Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “decision making”

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 OSTI2023

Visualization and Decision Making Design Under Uncertainty

Uncertainty is an important aspect to data understanding. Without awareness of the variability, error, or reliability of a dataset, the ability to make decisions on that data is limited. However, practices around uncertainty visualization remain domain-specific, rooted in convention, and in many instances, absent entirely. Part of the reason for this may be a lack of established guidelines for navigating difficult choices of when uncertainty should be added, how to visualize uncertainty, and how to evaluate its effectiveness. Unsurprisingly, the inclusion of uncertainty into visualizations is a major challenge to visualization. As work concerned with uncertainty visualization grows, it has become clear that simple visual additions of uncertainty information to traditional visualization methods do not appropriately convey the meaning of the uncertainty, pose many perceptual challenges, and, in the worst case, can lead a viewer to a completely wrong understanding of the data. These challenges are the driving motivator for this special issue.

data models↗
DOE OSTI2023

Quantifying Uncertainty of Deep Reinforcement Learning Based Decision Making for Operations and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plant

This paper summarizes research that integrates condition monitoring and prognostics with decision making for nuclear power plant operations and maintenance. As part of this research, we have developed an online asset management tool to help reduce life-cycle maintenance and repair costs. Using the latest advancements in condition monitoring, supply chain analytics, and deep reinforcement learning, we have created a predictive maintenance tool that can optimize the maintenance and spare-part management of a repairable nuclear system. To demonstrate these methods, preliminary studies were conducted on a simple, representative maintenance system undergoing a stochastic degradation process that requires repairs or replacement to continue operation. Through Monte Carlo simulations, we were able to reduce maintenance spending by approximately 50% compared to optimized, time-based maintenance strategies. Not only does the decision maker reduce the average life-cycle costs, it also minimizes the chance of high cost scenarios, lowering the variance of the expected cost distributions, and reducing overall financial risk. Furthermore, this work also studies the ability of the decision maker to handle various levels of noise from observation uncertainty. By introducing uncertainty into the decision-making process, we have quantified the robustness and resiliency of the decision maker, as well as identified necessary levels of observability to demonstrate cost effectiveness.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

A template of information needs for decision-making about delaying remediation on contaminated lands to protect human health

The contamination legacy of industrialization, militarization, and nuclear arms race poses current or future risks to populations and the environment. Responsible parties and regulators make decisions regarding which sites to clean up, how, how much, and when. This study aimed to provide an information needs template to evaluate and reduce risks to human health when considering whether to initiate or delay remediation. This investigation focused on four aspects of timing and prioritization: 1) management, planning and implementation, 2) source terms, pathways, and exposures, 3) risks and receptors, and 4) external drivers. Within each type, issues were identified and described. Management class included personnel, health and safety data, funding, equipment, and structural integrity. Source term included contaminant sources, pathways, initiating events, and barriers to exposure. Risk included types and exposures to workers and general public. External drivers included regulatory framework, stakeholders, Congressional mandates, and economic and social contexts. Risk may increase over time as contamination spreads, enters aquifers, and reaches receptors, and may decline as radionuclides decay, and plumes dissipate. The overall objective was to provide a template of information that is useful to managers and regulators, and might be used by the public to understand the risks and benefits of re-prioritization cleanup.

Environmental Sciences & Ecology↗
DOE OSTI2024

Simulation-Guided Decision-Making for Enhancing Energy Resilience in a Remote Alaskan Community

The increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events underscore the need to bolster the resilience of energy infrastructure in remote coastal communities exposed to climate hazards. In recent years, considerable effort has been made to harden the grid infrastructure of remote communities through investment in energy storage, advanced metering, renewable generation and energy-efficient loads. However, simulation-based studies are still needed to identify appropriate locations for investment and determine the adequacy of existing infrastructure in supporting new resources. Preparing the required models may often be challenging due to insufficient metering, disparate data sources and workforce limitations. This paper describes modeling efforts undertaken to represent, within a unified co-simulation platform: (a) the electric distribution network and (b) the thermal behavior of a community medical center, in the remote community of Cordova, Alaska. With the help of case-studies, it is shown how the developed simulation platform can help the local utility in making decisions regarding capital investment aimed at enhancing community resilience.

Microgrid, energy storage, resilience↗
DOE OSTI2024

Decision-making based on Markov decision process in integrated artificial reasoning framework—Part I: Theory

This paper presents a decision-making framework based on an integrated artificial reasoning framework and Markov decision process (MDP). The integrated artificial reasoning framework provides a physics-based approach that converts system information into state transition models, and the analysis result will be represented by the transition probabilities that can be used with an MDP to find a traceable and explainable optimal pathway. A dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) is well suited for representing the structure of an MDP. The causality information among process variables (or among subsystems) is mathematically represented in a DBN by the conditional probabilities of the node’s states provided different probabilities of the parent node’s states. To define node states in a physically understandable manner, we used multilevel flow modeling (MFM). An MFM follows the fundamental energy and mass conservation laws and supports the selection of process variables that represent the system of interest so that causal relations among process variables are properly captured. An MFM-based DBN supports developing state transition models in an MDP to capture the effect of process variables of system having physical relations. The operators of the target system can capture stochastic system dynamics as multiple subsystem state transitions based on their physical relations and uncertainties coming from component degradation or random failures. We analyzed a simplified exemplary system to illustrate an optimal operational policy using the suggested approach.

Markov decision process↗
DOE OSTI2020

Regulatory Decision-Making Process Using 'Weight of Evidence: An Evidence Integration Approach' by the State of Washington at the Hanford Site - 20163

Performance Assessment and Environmental Impact Statement Modeling, Human and Ecological Risk Assessments are the tools used by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) to make regulatory decisions for permitting and cleanup. These efforts all inherently have large amounts of uncertainty no matter how many alternative approaches are attempted. Professional feedback from tribal governments, stakeholders, federal and state regulators, the public and independent peer review groups are taken into account in this process of informed decision making. The process also includes full evaluation of the comments and the associated reviews made by the various peer review groups such as the Low -Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (DOE order 435.1) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The evolution of technology has produced quicker and more efficient fate and transport modeling tools with related quantification of uncertainties and their significance. Groundwater and vadose zone models have been expanded across the entire Hanford site. Many of the technical approaches identified in the Washington State Regulations are updated using current knowledge to better understand the complexities of the Hanford Site using the latest state of the art tools for risk assessment and modeling. More emphasis and time are directed on defining uncertainty and then managing the uncertainty. One added tool is to run sensitivity cases based on informed decision making. The weight of evidence approach considers all relevant information in an integrative assessment that takes into account the kinds of evidence available, the quality and quantity, the uncertainty and error associated with each type, and how they fit together. Evidence of integration involves looking at systematic reviews and evaluating their strengths and weaknesses. In conclusion, Ecology, Washington State's lead regulatory agency at the Hanford site, has had to modify its site closure approach compared to the rest of the state. A more holistic approach dealing with the Hanford site as an integrated system has evolved leading to a defensible informed approach for regulatory closure decisions. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Correlated Trajectory Uncertainty for Adaptive Sequential Decision Making

One of the great challenges with decision making tasks on real world systems is the fact that data is sparse and acquiring additional data is expensive. In these cases, it is often crucial to make a model of the environment to assist in making decisions. At the same time, limited data means that learned models are erroneous, making it just as important to equip the model with good predictive uncertainties. In the context of learning sequential decision making policies, these uncertainties can prove useful for informing which data to collect for the greatest improvement in policy performance \citep{mehta2021experimental, mehta2022exploration} or informing the policy about unsure regions of state and action space to avoid during test time \citep{yu2020mopo}. Additionally, assuming that realistic samples of the environment can be drawn, an adaptable policy can be trained that attempts to make optimal decisions for any given possible instance of the environment \citep{ghosh2022offline, chen2021offline}. In this work, we examine the so-called ``probabilistic neural network'' (PNN) model that is ubiquitous in model-based reinforcement learning (MBRL) works. We argue that while PNN models may have good marginal uncertainties, they form a distribution of non-smooth transition functions. Not only are these samples unrealistic and may hamper adaptability, but we also assert that this leads to poor uncertainty estimates when predicting multiple step trajectory estimates. To address this issue, we propose a simple sampling method that can be implemented on top of pre-existing models.We evaluate our sampling technique on a number of environments, including a realistic nuclear fusion task, and find that, not only do smooth transition function samples produce more calibrated uncertainties, but they also lead to better downstream performance for an adaptive policy.

Offline Reinforcement Learning↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Typology of Decision-Making Tasks for Visualization

Despite decision-making being a vital goal of data visualization, little work has been done to differentiate decision-making tasks within the field. While visualization task taxonomies and typologies exist, they often focus on more granular analytical tasks that are too low-level to describe large complex decisions, which can make it difficult to reason about and design decision-support tools. In this paper, we contribute a typology of decision-making tasks that were iteratively refined from a list of design goals distilled from a literature review. Our typology is concise and consists of only three tasks: CHOOSE, ACTIVATE, and CREATE. Although decision types originating in other disciplines exist, we provide definitions for these tasks that are suitable for the visualization community. Our proposed typology offers two benefits. First, the ability to compose and hierarchically organize the tasks enables flexible and clear descriptions of decisions with varying levels of complexities. Second, the typology encourages productive discourse between visualization designers and domain experts by abstracting the intricacies of data, thereby promoting clarity and rigorous analysis of decision-making processes. We demonstrate the benefits of our typology through four case studies, and present an evaluation of the typology from semi-structured interviews with experienced members of the visualization community who have contributed to developing or publishing decision support systems for domain experts. Our interviewees used our typology to delineate the decision-making processes supported by their systems, demonstrating its descriptive capacity and effectiveness. Finally, we present preliminary findings on the usefulness of our typology for visualization design.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

System risk quantification and decision making support using functional modeling and dynamic Bayesian network

Risk-informed decision-making requires a probabilistic assessment of the likelihood of success of control action, given the system status. This paper presents a systematic state transition modeling approach integrating dynamic probabilistic risk assessment with a decision-making process using a dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) coupled with functional modeling. A functional model designed with multilevel flow modeling (MFM) technique was used to build a system state structure inferred by energy, mass, and information flow so that one can verify the developed model with respect to system functionality. The MFM model represents the causal relationship among the nodes, which captures the structure of process parameters and control units. Each node may have multiple possible states, and the DBN structured by the MFM model represents the time-domain transitions among the defined states. Furthermore, the MFM-DBN integrated state transition modeling is a white-box approach that allows one to draw the system's risk profile by updating the system states and supports the decisions probabilistically with physical inference. An example of a simple heating system has been used to illustrate this process, including decision-making support based on quantitative risk profile. For demonstrating its applicability to a complex system operational decision making, a case study of station blackout accident scenario leading to the seal loss of coolant accident in a nuclear power plant is presented. The proposed approach effectively provided the risk profile along time for each option so that the operators can make the best decision, which minimizes the plant risk.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Method and apparatus for constructing informative outcomes to guide multi-policy decision making

In Multi-Policy Decision-Making (MPDM), many computationally-expensive forward simulations are performed in order to predict the performance of a set of candidate policies. In risk-aware formulations of MPDM, only the worst outcomes affect the decision making process, and efficiently finding these influential outcomes becomes the core challenge. Recently, stochastic gradient optimization algorithms, using a heuristic function, were shown to be significantly superior to random sampling. In this disclosure, it was shown that accurate gradients can be computed-even through a complex forward simulation—using approaches similar to those in dep networks. The proposed approach finds influential outcomes more reliably, and is faster than earlier methods, allowing one to evaluate more policies while simultaneously eliminating the need to design an easily-differentiable heuristic function.

Olson, Edwin↗
DOE OSTI2021

Harnessing Condorcet Methods to Improve Decision-making Based on Ranked Data

Decision-makers must often choose between multiple alternatives based on their relative merits across a variety of criteria. These multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problems must be approached in an objective, measurable, and transparent fashion to obtain well-supported outcomes. The challenge of using sets of ranked data to identify the optimal choice is not unlike the challenge of using ranked ballots to identify the winner of an election in a preference voting system. As such, the methods of rank aggregation used in elections can be applied to help resolve MCDM problems. Previous research into the design of elections and ballots has yielded many algorithms with well-understood properties. A subset of these, called Condorcet methods, reliably identify the “Condorcet winner,” if it exists, giving the result that would defeat any other in a pairwise comparison. That, in addition to several other desirable qualities, makes Condorcet methods like the Schulze method, Ranked Pairs, and Copeland’s method, effective and scalable means for tackling MCDM problems. These rank aggregation methods have been implemented in JavaScript functions for incorporation into a web-based MCDM decision tool. These algorithms can be applied in a wide variety of contexts (for example, determining the “best” environmental remediation method or selecting a subcontractor) to facilitate effective decision-making. The performance of the JavaScript Condorcet prototype tool was compared across the implemented algorithms and with both a non-Condorcet rank aggregation method as well as an implementation of the Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART) algorithm.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Analytical Framework for Homeowner-Focused Computational Cost-Benefit Mitigation Decision Making

As a result of increasing windstorm losses in the United States over the past 50 years, a variety of residential wind hazard mitigation strategies have been recommended. Wind hazard mitigation undoubtedly reduces windstorm losses; however, little customized information is available to support the economic decision-making process for individual stakeholders, especially at the consumer level. Therefore, there is a need for decision support tools to calculate, evaluate, and present the economic benefits of mitigation over variable decision-making time horizons for unique building characteristics in specific geographical locations. This paper presents a cost-benefit computational decision-making recommendation framework that evaluates and presents the cost effectiveness of mitigation, customized based on location, years of interest, and building characteristics. The decision-making framework consists of two cores. The user-independent core and user-dependent core which consists of eight steps, divided into four subprocesses: (1) data acquisition, (2) data evaluation, (3) cost-benefit calculation, and (4) results comparison and decision making. To demonstrate the framework, a wood-framed single-family home in light suburban terrain in Golden Meadow, Louisiana, is used as a case study, considering retrofit mitigation with a $15,000 budget and a decision-making time horizon of 30 years. The case study provides six mitigation options, with cost ranging between approximately $2,000 and $15,000 and net benefit/cost ratios ranging from 2.4 to 13. Once fully implemented in a decision making information tool, the developed mitigation recommendation framework will provide valuable information that can be used by home designers, builders, owners, and other stakeholders to better understand the economic facets of wind hazard mitigation, providing critical information as part of the overall decision-making process.

Orooji, Fatemeh↗
DOE OSTI2026

Multi‐Model Ensembles in Ecosystem Modeling: Challenges and Best Practices for Decision‐Making

Ecosystem models are increasingly central to the decision-making for environmental policy, conservation planning, and climate-related investments. Yet, the growing reliance on Multi-Model Ensembles (MMEs) of ecosystem models by practitioners and policymakers, sometimes under tight timelines and imperfect information, has frequently outpaced the scientific rigor required to ensure ensemble reliability. Here, MMEs refer to approaches that combine targeted predictions from multiple models with the expectation of improving robustness and quantifying predictive uncertainty. Poorly designed MMEs may create a false sense of confidence and lead to suboptimal policy and market decisions. This perspective argues that robust decision-making-relevant MMEs must be grounded on two pillars: (1) rigorous Model Intercomparison Projects (MIPs), which identify inter-model agreement and disagreement, characterize model uncertainties, and evaluate robustness with observationally based benchmarks—MIPs' diagnostic evaluation is so critical that it must be needed to drive MME's decision in model selection and weighting, especially when only a limited number of models available; and (2) co-design by both stakeholders and scientists to ensure that scenarios, metrics and uncertainty requirements provide decision-relevant information. Building upon the past success and lessons from the existing MIPs-MMEs efforts (e.g., climate/Earth system/crop), we derived the theoretical basis for MMEs, addressed their specific challenges in ecosystem modeling, and highlighted proper consideration of model numbers and diversity, risk of model inter-dependence, effective calibration of model parameters, possible overdue of some ecosystem model development, critical roles of open benchmark data across a wide range of conditions, and suggested use of Artificial Intelligence to support MIPs-MMEs. We highlighted the under-recognized opportunity for MIPs and MMEs to drive scientific progress and innovation through identifying better performing models, systematic benchmarking, feedback loops, and targeted model improvement. By following actionable best practice guidelines, MMEs can evolve from ad hoc aggregation of models into a trusted backbone of environmental policy and decision-making.

ecosystem modeling↗
DOE OSTI2024

Opportunities and Challenges in the Visualization of Energy Scenarios for Decision-Making: Preprint

Scenario studies are a technique for representing a range of possible complex decisions through time, and analyzing the impact of those decisions on future outcomes of interest. It is common to use scenarios as a way to study potential pathways towards future build-out and decarbonization of energy systems. The results of these studies are often used by diverse energy system stakeholders - such as community organizations, power system utilities, and policymakers - for decision-making using data visualization. However, the role of visualization in facilitating decision-making with energy scenario data is not well understood. In this work, we review visualization designs employed in energy scenario studies found in the literature and publicly accessible online sources. We discuss the effectiveness of existing techniques particularly in regards to decision-making, and present opportunities and challenges in the visualization of energy system scenario data.

decision-making↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 132: Risk-Informed Approach for Decision Making in WM, D and D and SNF Management: Reasonable Assurance for Safety

Mr. Larry Camper organized a panel of experts to discuss approaches to better make risk-informed decisions in waste management, decommissioning, and the management of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF). The audience heard the perspectives from four panelists that addressed issues ranging from the technical basis used to make risk-informed decisions to for developing cleanup criteria and promulgating regulations and safety standards both domestically and abroad. A summary of each of the presentations given by the panelists is provided herein. This WMS BOD featured panel focused on the Risk-Informed Approach for Decision Making in WM, D and D and SNF Management and the Reasonable Assurance for Safety. The panelists addressed and discussed with the audience different approaches used for decision-making, summarizing ongoing probabilistic vs. deterministic approaches, including IAEA graded approach, and discussed policies/approaches to achieve reasonable assurance for safety rather than using absolute assurance. Panelists with presentations: Risk-Informed Decision Making - More than a Motto? (Paul Black); NRC Staff Perspective on Risk-Informed Approach and Reasonable Safety Assurance in D and D and LLW (Rateb (Boby) Abu Eid); Risk-Informed Decision-Making and Illustrative National Academies Studies (Charles Ferguson); IAEA's Revised Safety Guidance on Remediation (Michelle Roberts); NDA Radioactive Waste Strategy - A Risk Informed Approach (James McKinney)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗