Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “flood sensors”

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 OSTI2026

Where should we put flood sensors?

Flooding is a major and growing problem in Southeast Texas, especially after storms like Hurricane Harvey and Tropical Storm Imelda. Communities need good flood sensor networks to know when and where flooding happens. Sensor networks have primarily been used and located to assess the physical aspects of flooding. This approach provides an incomplete picture for decisions intended to reduce risk to people. our budget for flood sensors is limited, so we should make the best possible use of each sensor we can afford. Poorly placed sensors can create misunderstanding of who is at risk, while better placement helps communities protect lives and homes and support recovery efforts. Because local budgets for flood sensors are limited, using a holistic approach for sensor placement can support more effective decision making.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Field surveying data of low-cost networked flood sensors in southeast Texas

Floods are common natural disasters worldwide and pose substantial risks to life, property, food production, and natural resources. Effective measures for flood mitigation and warning are essential. Southeast Texas is still at significant risk of flooding, and Lamar University is assisting the region with asset management of a flood sensor network for flooding events. This network provides real-time water stage information. Lamar University developed a survey program to measure elevation and coordinates at each sensor site location to make this data more useful for flood monitoring and mapping. This paper overviews the measurement of the elevation and coordinates of 74 networked flood sensors and various flood stage thresholds at critical points that flood decision-makers can use for reference at each site. In the first phase of this program, these sensors were deployed throughout a 7-county region spanning nearly 6,000 square miles in Southeast Texas. The latitude and longitude of the sensors and their elevations were determined using survey-grade Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) technology. Various Continually Operating Reference Stations (CORS) were utilized for post-processing to achieve sub-inch resolution. The flood stage thresholds, water level sensors elevation, and the elevations and positions of other critical surrounding points are viewable to the public through two online repositories and a web-based sensor management dashboard. The data is used to aid with decisions related to road closures or modeling efforts by mitigation decision-makers, emergency managers, and the public, including the Texas Department of Transportation, Houston Transtar, the National Weather Service, and the Sabine River Authority of Texas (SRA).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Data Repository for Multi-Objective Urban Observational Strategies: A risk-based framework for expanding flood sensor networks.

These data support the manuscript "Multi-Objective Urban Observational Strategies: A risk-based framework for expanding flood sensor networks." These data are generated to allow water managers to reason about optimal locations to expand a flood observation system from multiple perspectives, specifically focusing on flood hazards, and population exposure to flooding. The data included are a) a shapefile of individual sensor locations b) a shapefile of river reach catchments, c) raster of FEMA flood likelihood layers d) shapefile of population locations and population socioeconomic characteristics. The code is written in R and includes all files necessary to generate the figures for the associated manuscript. Interactive maps of the final calculated maps of hazard, vulnerability, exposure, and risk are also included as html files.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Multi‐Objective Urban Observational Strategies: A Risk‐Based Framework for Expanding Flood Sensor Networks

In coupled human and natural systems, developing an observation strategy which maximizes insight into both the natural system and the human system is a challenging multi-objective optimization problem. In this article, we describe the expansion of a flood risk observation system in Southeast Texas designed to improve our understanding of both physical and socioeconomic exposure to hydrological hazards at fine spatial scales, in the context of a structured hazard-exposure-vulnerability risk framework. We describe a new approach for assessing the spatial extent through which a flood sensor's observations can be assumed to be relevant, and estimate the population served within each sensor's area of information using downscaled socio-demographic data. As hydrological observations and modeling move to ever finer scale, assessing the information they contain in the context of both social and natural systems becomes increasingly important for developing actionable scientific insights.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Flood Susceptibility Mapping Using Machine Learning and Geospatial-Sentinel-1 SAR Integration for Enhanced Early Warning Systems

This study presents a comprehensive framework for flood susceptibility mapping by integrating geospatial factors with both statistical and machine learning models. Thirteen Flood-related factors, including DEM, slope, TWI, NDVI, etc., are extracted as features of models, and historical flood data derived from Sentinel-1 SAR from 2018 to 2023 are used as the target variables of the models. These datasets are analyzed using a frequency-based statistical model and three machine learning models, including Random Forest, XGBoost, and CNN, to generate flood susceptibility maps. The performance of each model is evaluated through AUC; and SHAP scores are separately generated for Machine learning (ML) models to explain each feature contribution in the ML model. The generated susceptibility maps are validated by high-flood-risk locations monitored by flood sensors, BLE inundation models, and flood-prone areas suggested by the Local Community Task Force. The results indicate that the XGBoost model outperforms all other models, with an AUC of 0.92 and demonstrates the highest alignment with recommended high-flood-risk locations, while the frequency-based statistical model showed the weakest performance with an AUC of 0.65. SHAP value graphs highlight the elevation, slope, and TWI as the most influential features across all models. The susceptibility maps generated by the machine learning model show strong agreement with the BLE map and high-flood-risk areas identified by the local Community Task Force.

Google Engine↗
DOE OSTI2025

Identifying Urban Pluvial Frequency Flooding Hotspots Using the Topographic Control Index and Remote Sensing Radar Images for Early Warning Systems

Identifying areas that frequently experience post-rainfall ponding is essential for effective flood mitigation and planning. This study integrates Sentinel-1 radar imagery and the Topographic Control Index (TCI) to identify 378 flood-prone urban depressions in Beaumont, Texas. Out of 159 major rainfall events, only six had Sentinel-1 radar imagery acquired within six hours of peak rainfall, and these were used to generate the flood frequency map; the ground-based flood sensor data were used to verify that these selected events corresponded to actual peak rainfall and to validate radar-detected water pixels. Validation results showed 100% precision, 70.87% recall, an F1-score of 82.95%, and 71.32% overall accuracy. Approximately 84% of medium-to-high TCI depressions overlapped with Beaumont’s two-year inundation map, confirming a strong relationship between TCI and observed flooding. A total of 124 depressions retained significant water, and after excluding 25 engineered detention ponds, 99 natural depressions remained flood vulnerable. Among these, 74 depressions with medium or high TCI were identified as the highest-priority nuisance flooding hotspots. The results demonstrate that combining TCI with radar imagery provides a reliable and cost-effective approach for identifying areas prone to frequent urban ponding. This framework supports practical decision-making for drainage improvements, hotspot identification, and early-warning system development in urban flood-prone regions.

Sentinel-1 radar imagery↗
DOE OSTI2025

Applying Transfer Learning for Street-Scale Nuisance Flood Forecasting in Coastal-Urban Cities

An important challenge with Machine Learning (ML) is its transferability; that is, whether a ML model trained on one set of data can be applied to a second set of data without requiring a full re-training of the model. Transfer Learning (TL) addresses this challenge by transferring knowledge learned in the source domain (the data it was trained on) to the target domain (a second set of data that is statistically different but related, which the model was not trained on). This study investigates the use of TL for street-scale nuisance flood forecasting by exploring whether a ML model trained on data collected for one set of streets can effectively forecast flooding for another set of streets in the same city using TL. The envisioned use case is a city deploying a new flood depth monitoring sensor on a street and using TL to apply a ML model, trained on sensor data from an existing flood depth sensor network, to this new street. Eventually, the new flood depth sensor will have a sufficient dataset for training its own ML model, but TL can be used to fill the gap in time while this new dataset is being generated. This method is explored using a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) model trained on data for the flood-prone streets of Norfolk City, Virginia. The data used for training includes environmental time series (rainfall, tide), topographic features (Digital Elevation Model (DEM), Topographic Wetness Index (TWI), Depth To Water (DTW)), and street-scale flood depth time series obtained from a high-fidelity physics-based model, acting as a synthetic street-scale stream depth sensor dataset since actual stream depth sensor data is generally unavailable for most cities. A set of 180 flood-prone streets was used to train a base model, while another set of 180 flood-prone streets was used to re-train that model using different TL strategies. The results show that full-weight re-training proved most effective and minimal re-training of only the output layer was insufficient. The advantage of TL was most pronounced when target data was limited, meaning data collected at the new water depth sensor location included generally less than 18 flood events. As target data increased beyond 18 flood events, the benefit of TL diminished relative to training a ML model directly on the local flood events. These findings can assist cities as they implement street-scale flood sensing systems to create accurate forecasts for new sensing locations that do not yet have sufficient data records to train a local ML model.

Roy, Binata [Univ. of Virginia, Charlottesville, V↗
DOE OSTI2025

River Dissolved Oxygen Prediction Using Machine Learning Models and Wireless Sensor Measurements

Simultaneous flooding&heat and droughts&heat events can potentially destabilize hydro-meteorological conditions to deteriorate the water quality of Neches River. Machine learning (ML) models utilizing wireless sensor measurements have been applied to predict water quality and optimize various water management strategies. This study aims to develop ML models to predict dissolved oxygen (DO) prediction under various hydro-meteorological conditions and enhance water management decision-making. Wireless sensor measurements of DO, water temperature, sample depth, conductivity, turbidity, and pH, along with discharge from the United States Geological Survey stations, are collected for model inputs at the Pine Island Bayou C749 station (PIB-C749) and Neches River Saltwater Barrier (SWB). Multilayer perceptron neural networks, recurrent neural networks, long short-term memory (LSTM), and bidirectional LSTM (BiLSTM) with and without attention mechanism (AT) are tested to determine the best model, which is applied the rolling forecast method to predict 14-day DO. Traditional and recurrent transfer learning (TL and RTL) methods are adopted to overcome insufficient data at the SWB. The input feature importance analysis using the integrated gradients (IG) algorithm is applied to determine dominant inputs. The results show LSTM-based models are capable handling long sequential data. AT-BiLSTM and RTL-LSTM demonstrate the best performance at the PIB-C749 (RMSE=0.054) and the SWB (RMSE=0.028), respectively. TL and RTL methods significantly improve model performance at the SWB. DO, temperature, and pH show higher importance, consistent with hydrodynamics and water chemistry. Both best models are applied to predict 14-day DO and demonstrate reasonable performance for decision-making. Hydro-meteorological conditions of 2017 flood and 2012 drought events are simulated and reveal that possible hypoxia occurs after flooding due to increasing temperature and turbidity, and DO concentration decreases significantly under heat and drought conditions. In conclusion, LSTM-based models utilizing wireless sensor data can be a timely and effective approach to make appropriate decisions on water resource management.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Bayes_Opt-SWMM: A Gaussian process-based Bayesian optimization tool for real-time flood modeling with SWMM

Real-time flood model plays a pivotal role in averting urban flood damage, particularly when there is minimal lead time for preparatory measures. However, urban flood modeling in real-time often contends with inherent uncertainties arising from input data uncertainty and parameter ambiguities. Here this study introduces a real-time calibration (RTC) tool called Bayes_Opt-SWMM, specifically tailored for real-time urban flood modeling and uncertainty optimization. This tool leverages the Gaussian process-based Bayesian optimization algorithm and interfaces seamlessly with the Stormwater Management Model (SWMM). It integrates real-time model forcing data and flood monitoring collected through sensors and gauges which are strategically placed within critical locations of urban drainage systems. Our approach hinges on the Surrogate Model based Uncertainty Optimization (SMUO) concept, providing an avenue for enhancing real-time flood modeling. Bayes_Opt-SWMM runs the optimization process using a surrogate model called Gaussian Process emulator with two inference methods: (1) the Gaussian Process (GP) model and (2) Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) algorithm in GP model (GP_MCMC). Furthermore, three acquisition functions, namely Expected Improvement (EI), Maximum Probability of Improvement (MPI), and Lower Confidence Bound (LCB), facilitate optimal parameter fitting within the surrogate models. The efficiency of GP-based surrogate models in learning SWMM model parameters, leads to an improved uncertainty quantification and accelerated real-time flood modeling in urban areas. Overall, Bayes_Opt-SWMM emerges as a cost-effective and valuable tool for real-time flood modeling and monitoring, with significant potential for managing intelligent storm water systems in urban environments.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Software for High-Resolution Flood Mapping With Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 via Misalignment-Robust Cross-Sensor Learning and Generative Despeckling

SF-26-078 This software provides a high-level workflow for satellite-based flood and surface-water mapping using Sentinel-1 SAR and Sentinel-2 multispectral imagery. It supports preparation of remote-sensing data, training and evaluation of deep-learning models, and generation of high-resolution water extent predictions, including methods to improve robustness to SAR speckle noise and cross-sensor image misalignment.

Feinstein, Jeremy [Argonne National Laboratory (AN↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data for: A Synoptic System for Capturing Ecosystem Control Points Across Terrestrial-Aquatic Interfaces

The investigation of how climate change and water level fluctuations impact variable and interconnected ecosystems, like the interfaces between terrestrial and aquatic environments, requires the collection and integration of many data types. We describe an integrative and autonomous environmental monitoring approach that uses environmental sensors and data loggers to monitor surface water, groundwater, soil, and vegetation changes and generate essential data for predictive models. We established the network at seven sites along the Chesapeake Bay and Lake Erie coastlines, including a large-scale flood manipulation experiment, collectively generating over three million observations per month. Such sensor networks hold great promise for tracking and comprehending environmental changes where land and water intersect. The sensor system and overall approach to sensor management that we have designed is intended to be widely accessible for research teams spanning in size from an individual investigator to large multi-institution projects. This dataset shows example data generated by the sensor network described above. Data output for data loggers connected to groundwater water quality sondes measuring dissolved oxygen, pH, oxidative redox potential (ORP), groundwater elevation, groundwater salinity and temperature, and groundwater elevation; replicate soil moisture and conductivity probes installed at 10 and 30 cm below the ground surface; rainfall and solar radiation; and mean sap flow from 8 replicate probes. Sensors are installed at upland forest (UP), wetlands (W), and transitional locations between these ecosystems (TR). Example datasets are from Goodwin Islands in the Chesapeake Bay and Portage River along the Lake Erie coastline.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

COMPASS-FME Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) Experiment Level 1 Sensor Data v1-2

This is the version 1-2 Level 1 (L1) data release for COMPASS-FME environmental sensors located at our Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) experimental site. This manipulative, ecosystem-scale TEMPEST experiment addresses the potential for freshwater and estuarine-water disturbance events to alter tree function, species composition, and ecosystem processes in a deciduous coastal forest in MD, USA. The experiment uses a large-unit (2000 m2), un-replicated experimental design, with three 50 m × 40 m plots serving as control, freshwater, and estuarine-water treatments.L1 data are close to raw, but are units-transformed and have out-of-instrument-bounds and out-of-service flags added. Duplicates and missing data are removed but otherwise these data are not filtered, and have not been subject to any additional algorithmic or human QA/QC. Any scientific analyses of L1 data should be performed with care. **This dataset will be updated quarterly with new data for the duration of the project**This dataset includes:- An overall dataset README file that describes the current version, gives citation and contact information, etc.- Site- and year-specific folders, each holding up to 12 CSV (comma separated value) data files for each site and plot in that year.- Metadata files within each site-year folder provide full information on data units, expected ranges, contact information, detailed flood times, as well as a general description of the site.- Environmental sensor types that appear in the data files include weather (ClimaVUE50, CS, RM Young, and LI instruments in the graphs below); soil conditions (TEROS12); soil redox state (Redox); groundwater variables (AquaTROLL200 and AquaTROLL600); open water sondes (Exo); tree sap velocity (Sapflow); and system voltage and state (Datalogger). Data are normally logged every 15 minutes.Please see v1-2 TEMPEST L1 Sensor Package Quick Start.pdf for detailed information on data package structure, temporal coverage, and versioning.The TEMPEST flood events occurred on the following dates. They lasted for ~10 hours each day and delivered ~80,000 gallons to each plot; many data streams are available at 1 or 5 minute frequency during these periods.* Tests: Aug 25 (fresh plot) and Sep 9 (salt plot), 2021* TEMPEST 1: June 22, 2022* TEMPEST 2: June 6-7, 2023* TEMPEST 3: June 11-13, 2024

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

COMPASS-FME Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) Experiment Level 1 Sensor Data v2-1

This is the version 2-1 Level 1 (L1) data release for COMPASS-FME environmental sensors located at our Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) experimental site. This manipulative, ecosystem-scale TEMPEST experiment addresses the potential for freshwater and estuarine-water disturbance events to alter tree function, species composition, and ecosystem processes in a deciduous coastal forest in MD, USA. The experiment uses a large-unit (2000 m2), un-replicated experimental design, with three 50 m × 40 m plots serving as control, freshwater, and estuarine-water treatments. L1 data are close to raw, but are units-transformed and have out-of-instrument-bounds, out-of-service, and outlier flags added. Duplicates and missing data are removed but otherwise these data are not filtered, and have not been subject to any additional algorithmic or human QA/QC. Any scientific analyses of L1 data should be performed with care. **This dataset will be updated quarterly with new data for the duration of the project** This dataset includes: - An overall dataset README file that describes the current version, gives citation and contact information, etc. - Site- and year-specific folders, each holding variable-specific CSV (comma separated value) data files for each site and plot in that year. - Metadata files within each site-year folder provide full information on data units, expected ranges, contact information, detailed flood times, as well as a general description of the site. - Environmental sensor types that appear in the data files include weather (ClimaVUE50, CS, RM Young, and LI instruments in the graphs below); soil conditions (TEROS12); soil redox state (Redox); groundwater variables (AquaTROLL200 and AquaTROLL600); open water sondes (Exo); tree sap velocity (Sapflow); and system voltage and state (Datalogger). Data are normally logged every 15 minutes. Please see v2-1 TEMPEST L1 Sensor Package Quick Start.pdf for detailed information on data package structure, temporal coverage, and versioning. The TEMPEST flood events occurred on the following dates. They lasted for ~10 hours each day and delivered ~80,000 gallons to each plot; many data streams are available at 1 or 5 minute frequency during these periods. * Tests: Aug 25 (fresh plot) and Sep 9 (salt plot), 2021 * TEMPEST 1: June 22, 2022 * TEMPEST 2: June 6-7, 2023 * TEMPEST 3: June 11-13, 2024 This dataset was updated 2026-03-12: (i) data now go through 2025-12-31 (previous end was 2025-06-30) and (ii) dataset and file names updated to “…v2-1” (previously was “v2-0”).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hydrologic investigations of radar-rainfall error propagation to rainfall-runoff model hydrographs

Rainfall is arguably the most important yet most variable input for rainfall-runoff hydrologic models. In this study, the authors search for the characteristics of radar-rainfall estimates that are most important for skillful streamflow predictions. They perform comprehensive hydrologic investigations of radar-rainfall characteristics, including spatiotemporal resolution, radar range visibility, statistical characterization of rainfall variability, all vis-a-vis basin characteristics such as size and river network topology. Since the true rainfall fields are unknown, the authors exploit a paradigm of using two independently constructed radar-rainfall products i.e., Multi-Radar Multi-Sensor and IFC-ZR used operationally by the Iowa Flood Center (IFC). Using the distributed hydrologic model called the Hillslope-Link Model for the domain of the state of Iowa, they evaluate streamflow prediction at 140 USGS gauge stations that monitor rivers in Iowa. Through spatial and temporal rainfall aggregation experiments, the authors show that the impact of spatial and temporal resolution of rainfall is significant typically for smaller basins while starts reducing significantly for basins larger than 1,000 km 2 . Other rainfall characteristics they explored do not reveal a strong signature in the relationship of rainfall differences between the two products and hydrograph errors. However, exploring the product similarities rather than differences reveals that the basin-wide rainfall volume has the most significant effect on streamflow prediction. The results from this study are generalizable for all rainfall observing systems.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

COMPASS-FME Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) Experiment Level 2 Sensor Data v2-1

This is the version v2-1 Level 2 (L2) data release for COMPASS-FME environmental sensors located at our Terrestrial Ecosystem Manipulation to Probe the Effects of Storm Treatments (TEMPEST) experimental site. This manipulative, ecosystem-scale TEMPEST experiment addresses the potential for freshwater and estuarine-water disturbance events to alter tree function, species composition, and ecosystem processes in a deciduous coastal forest in MD, USA. The experiment uses a large-unit (2000 m2), un-replicated experimental design, with three 50 m × 40 m plots serving as control, freshwater, and estuarine-water treatments. Level 2 (L2) data consist of sensor observations from the COMPASS-FME synoptic sites, TEMPEST, and DELUGE. Compared to the L1 data, these are more consistent (always 15-minute timestamps for the entire year); better QA/QC’d (out of bounds, out of service, and extreme outlier values are removed); and more complete, with a gap-filled time series available alongside the main observations, and additional derived (calculated) variables. L2 data are intended to be rapidly and easily usable in analyses and simulations. However, algorithmic outlier identification always carries the risk of removing valid data, and Level 1 data may be more suitable for analyses that focus on variability or extreme events. This dataset includes: - An overall dataset README file that describes the current version, gives citation and contact information, etc. - Site- and year-specific folders, each holding variable-specific Parquet (a high performance, space efficient format; see https://parquet.apache.org) data files for each site and plot in that year. - Metadata files within each site-year folder provide full information on data units, expected ranges, contact information, detailed flood times, as well as a general description of the site. - Environmental sensor types that appear in the data files include weather (ClimaVUE50, CS, RM Young, and LI instruments in the graphs below); soil conditions (TEROS12); soil redox state (Redox); groundwater variables (AquaTROLL200 and AquaTROLL600); open water sondes (Exo); tree sap velocity (Sapflow); and system voltage and state (Datalogger). Data are reported every 15 minutes. Please see v2-1 TEMPEST L2 Sensor Package Quick Start.pdf for detailed information on data package structure, temporal coverage, and versioning. Data files are in Apache Parquet, a high performance, space efficient format for tabular data. These files can be read using R's `arrow` package (https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/), with similar tools available in other languages. The TEMPEST flood events occurred on the following dates. They lasted for ~10 hours each day and delivered ~80,000 gallons to each plot; many data streams are available at 1 or 5 minute frequency during these periods. * Tests: Aug 25 (fresh plot) and Sep 9 (salt plot), 2021 * TEMPEST 1: June 22, 2022 * TEMPEST 2: June 6-7, 2023 * TEMPEST 3: June 11-13, 2024

EARTH SCIENCE > ATMOSPHERE > ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATU↗
DOE OSTI2020

Acoustic Explosion Data Archive for Machine Learning

The prompt detection of explosions is a key element of the nuclear non-proliferation mission. With traditional sensors being limited in number and scale, smartphones as compact and economical multi-modal sensors are gaining traction and are being deployed. To address the flood of heterogeneous smartphone data, our team proposes a feature extraction using standardized constant-Q frequency bands across acoustic, barometric, and accelerometer data. The work in this presentation contains data collected at Idaho National Laboratory during planned detonations.

46 - INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AN↗
DOE OSTI2020

Data Fusion and Feature Extraction of Explosions Recorded on Smartphones

The prompt detection of explosions is a key element of the nuclear non-proliferation mission. With traditional sensors being limited in number and scale, smartphones as compact and economical multi-modal sensors are gaining traction and are being deployed. To address the flood of heterogeneous smartphone data, our team proposes a feature extraction using standardized constant-Q frequency bands across acoustic, barometric, and accelerometer data. The work presented in this poster utilizes three explosions collected on smartphones with Idaho National Lab. More explosions are planned in the near future at INL and NNSS. These extracted features will be used in machine learning methods in future iterations.

46 - INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AN↗
DOE OSTI2026

COMPASS-FME Synoptic Sites Level 2 Sensor Data v2-1

This is the version 2-1 Level 2 (L2) data release for COMPASS-FME environmental sensors located at our synoptic field sites. COMPASS-FME is studying sites in two distinct regions, the Chesapeake Bay and the Western Lake Erie Basin. We established the network at seven "synoptic" (observational) sites along the Chesapeake Bay and Lake Erie coastlines, collectively generating over three million observations per month, to track and comprehend environmental changes where land and water intersect. Additionally, the two regions provide an interesting contrast of saltwater and freshwater coasts that allow us to differentiate the impacts of inundation and coastal water chemistries in two nationally important coastal systems. Level 2 (L2) data consist of sensor observations from the COMPASS-FME synoptic sites, TEMPEST, and DELUGE. Compared to the L1 data, these are more consistent (always 15-minute timestamps for the entire year); better QA/QC’d (out of bounds, out of service, and extreme outlier values are removed); and more complete, with a gap-filled time series available alongside the main observations, and additional derived (calculated) variables. L2 data are intended to be rapidly and easily usable in analyses and simulations. However, algorithmic outlier identification always carries the risk of removing valid data, and Level 1 data may be more suitable for analyses that focus on variability or extreme events. This dataset includes: - An overall dataset README file that describes the current version, gives citation and contact information, etc. - Site- and year-specific folders, each holding variable-specific Parquet (a high performance, space efficient format; see https://parquet.apache.org) data files for each site and plot in that year. - Metadata files within each site-year folder provide full information on data units, expected ranges, contact information, detailed flood times, as well as a general description of the site. - Environmental sensor types that appear in the data files include weather (ClimaVUE50, CS, RM Young, and LI instruments in the graphs below); soil conditions (TEROS12); soil redox state (Redox); groundwater variables (AquaTROLL200 and AquaTROLL600); open water sondes (Exo); tree sap velocity (Sapflow); and system voltage and state (Datalogger). Data are reported every 15 minutes. Data files are in Apache Parquet, a high performance, space efficient format for tabular data. These files can be read using R's `arrow` package (https://arrow.apache.org/docs/r/), with similar tools available in other languages. Please see v2-1 L2 Sensor Package QStart.pdf for detailed information on data package structure, temporal coverage, and versioning.

EARTH SCIENCE > ATMOSPHERE > ATMOSPHERIC TEMPERATU↗