI based medical coding

Objective: Improving the AI-driven automated medical encoding of clinical text plays a vital role in gathering information on the occurrence of diseases to improve population-level health. This work presents a novel attention mechanism designed to enhance text classification models and ensure appropriate classification of medical concepts in unstructured electronic health records. Materials and Methods: We developed a deformable, phrase-level attention mechanism to identify important lexical word-level and contextual phrase-level information from clinical text documents. We evaluated conventional and transformer-based deep learning models that we extended with our attention mechanism on the extraction of critical cancer information (e.g., site, subsite, laterality, histology, behavior) from 629,908 electronic pathology reports and on the automated medical encoding of 52,722 hospital discharge summaries. Results: Transformer-based models with the deformable, phrase-level attention mechanism achieved the best performance on the extraction of critical cancer information from pathology reports. Conventional- and transformer-based models show similar or better performance than their baseline counterparts on the automated medical encoding of clinical documents. Discussion: The addition of phrase-level information allowed models extended with our proposed method to outperform standard word-level attention. Our method showed favorable properties for the real-world application in terms of model robustness and phenotyping. These results indicate that our method is promising for automated data harmonization for common data models. Conclusion: This work proposes a novel deformable, phrase-level attention mechanism that enhances text classification models in the extraction of medical concepts from clinical text documents. We demonstrate strong performances on two clinical text datasets and showcase real-world deployability of our method.

Automated medical encoding↗
DOE OSTI2025

Leveraging Large Language Models for Real-World Data Evidence: A Framework for Automated Treatment Extraction and Data Harmonization

Background: The ability to comprehensively collect treatment information from cancer patient medical records would enable studies to evaluate real-world benefits and risks tied to specific treatments. Currently, it is difficult to system- atically collect high-quality treatment information because it is often stored in unstructured text. Manually extracting and standardizing drug and regimen data is time-intensive. Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) offer a potential solution for automated extraction of structured treatment information from clinical text. Objective: This study systematically evaluates the utility of four LLMs from the Llama family for automated extraction of oncology treatment information from clinical text. This information can guide researchers using cancer registry data to provide insights into cancer care and outcomes beyond clinical trials. Methods: Four instruction-tuned Llama models with varying parameter counts (1B, 3B, 8B, and 70B) were evaluated for their ability to extract treatment information from clinical documents. A unified oncology knowledge base integrating seven major public data sources was developed to standardize and normalize extracted entities—a critical step for harmonizing data from diverse sources. Extracted treatment data were compared against expert-annotated ground truth. Model performance was assessed using accuracy metrics (Precision, Recall, F1-Score) and opera- tional feasibility metrics, including processing speed and structural compliance of the output. Results: A strong positive correlation was observed between model size and extraction accuracy. F1-score improved from 0.609 for the 1B model to 0.710 (3B), 0.807 (8B), and 0.828 (70B). While larger models demonstrated superior accuracy and compliance, they incurred higher computational costs. The modest performance difference between 8B and 70B suggests diminishing returns with increasing model size. Conclusions: LLMs represent a viable technology for automating oncology treatment extraction. The 8B-parameter model emerged as a highly effective option, balancing high accuracy and computational efficiency. Selecting an appropriate LLM for deployment in cancer registries involves a trade-off between desired accuracy and available operational resources. Harmonizing extracted entities with the oncology knowledge base facilitates standardized integration into common data models, enhancing data quality for real-world evidence analyses.

artificial intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2025

Personalized Tucker Decomposition: Modeling Commonality and Peculiarity on Tensor Data

In this paper, we propose a personalized Tucker decomposition (perTucker) to address the limitations of traditional tensor decomposition methods in capturing heterogeneity across different datasets. perTucker decomposes tensor data into shared global components and personalized local components. We introduce an order orthogonality assumption and develop a proximal gradient regularized block coordinate descent algorithm guaranteed to converge to a stationary point. The unique and common representations learned by perTucker reveal intrinsic statistical patterns in data and provide valuable information for a wide range of downstream analytics, including anomaly detection, source classification, and clustering. We demonstrate perTucker’s effectiveness through a simulation study and two case studies on solar flare detection and tonnage signal classification.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

“Understanding Robustness Lottery”: A Geometric Visual Comparative Analysis of Neural Network Pruning Approaches

Deep learning approaches have provided state-of-the-art performance in many applications by relying on large and overparameterized neural networks. However, such networks are very brittle and are difficult to deploy on resource-limited platforms. Model pruning, i.e., reducing the size of the network, is a widely adopted strategy that can lead to a more robust and compact model. Many heuristics exist for model pruning, but our understanding of the pruning process remains limited due to the black-box nature of a neural network model. Empirical studies show that some heuristics improve performance whereas others can make models more brittle. Here, this work aims to shed light on how different pruning methods alter the network’s internal feature representation and the corresponding impact on model performance. To facilitate a comprehensive comparison and characterization of the high-dimensional model feature space, we introduce a visual geometric analysis of feature representations. We evaluated a set of critical geometric concepts decomposed from the commonly adopted classification loss and used them to design a visualization system to compare and highlight the impact of pruning on model performance and feature representation. The proposed tool provides an environment for an in-depth comparison of pruning methods and a comprehensive understanding of how the model responds to common data corruption. By leveraging the proposed visualization, machine learning researchers can reveal the similarities between pruning methods and redundancy in robustness evaluation benchmarks, obtain geometric insights about the differences between pruned models that achieve superior robustness performance, and identify samples that are robust or fragile to model pruning and common data corruption.

Li, Zhimin [Univ. of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT (Uni↗
DOE OSTI2025

Automated qualification data tool for high temperature metallic materials

This report describes a framework for storing, processing, and displaying qualification data for high temperature mechanical properties. The framework automates the process of generating design data from mechanical test results, for example for a data qualification report for the ASME Boiler \& Pressure Vessel Code. The framework has three parts: a data storage model with common formats for several types of typical mechanical property tests, a backend based on the \pycreep Python library for correlating and extrapolating the data to generate design material properties and allowable stresses, and a demonstration user interface for displaying, sorting, and filtering the data and exploring different options for modeling the design mechanical properties. The report discusses the options available for data processing, with illustrations from real test data on Alloy 617, Alloy 709, Alloy 740H, and Laser-Powder Bed Fusion 316H. The framework is complete for ASME type data analysis and will be used to store test data generated by the Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technologies sponsored qualification programs. Future work could extend the tool to other types of material properties and/or expand the demo user interface to make it accessible across the AMMT program.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Convergence in simulating global soil organic carbon by structurally different models after data assimilation

Abstract Current biogeochemical models produce carbon–climate feedback projections with large uncertainties, often attributed to their structural differences when simulating soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics worldwide. However, choices of model parameter values that quantify the strength and represent properties of different soil carbon cycle processes could also contribute to model simulation uncertainties. Here, we demonstrate the critical role of using common observational data in reducing model uncertainty in estimates of global SOC storage. Two structurally different models featuring distinctive carbon pools, decomposition kinetics, and carbon transfer pathways simulate opposite global SOC distributions with their customary parameter values yet converge to similar results after being informed by the same global SOC database using a data assimilation approach. The converged spatial SOC simulations result from similar simulations in key model components such as carbon transfer efficiency, baseline decomposition rate, and environmental effects on carbon fluxes by these two models after data assimilation. Moreover, data assimilation results suggest equally effective simulations of SOC using models following either first‐order or Michaelis–Menten kinetics at the global scale. Nevertheless, a wider range of data with high‐quality control and assurance are needed to further constrain SOC dynamics simulations and reduce unconstrained parameters. New sets of data, such as microbial genomics‐function relationships, may also suggest novel structures to account for in future model development. Overall, our results highlight the importance of observational data in informing model development and constraining model predictions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data-Efficient Dimensionality Reduction and Surrogate Modeling of High-Dimensional Stress Fields

Tensor datatypes representing field variables like stress, displacement, velocity, etc., have increasingly become a common occurrence in data-driven modeling and analysis of simulations. Numerous methods [such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs)] exist to address the meta-modeling of field data from simulations. As the complexity of the simulation increases, so does the cost of acquisition, leading to limited data scenarios. Modeling of tensor datatypes under limited data scenarios remains a hindrance for engineering applications. Here, in this article, we introduce a direct image-to-image modeling framework of convolutional autoencoders enhanced by information bottleneck loss function to tackle the tensor data types with limited data. The information bottleneck method penalizes the nuisance information in the latent space while maximizing relevant information making it robust for limited data scenarios. The entire neural network framework is further combined with robust hyperparameter optimization. We perform numerical studies to compare the predictive performance of the proposed method with a dimensionality reduction-based surrogate modeling framework on a representative linear elastic ellipsoidal void problem with uniaxial loading. The data structure focuses on the low-data regime (fewer than 100 data points) and includes the parameterized geometry of the ellipsoidal void as the input and the predicted stress field as the output. The results of the numerical studies show that the information bottleneck approach yields improved overall accuracy and more precise prediction of the extremes of the stress field. Additionally, an in-depth analysis is carried out to elucidate the information compression behavior of the proposed framework.

artificial intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2024

Interpreting the spatial distribution of soil properties with a physically-based distributed hydrological model

Digital soil maps are commonly data-driven as the development of physically-based models for soil mapping is difficult due to the complexity of soils. However, physically-based hydrologic models have been successful in simulating water dynamics. Since water movement is a major driver of pedogenesis, the physical rules that govern water movement might help explain and predict the spatial variation of soil properties. Here, we demonstrate the novel use of a physically-based, distributed hydrologic model to inform the spatial distribution of soil properties. The Distributed Hydrology Soil Vegetation Model (DHSVM) was utilized to simulate soil moisture content (SM) and water table depth (WTD) in two hillslope catchments under pasture and forest management wherein hydrologic model outputs were then compared with soil properties measured in situ. SM sensors and wells were installed in both catchments to validate simulations of soil water movement via Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency (E). In-situ observations were made at 87 sites within both catchments to study the connection between simulated water movement (SM and WTD) and observed soil properties, namely the depth and thickness of the argillic (Bt), fragic (Btx), and C horizons, and the depth of redoximorphic features. The simulated time series of SM and WTD were also clustered per season using Dynamic Time Warping (DTW), which identified similarity among time series at varying timescales. Model validation suggested that simulations of surficial SM (0–20 cm) were reasonable (E = 0.45), however, simulated subsurface SM (45–60 cm) and WTD were not sufficiently accurate. The thickness of Btx horizons were spatially grouped into different populations by SM clusters from every season except spring. For the other properties, only SM dynamics of specific seasons grouped into significantly different populations, suggesting that the explanatory power of simulated water movement varies seasonally and was greater during winter. Here, we show clusters of simulated SM separated soil properties into statistically different populations, showing that hydrologic models could inform areas that followed different water dynamics related to pedogenic trajectories and related biogeochemical processes not necessarily simulated by the model. As such, physically-based modeling of water dynamics can, therefore, inform and advance digital soil mapping by linking water movement patterns stemming from hydrologic model outputs to spatial patterns of soil properties and pedogenesis.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

A novel conditional generative model for efficient ensemble forecasts of state variables in large-scale geological carbon storage

Integrating monitoring data to efficiently update reservoir pressure and CO 2 plume distribution forecasts presents a significant challenge in geological carbon storage (GCS) applications. Inverse modeling techniques are commonly used to fuse observational data and refine reservoir model parameters, thereby improving state variable forecasts. However, these techniques often rely on linear or Gaussian assumptions, which can limit their effectiveness in accurately predicting state variables. Moreover, simulating large-scale three-dimensional (3D) GCS problems is computationally expensive, making iterative runs in inverse problems prohibitive. To address these challenges, we propose a conditional generative model utilizing the score-based diffusion method for real-time 3D pressure and saturation field distribution predictions. Our approach involves solving the score function with a mini-batch-based Monte Carlo estimator to generate labeled data. This data is subsequently employed to train a fully connected neural network, enabling it to learn the conditional sample generator within a supervised learning framework. This method enables the rapid generation of a large ensemble of predictions, facilitating comprehensive uncertainty quantification of state variables. Here we applied our method to forecast the dynamic 3D distributions of pressure and saturation fields over a 30-year injection period. The statistical assessment with low root mean square error (RMSE) values demonstrates that our method can accurately predict the spatiotemporal distributions of both pressure and saturation fields. Moreover, the developed conditional generative model shows high computational efficiency by generating 100 ensemble forecasts of 3D state variables in less than 10 min. The consistency between ensemble averages and ground truth values further illustrates the model’s capability to capture state variable dynamics during the CO 2 plume injection process. Notably, the ground truth values fall within the ensemble forecasts, indicating that our uncertainty quantification effectively captures variability and potential noise in the observations. Thus, the developed conditional generative model proves to be a more efficient, accurate, and practical tool for GCS applications, facilitating timely risk analysis and informed decision-making.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Calibration verification for stochastic agent-based disease spread models

Accurate disease spread modeling is crucial for identifying the severity of outbreaks and planning effective mitigation efforts. To be reliable when applied to new outbreaks, model calibration techniques must be robust. However, current methods frequently forgo calibration verification (a stand-alone process evaluating the calibration procedure) and instead use overall model validation (a process comparing calibrated model results to data) to check calibration processes, which may conceal errors in calibration. In this work, we develop a stochastic agent-based disease spread model to act as a testing environment as we test two calibration methods using simulation-based calibration, which is a synthetic data calibration verification method. The first calibration method is a Bayesian inference approach using an empirically-constructed likelihood and Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) sampling, while the second method is a likelihood-free approach using approximate Bayesian computation (ABC). Simulation-based calibration suggests that there are challenges with the empirical likelihood calculation used in the first calibration method in this context. These issues are alleviated in the ABC approach. Despite these challenges, we note that the first calibration method performs well in a synthetic data model validation test similar to those common in disease spread modeling literature. We conclude that stand-alone calibration verification using synthetic data may benefit epidemiological researchers in identifying model calibration challenges that may be difficult to identify with other commonly used model validation techniques.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Accurate and uncertainty-aware multi-task prediction of HEA properties using prior-guided deep Gaussian processes

Surrogate modeling techniques have become indispensable in accelerating the discovery and optimization of high-entropy alloys (HEAs), especially when integrating computational predictions with sparse experimental observations. This study systematically evaluates the training and testing performance of four prominent surrogate models—conventional Gaussian processes (cGP), Deep Gaussian processes (DGP), encoder-decoder neural networks for multi-output regression and eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost)—applied to a hybrid dataset of experimental and computational properties of the 8-component HEA system Al-Co-Cr-Cu-Fe-Mn-Ni-V. We specifically assess their capabilities in predicting correlated material properties, including yield strength, hardness, modulus, ultimate tensile strength, elongation, and average hardness under dynamic/quasi-static conditions, alongside auxiliary computational properties. The comparison highlights the strengths of hierarchical deep modeling approaches in handling heteroscedastic, heterotopic, and incomplete data commonly encountered in materials science. Our findings illustrate that combined surrogate models such as DGPs infused with machine-learned priors outperform other surrogates by effectively capturing inter-property correlations and by assimilating prior knowledge. This enhanced predictive accuracy positions the combined surrogate models as powerful tools for robust and data-efficient materials design.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

First Joint Oscillation Analysis of Super-Kamiokande Atmospheric and T2K Accelerator Neutrino Data

The Super-Kamiokande and T2K Collaborations present a joint measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters from their atmospheric and beam neutrino data. It uses a common interaction model for events overlapping in neutrino energy and correlated detector systematic uncertainties between the two datasets, which are found to be compatible. Using 3244.4 days of atmospheric data and a beam exposure of 19.7⁢(16.3) × 10 20 protons on target in (anti)neutrino mode, the analysis finds a 1.9⁢𝜎 exclusion of 𝐶⁢𝑃 conservation (defined as 𝐽 𝐶⁢𝑃 = 0) and a 1.2⁢𝜎 exclusion of the inverted mass ordering.

Neutrino detection↗
DOE OSTI2024

Strong Lensing by Galaxies

Strong gravitational lensing at the galaxy scale is a valuable tool for various applications in astrophysics and cosmology. Some of the primary uses of galaxy-scale lensing are to study elliptical galaxies’ mass structure and evolution, constrain the stellar initial mass function, and measure cosmological parameters. Since the discovery of the first galaxy-scale lens in the 1980s, this field has made significant advancements in data quality and modeling techniques. In this review, we describe the most common methods for modeling lensing observables, especially imaging data, as they are the most accessible and informative source of lensing observables. We then summarize the primary findings from the literature on the astrophysical and cosmological applications of galaxy-scale lenses. We also discuss the current limitations of the data and methodologies and provide an outlook on the expected improvements in both areas in the near future.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

The National Climate Data Base (NCDB): A Bias-Corrected High-Resolution Climate Dataset

Assessing renewable energy resources under future climate scenarios has been highlighted in recent years to analyze and understand potential impacts of future change in renewable generation on the power sector. Solar energy is well-known as the most plentiful among various renewable resources and usually converted to electricity using photovoltaics (PV) technologies, and the global deployment of PV technology has increased rapidly in recent decades. In this study, we develop a statistical technique to downscale the future projection of solar irradiance for PV energy-related applications. A set of Regional Climate Model (RCM)-based projections obtained from the North American Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (NA-CORDEX) are used as inputs to statistical methods to generate high-resolution global horizontal irradiance (GHI) over the contiguous United States (CONUS). The main steps of the statistical downscaling method include (1) regridding RCM output (0.22 degree and daily resolutions) to handle the modeled-observed data sets on a common grid, (2) correcting bias of RCM GHI using satellite-derived observation, and (3) implementing temporal and spatial downscaling to generate GHI at 8-km and hourly resolution. Basically, complex physical processes and interactions between solar radiation and various atmospheric constituents lead solar irradiance to be highly variable and uncertain. Underrepresentation of clouds from the RCM parameterizations is the main source of error and uncertainty in modeling solar irradiance. Thus, we adapt and use the high-quality satellite-derived data from the National Solar Radiation Database (NSRDB) to analyze the bias and error of RCM GHI as well as estimate the statistical parameters for spatial and temporal downscaling. This presentation will summarize the comprehensive analysis conducted to produce and assess the results under two climate scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). We will also present a detailed validation demonstrating the strengths of the proposed downscaling method and future extension of this research.

climate data↗
DOE OSTI2024

The National Climate Database (NCDB): An Unbiased 100-Year Dataset for PV Modeling

In this study, we develop a statistical technique to downscale the future projection of solar irradiance for photovoltaics (PV) energy-related applications. A set of Regional Climate Model (RCM)-based projections obtained from the North American Coordinated Regional Climate Downscaling Experiment (NA-CORDEX) are used as inputs to statistical methods to generate high-resolution global horizontal irradiance (GHI) over the contiguous United States (CONUS). The main steps of the statistical downscaling method include (1) regridding RCM output (0.22 degree and daily resolutions) to handle the modeled-observed data sets on a common grid, (2) correcting bias of RCM GHI using satellite-derived observation, and (3) implementing temporal and spatial downscaling to generate GHI at 8-km and hourly resolution. Basically, complex physical processes and interactions between solar radiation and various atmospheric constituents lead solar irradiance to be highly variable and uncertain. Underrepresentation of clouds from the RCM parameterizations is the main source of error and uncertainty in modeling solar irradiance. Thus, we adapt and use the high-quality satellite-derived data from the National Solar Radiation Database (NSRDB) to analyze the bias and error of RCM GHI as well as estimate the statistical parameters for spatial and temporal downscaling. This presentation will summarize the comprehensive analysis conducted to produce and assess the results under two climate scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). We will also present a detailed validation demonstrating the strengths of the downscaling method, a summary of the 100-year dataset from 2001-2100, and future extension of this research.

bias correction↗