Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “metadata”

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 OSTI2018

Distributed metadata servers in a file system with separate metadata servers for file metadata and directory metadata

A file system is provided having a plurality of distributed metadata servers with separate metadata servers for file metadata and directory metadata. An exemplary distributed metadata storage system comprises a plurality of compute nodes, wherein at least one compute node comprises a file system client that generates a directory metadata request and/or a file metadata request; a plurality of directory metadata servers to serve directory metadata in response to a given directory metadata request; and a plurality of file metadata servers to serve file metadata in response to a given file metadata request. The plurality of directory metadata servers are distinct from the plurality of file metadata servers. The compute nodes optionally comprise an object client that requests object data from an object store system. The number of directory metadata servers and the number of file metadata servers are optionally determined independently to balance for different workloads, and can be dynamically readjusted for evolving workloads.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Shepherding Metadata Through the Building Lifecycle

Many different digital representations of a building are produced over the course of its lifecycle. These representations contain the metadata required to support different stages of the building, from initial planning and design, to construction and commissioning, through operations, audits, retrofits and maintenance. However, because of differences in the semantics, structure and syntax of these representations, the metadata they contain is not interoperable. We present a novel method for leveraging these representations to create a unified, authoritative Brick metadata model for a building that can be continually maintained over the course of the building lifecycle. A simple synchronization protocol relays inferred Brick metadata from existing metadata sources such as gbXML, BuildingSync, Project Haystack and Modelica to a central integration server, which merges the metadata into a valid Brick model.

Fierro, Gabe↗
DOE OSTI2020

Introduction to Metadata and Ontologies: Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Metadata and Ontologies (But Were Afraid to Ask)

Metadata are contextual data about your experimental data. Metadata are the who, what, when, where, and why of these data. Metadata puts these data into context. In microbiome research, metadata includes information about the sample: when it was collected, where it was collected from, what kind of sample it is, and what were the properties of the environment or experimental condition from which the sample was taken. Information about sample processing is also metadata: methods used to extract and purify molecules (e.g., DNA) from the sample, type of DNA sequencing or other ’omics analyses done, and where the raw experimental data are located. This documentation includes information on the following topics: What are metadata? What kinds of metadata are there? Why are metadata important? Why should metadata be standardized? Why should metadata be machine readable? What is an ontology? Why are ontologies important? What are some examples of ontologies? The documentation also includes further resources on metadata guides and tools and tips for formatting metadata for maximum utility.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP): A Metadata Framework for Advancing Interoperability and AI Readiness Across Scientific Repositories

The Department of Energy (DOE) funds a diverse and distributed ecosystem of repositories that steward scientific data, publications, and software across its research programs, user facilities, and national laboratories. While significant progress has been made in standardizing dataset-level metadata, the metadata describing repositories themselves (their identity, governance, access interfaces, policies, and technical capabilities) remains inconsistent and fragmented across DOE-funded systems. This variability limits discoverability, interoperability, automated validation, and AI-driven analysis, all of which are increasingly essential for modern scientific workflows. To address this gap, the DOE Data Curation Working Group (DCWG) developed the DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP). The DRMP is a practical, community-driven framework that defines how repositories can describe themselves in a consistent, machine-actionable, and scalable manner. The DRMP is not a new metadata schema. Instead, it is a mapping profile and structured element set capturing the essential characteristics of DOE repositories. It harmonizes repository-level metadata across six widely adopted community schemas: RE3Data; DCAT-US v3; Schema.org; Dublin Core; DataCite 4.6; and PREMIS 3.0. This harmonization eliminates reinvention and enables interoperability within DOE and across the broader scientific ecosystem. A core objective of the DRMP is to reduce burden on repositories by allowing them to reuse their existing metadata through a Rosetta-style crosswalk rather than redesigning local implementations. The profile introduces a three-level conformance model that supports incremental adoption: • Level 1 – Minimum Viable Record (MVR): foundational identification elements required for workflows, project registration, and basic repository presence. • Level 2 – Interoperable: structured metadata enabling alignment with national and international discovery systems. • Level 3 – AI-Ready: enhanced provenance, policy transparency, fixity, semantic context, and capabilities that support automated reasoning, model training governance, and machine-assisted curation. To support implementation, the DRMP includes JSON Schema definitions, OpenAPI patterns, and MCP templates that allow repositories to publish machine-readable metadata directly within existing platforms. These resources are modular and lightweight, enabling adoption without major architectural change. Adopting the DRMP enables repositories to: • Enhance discoverability and interoperability by aligning identifiers, classifications, and descriptive elements across widely used schema standards. • Support federated discovery and cross-registration across DOE systems, Data.gov, and international catalogs. • Enable AI agents and workflow orchestration systems to interpret repository-level metadata within the American Science Cloud (AmSC) through Model Context Protocol (MCP)-based context publication. • Demonstrate alignment with DOE’s open science, stewardship, and FAIR data priorities. This guidance represents a community-driven step forward. Through voluntary adoption and continued feedback, the DRMP advances a cohesive, machine-actionable description of DOE repositories that supports FAIR data practices, preparing the infrastructure for AI-enabled research, and strengthening the discoverability and reuse of DOE’s scientific outputs.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2026

SPRUCE: Peat Core Sample Collection Metadata, Marcell Experimental Forest, Minnesota, August 2024

This data set contains metadata associated with peat core samples collected from the Spruce and Peatland Responses Under Changing Environments (SPRUCE) experiment in August 2024. This sample metadata contains no analytical results and is a reference for analytical datasets. To ensure accessibility and discoverability, each sample was assigned an International Generic Sample Number (IGSN), a persistent identifier, using System for Earth and Extraterrestrial Sample Registration (SESAR). These samples were used for downstream analysis by multiple teams of researchers the results of which will be reported separately. This dataset contains one data file in comma separate (.csv) format. Additional metadata are provided: one data dictionary and a file-level metadata file in comma separate (.csv) format and a user guide in PDF (*.pdf) format. An aliquot of most samples is stored at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and may be available for further analysis. Access this collection event on SESAR https://doi.org/10.58052/IEJ9B00VQ. To inquire about obtaining archived samples for analysis, reach out using the Contact Sample Owner form located on the bottom of the landing page in SESAR. Note: Only dried and ground material from C Cores are available for new analysis.

Birkebak, Joshua [ORNL] (ORCID:0009000955611494)↗
DOE OSTI2020

Interactive Metadata Integration with Brick

Many different digital representations of a building are produced over the course of its lifecycle. While these representations individually contain metadata required to support different stages of the building's lifecycle, they are largely not interoperable due to differences in structure, syntax and semantics. This impedes the development and deployment of data-driven applications providing fault detection and diagnosis, virtual metering or optimal control. [4] introduces a new platform for the continuous curation of a unified, Brick [1]-based metadata model that can be maintained throughout the building lifecycle. In this demonstration, we present a live proof-of-concept implementation of the platform with support for several metadata representations in the context of a simulated building lifecycle.

Fierro, Gabe↗
DOE OSTI2021

Metadata Schemas and Ontologies for Building Energy Applications: A Critical Review and Use Case Analysis

With the increasing digitalization of processes throughout the lifecycle of buildings, data exchanged between stakeholders and between building systems has grown significantly. However, a lack of semantic interoperability between data in different systems is still prevalent, hindering the development of applications that can be reused across buildings and limiting the scalability of innovative solutions. Semantics refers to the description of the meaning of the data in a way that can be consistently understood by applications. Recently, several competing initiatives have been developing metadata schemas and ontologies to express this semantic information for different applications in the building domain. This paper systematically reviews these schemas and conducts an analysis of five of them to evaluate their applicability to three high-value use cases for building operations: energy audits, automated fault detection and diagnostics and optimal control. The survey finds 40 schemas published in the last 10 years but but their actual use in industry is difficult to estimate. Among the five selected ontologies, several gaps are highlighted in relation to the three use cases. Recommendations for the future include better harmonization of these initiatives, more centralized repositories and search engines for these schemas as well as better industry engagement to facilitate their adoption.

Smart Building, Sematic, Metadata, Ontology, Data ↗
DOE OSTI2024

Optimizing Metadata Exchange: Leveraging DAOS for ADIOS Metadata I/O

In HPC I/O middleware like the Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) often mediates data transfers between applications. The metadata I/O generated by such systems often presents significant scaling and performance limitations. This work seeks improvement opportunities for metadata I/O by leveraging the DAOS storage systems, a recent storage system solution deployed on high-end systems such as the Aurora supercomputer. We investigate the tradeoffs and the design space for integrating I/O engines for the ADIOS middleware based on the different storage mechanisms supported by DAOS. We present a new DAOS-Array-ChunkSize-aligned engine which provides up to 2.3× improved performance than when using the existing DAOS-POSIX interface, without requiring any application modifications.

Venkatesh, Ranjan Sarpangala↗
DOE OSTI2025

U.S. Hydropower Market Report Data and Metadata (2025 update)

This database complements the U.S. Hydropower Market Report (2025 update). This update focuses on data and trends in 2024 and contextualizes this information compared to evolving high-level trends over the past 10–20 years. It contains data on U.S. hydropower (and pumped storage hydropower) development pipeline, relicenses, license surrenders, performance metrics, and supply chain.

Johnson, Megan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000290141741)↗
DOE OSTI2026

U.S. Hydropower Relicensing and License Surrender Data and Metadata, 2026

The U.S. Hydropower Relicensing and License Surrender Database (2026) provides a comprehensive, nationwide snapshot (as of December 31, 2025) of hydropower projects across the United States that are undergoing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing or license surrender processes. Compiled by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the dataset includes detailed project-level attributes such as geographic location, ownership type, waterway, project type (hydropower or pumped storage), regulatory milestones (e.g., Notice of Intent, application dates, FERC issuance dates), licensing process type (ILP, TLP, ALP), operational characteristics, capacity changes, settlement agreements, construction or turbine‑generator investments, and project status categories spanning relicensing, surrenders, exemptions, and terminations. Together, the relicensing and surrender records offer a detailed view of regulatory trends, infrastructure transitions, dam removals, and economic drivers influencing the evolution of the U.S. hydropower fleet.

Johnson, Megan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000290141741)↗
DOE OSTI2026

Location Identifiers, Metadata, and Map for Field Measurements at the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory, Colorado, USA (Version 3.3)

This dataset contains identifiers, metadata, and a map of the locations where field measurements have been conducted at the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory located in the Upper Colorado River Basin, United States. This is version 3.3 of the dataset and replaces the prior version 3.2 (see below for details on changes between the versions). Dataset description: The East River-Taylor Watershed is the primary field site of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (WFSFA) and the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory. Researchers from several institutions generate highly diverse hydrological, biogeochemical, climate, vegetation, geological, remote sensing, and model data at the East-Taylor Watershed in collaboration with the WFSFA. Thus, the purpose of this dataset is to maintain an inventory of the field locations and instrumentation to provide information on the field activities in the East-Taylor Watershed and coordinate data collected across different locations, researchers, and institutions. The dataset contains (1) a README file with information on the various files, (2) three csv files describing the metadata collected for each surface point location, plot and region registered with the WFSFA, (3) csv files with metadata and contact information for each surface point location registered with the WFSFA, (4) a csv file with with metadata and contact information for plots, (5) a csv file with metadata for geographic regions and sub-regions within the watershed, (6) a compiled xlsx file with all the data and metadata which can be opened in Microsoft Excel, (7) a kml map of the locations plotted in the watershed which can be opened in Google Earth, (8) a jpg image of the kml map which can be viewed in any photo viewer, and (9) a zipped file with the registration templates used by the SFA team to collect location metadata. The zipped template file contains two csv files with the blank templates (point and plot), two csv files with instructions for filling out the location templates, and one compiled xlsx file with the instructions and blank templates together. Additionally, the templates in the xlsx include drop down validation for any controlled metadata fields. Persistent location identifiers (Location_ID) are determined by the WFSFA data management team and are used to track data and samples across locations. Dataset uses: This location metadata is used to update the Watershed SFA’s publicly accessible Field Information Portal (an interactive field sampling metadata exploration tool; https://wfsfa-data.lbl.gov/watershed/), the kml map file included in this dataset, and other data management tools internal to the Watershed SFA team. Version Information: The latest version of this dataset publication is version 3.3. This version contains 167 new point locations, 1 new plot, and 2 new geographic regions. Overall, there are a total of 1439 point locations, 75 plots, and 54 geographic regions. Additionally, the kml map of locations and image now includes two boundaries (Upper Ohio Creek (UO) and Carbon Creek (CA)) outside of the East River watershed (USGS HUC-10) and accompanying stream network that represents areas of focus. Refer to methods for further details on the version history. This dataset will be updated on a periodic basis with new measurement location information. Researchers interested in having their East-Taylor Watershed measurement locations added to this list should reach out to the WFSFA data management team at wfsfa-data@googlegroups.com. Acknowledgments: Please cite this dataset if using any of the location metadata in other publications or derived products. If using the location metadata for the 2018 NEON hyperspectral campaign, additionally cite Chadwick et al. (2020). doi:10.15485/1618130. 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. Part of this work was performed at SLAC Accelerator Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sandia National Laboratories Ecosystem for Open Science: Metadata Schema v0.2 Description.

The Ecosystem for Open Science (eOS) initiative was established in 2019. Its objective is improving openness and sharing of data and information across Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation (DNN) Research and Development (R&D) activities. To support this initiative, the eOS team at Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) developed metadata and data standards and proposed a machine-readable metadata schema. The nuclear explosion monitoring field was selected as a focus area due to its the wide range of pertinent phenomenologies.We developed the DCAT-eOS-AP metadata schema extending the Data Catalog Vocabulary version 2 (DCATv2) standard using an application profile (AP), to fit the needs of multi-disciplinary NA-22 projects. The DCAT-eOS-AP metadata schema describes data at different levels of granularity ranging from general descriptions to more domain-specific granular metadata. Its implementation and serialization is flexible with the ability to include new file or data types. Thus, it will scale with the ever-increasing data management needs of government research. Due to the multitude of phenomenologies represented in the DCAT-eOS-AP schema, we anticipate that it will be easily extensible to various projects across many DOE mission areas. This document describes data management challenges faced within the DNN R&D portfolio and provides insight on how metadata and data standards/guidelines combined with a comprehensive metadata schema can add value to programs throughout the Department of Energy (DOE). It reviews the importance of metadata standards, FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) data principles, and metadata schemas. Additionally, it summarizes input from subject matter experts (SME) at SNL and other National Laboratories that resulted in metadata and data standards/guidelines encompassing domains relevant to NA-22 projects. Finally, we discuss the DCAT-eOS-AP metadata development. Implementation recommendations and future development directions are included for those keen on adopting the DCAT-eOS-AP metadata schema.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Device and method for data compression using a metadata cache

A processing device is provided which includes memory comprising data cache memory configured to store compressed data and metadata cache memory configured to store metadata, each portion of metadata comprising an encoding used to compress a portion of data. The processing device also includes at least one processor configured to compress portions of data and select, based on one or more utility level metrics, portions of metadata to be stored in the metadata cache memory. The at least one processor is also configured to store, in the metadata cache memory, the portions of metadata selected to be stored in the metadata cache memory, store, in the data cache memory, each portion of compressed data having a selected portion of corresponding metadata stored in the metadata cache memory. Each portion of compressed data, having the selected portion of corresponding metadata stored in the metadata cache memory, is decompressed.

Das, Shomit N.↗
DOE OSTI2022

ESS-DIVE Reporting Format for Dataset Package Metadata

ESS-DIVE’s (Environmental Systems Science Data Infrastructure for a Virtual Ecosystem) dataset metadata reporting format is intended to compile information about a dataset (e.g., title, description, funding sources) that can enable reuse of data submitted to the ESS-DIVE data repository. The files contained in this dataset include instructions (dataset_metadata_guide.md and README.md) that can be used to understand the types of metadata ESS-DIVE collects. The data dictionary (dd.csv) follows ESS-DIVE’s file-level metadata reporting format and includes brief descriptions about each element of the dataset metadata reporting format. This dataset also includes a terminology crosswalk (dataset_metadata_crosswalk.csv) that shows how ESS-DIVE’s metadata reporting format maps onto other existing metadata standards and reporting formats.Data contributors to ESS-DIVE can provide this metadata by manual entry using a web form or programmatically via ESS-DIVE’s API (Application Programming Interface). A metadata template (dataset_metadata_template.docx or dataset_metadata_template.pdf) can be used to collaboratively compile metadata before providing it to ESS-DIVE.Since being incorporated into ESS-DIVE’s data submission user interface, ESS-DIVE’s dataset metadata reporting format, has enabled features like automated metadata quality checks, and dissemination of ESS-DIVE datasets onto other data platforms including Google Dataset Search and DataCite.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2018

Managing Rich Metadata in High-Performance Computing Systems Using a Graph Model

High-performance computing (HPC) systems generate huge amounts of metadata about different entities such as jobs, users, and files. Existing systems can efficiently record and manage part of these metadata, mainly the POSIX metadata of data files (e.g., file size, name, and permissions mode). But another important set of metadata, referred to as "rich" metadata in this study, which record not only wider range of entities (e.g., running processes and jobs) but also more complex relationships between them, are mostly missing in current HPC systems. Yet such rich metadata are critical for supporting many advanced data management functions such as identifying data sources and parameters behind a given result; auditing data usage; or understanding details about how inputs are transformed into outputs. To uniformly and efficiently manage the rich metadata generated in HPC systems, We propose to utilize a graph model in this study. We identify the key challenges of implementing such a graph-based HPC rich metadata management system and present GraphMeta, a graph-based rich metadata management system designed and optimized for HPC platforms, to tackle these challenges. In conclusion, extensive evaluations on both synthetic and real HPC metadata workloads show its advantages in both performance and scalability compared with existing solutions.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2018

Transforming Dermatologic Imaging for the Digital Era: Metadata and Standards

Imaging is increasingly being used in dermatology for documentation, diagnosis, and management of cutaneous disease. The lack of standards for dermatologic imaging is an impediment to clinical uptake. Standardization can occur in image acquisition, terminology, interoperability, and metadata. This paper presents the International Skin Imaging Collaboration position on standardization of metadata for dermatologic imaging. Metadata is essential to ensure that dermatologic images are properly managed and interpreted. There are two standards-based approaches to recording and storing metadata in dermatologic imaging. The first uses standard consumer image file formats, and the second is the file format and metadata model developed for the Digital Imaging and Communication in Medicine (DICOM) standard. DICOM would appear to provide an advantage over using consumer image file formats for metadata as it includes all the patient, study, and technical metadata necessary to use images clinically. Whereas, consumer image file formats only include technical metadata and need to be used in conjunction with another actor—for example, an electronic medical record—to supply the patient and study metadata. The use of DICOM may have some ancillary benefits in dermatologic imaging including leveraging DICOM network and workflow services, interoperability of images and metadata, leveraging existing enterprise imaging infrastructure, greater patient safety, and better compliance to legislative requirements for image retention.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Constraints on Future Analysis Metadata Systems in High Energy Physics

In high energy physics (HEP), analysis metadata comes in many forms—from theoretical cross-sections, to calibration corrections, to details about file processing. Correctly applying metadata is a crucial and often time-consuming step in an analysis, but designing analysis metadata systems has historically received little direct attention. Among other considerations, an ideal metadata tool should be easy to use by new analysers, should scale to large data volumes and diverse processing paradigms, and should enable future analysis reinterpretation. This document, which is the product of community discussions organised by the HEP Software Foundation, categorises types of metadata by scope and format and gives examples of current metadata solutions. Important design considerations for metadata systems, including sociological factors, analysis preservation efforts, and technical factors, are discussed. A list of best practices and technical requirements for future analysis metadata systems is presented. These best practices could guide the development of a future cross-experimental effort for analysis metadata tools.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗