Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “peer review”

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

Thank You to Our Peer Reviewers in 2025

Peer reviewing is the foundation of modern scholarship, with external specialists being asked to fairly check and evaluate submitted work. This difficult and often time‐consuming activity is performed voluntarily, with the understanding that one's own scholarship shall benefit down the line from a careful analysis of its assumption, results, accuracy, and yes, language, as we are now evaluating someone else's work. At Space Weather, we pride ourselves on a fair but quick review process yielding high‐quality articles with a time from submission to first decision of less than 2 months. This would not be possible without the hard work of all our reviewers. Once a year, we take the occasion to name these reviewers to thank them for their service to the journal and the community.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

2023 IEDO Peer Review Report

On behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonization Office (IEDO), we are pleased to share the report from our 2023 peer review. Peer review provides us with invaluable insight into our office strategy and program direction from a diverse group of external thought leaders. The findings and actionable recommendations from peer review inform our decision making and help us maintain a constant state of evolution and growth.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

2023 Peer Review Final Report

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy requires each of its programs to conduct periodic peer reviews to enhance EERE program planning. May 16–18, 2023, the Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technologies Office (AMMTO) held an in-person peer review of its program activities in which an independent panel of experts provided AMMTO with feedback on how well the new office’s programs align with its overarching goals and mission statement, identified possible course correction, and shared information. This review marks AMMTO’s first in-person peer review since the Advanced Manufacturing Office evolved into AMMTO and the Industrial Decarbonization and Efficiency Office. A detailed summary of observations, findings, impact, and recommendations is contained in the following report.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

2023 Project Peer Review Report

The Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) within the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy supports the research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of technologies aimed at mobilizing domestic renewable carbon resources for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions across the U.S. economy. BETO systematically prioritizes RD&D into technology opportunities across a range of emerging scientific breakthroughs and technology readiness levels in the subprogram areas illustrated in Figure 1. This approach supports a diverse portfolio while developing the most promising and widely applicable technologies, testing technologies as integrated processes, and demonstrating integrated processes to support scale-up. These technologies will use a broad variety of renewable carbon resources to produce increasing volumes of biofuels and bioproducts. More information on BETO’s mission, goals, and strategic approaches can be found in the Bioenergy Technologies Office Multi-Year Program Plan. The biennial Peer Review process enables external stakeholders to provide feedback on the responsible use of taxpayer funding and develop recommendations for the most efficient and effective ways to accelerate the development of a bioenergy industry. This report includes the results of the Project Peer Review meeting held on April 3–7, 2023, in Denver, Colorado.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Fusion Safety Program Peer Review (August 31 and September 1, 1999) [Slides]

The Fusion Safety Program Peer Review conference, held on August 31 and September 1, 1999, focuses on advancing the understanding and management of radioactive and hazardous materials within deuterium-tritium (D-T) fusion machines. The conference aims to investigate the behavior of significant sources of radioactive materials, such as activation products, dust, tritium, and beryllium. Additionally, it seeks to comprehend how various energy sources in fusion facilities—such as magnets, plasma, decay heat, and chemical reactions—can mobilize these materials. A key objective of the conference is to develop integrated, state-of-the-art analytic tools to demonstrate the safety and environmental potential of fusion technology. Furthermore, the conference assesses and evaluates safety and environmental issues associated with emerging fusion concepts, including those in the ARIES, ALPS, APEX, and IFE projects. This comprehensive approach aims to ensure the safe and sustainable advancement of fusion energy.

70 - PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

Peer Review of X441A Fission Gas Release Data

The purpose of this document is to demonstrate completion of the independent peer review for the fission gas release measurement of fuel pins irradiated in the Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II) as part of the X441A experiment. The specific data reviewed includes reported plenum volume and pressure from the measurement from the fuel pins. Fraction percent of fission gas release is derived in part from these measurements but is excluded from the data reviewed.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

SULI Peer Review

Daniel Xing is a SULI intern whose project was titled: “An Improved Boosted Decision Tree Framework for Event Classification MicroBooNE” This is a physical subject that helps us understand how we can better model neutrinos. I do not study neutrinos, so listening to this talk was very formal.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

SULI Peer Review

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Engineering - Mechanical and civil engineering↗

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program: 2023 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; June 6-9, 2023

This document summarizes peer review comments and scores for the fiscal year 2023 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR), held June 6-9, 2023. This review process provides project- and program-level evaluations of DOE-funded research, development, demonstration, and analysis of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.

AMR↗

The Source Physics Experiment and Distributed Acoustic Sensing

1. Purpose: This will be presented at the 2025 SSA meeting. 2. Peer Review: Internal Peer Review not required. Talk is informational displaying published findings and datasets. 3. HQ review: This is being sent to HQ for review.

Porritt, Robert William [Sandia National Laborator↗

A Review of the Customer Experience at Public Charging Stations and its Effects on Electric Vehicle Purchase and Use

The electric vehicle (EV) market in the U.S. has grown rapidly. However, poor public charging reliability could challenge achieving widespread adoption. We reviewed peer-reviewed articles and market research reports to understand how the public charging experience affects the willingness to purchase EVs among first-time buyers and current owners. Ample literature identifies the measures of the public charging experiences, characterizes the current public charging experience, and identifies the effect of infrastructure availability on EV purchase decisions. However, there is no causal evidence linking the customer experience at public chargers to purchase decisions or intentions for current EV owners or prospective buyers.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Refining the representations of high-latitude surface-atmosphere radiative coupling in the E3SM (Final project report)

Over the course of this project, we have successfully carried out proposed studies and reported our findings in leading peer-reviewed journals and national/international conferences. So far, we have published 7 peer-reviewed articles reporting these findings and contributed to 1 additional peer-reviewed article. One additional manuscript resulting from this project is currently under review. We have made 22 presentations at national and international conferences about the results from this project. We have also given 3 presentations at the E3SM all-hands or PI meetings to update the E3SM community on our results.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS): Bringing Open-Source Software Practices to the Scholarly Publishing Community for Authors, Reviewers, Editors, and Publishers

Open-source software (OSS) is a critical component of open science, but contributions to the OSS ecosystem are systematically undervalued in the current academic system. The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) contributes to addressing this by providing a venue (that is itself free, diamond open access, and all open-source, built in a layered structure using widely available elements/services of the scholarly publishing ecosystem) for publishing OSS, run in the style of OSS itself. A particularly distinctive element of JOSS is that it uses open peer review in a collaborative, iterative format, unlike most publishers. Additionally, all the components of the process—from the reviews to the papers to the software that is the subject of the papers to the software that the journal runs—are open. We describe JOSS’s history and its peer review process using an editorial bot, and we present statistics gathered from JOSS’s public review history on GitHub showing an increasing number of peer reviewed papers each year. We discuss the new JOSSCast and use it as a data source to understand reasons why interviewed authors decided to publish in JOSS. JOSS’s process differs significantly from traditional journals, which has impeded JOSS’s inclusion in indexing services such as Web of Science. In turn, this discourages researchers within certain academic systems, such as Italy’s, which emphasize the importance of Web of Science and/or Scopus indexing for grant applications and promotions. JOSS is a fully diamond open-access journal with a cost of around US$\$$5 per paper for the 401 papers published in 2023. The scalability of running JOSS with volunteers and financing JOSS with grants and donations is discussed.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

Dynamic Networks Experiment 2

Item Purpose: Presentation of LYNM DN DNE2 at the AFRL TIM. Internal Peer Review Status: This item has completed internal peer review. HQ review status: This item has been reviewed and approved by HQ.

Berg, Elizabeth Mary [Sandia National Laboratories↗

From models to reality: a systematic review on simulated and measured residential heat pump energy savings

High-performance HVAC solutions are central to residential energy management. A substantial share of these are electric, reversible-cycle systems, with heat pumps representing the largest portion of current and near-term adoption. This review synthesizes peer-reviewed and grey literature on residential space heating and cooling heat pumps. The academic literature is dominated by modeling (73.8%), with limited field measurement (13.1%). Grey literature from United States serve as a supplemental resource providing measured savings. Conversions from electric-resistance heating consistently show the largest site energy reductions, while oil/propane baselines yield moderate savings, and gas baseline scenario often deliver small and region-dependent savings. This study cross-checks the grey literature measured data with simulation data filtered from the ResStock dataset. The comparison indicates a discrepancy between simulations and measured data: simulated site EUIs are typically lower than measured EUIs, but percentage energy savings fall in similar ranges, implying simulations capture directional effects while underestimating energy use. Factors associated with variability and model–measurement differences include system characterization and control representation (e.g., backup heat engagement, thermostat/setpoint strategies, commissioning/installation quality), occupant behavior, weather normalization, metering scope, and envelope characterization. This paper also outlines the proposed methodology for comparing simulation and measured data for heat pumps. It emphasizes the metrics used for comparison and units harmonization, building characteristics matching, and compact metadata are needed for simulations to match measured data. The proposed methodology is expected to improve the credibility of simulated savings as measured evidence grows.

Yu, Lili↗