Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “portfolio analysis”

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
NASA NTRS2005

Portfolio Analysis Tool

Portfolio Analysis Tool (PAT) is a Web-based, client/server computer program that helps managers of multiple projects funded by different customers to make decisions regarding investments in those projects. PAT facilitates analysis on a macroscopic level, without distraction by parochial concerns or tactical details of individual projects, so that managers decisions can reflect the broad strategy of their organization. PAT is accessible via almost any Web-browser software. Experts in specific projects can contribute to a broad database that managers can use in analyzing the costs and benefits of all projects, but do not have access for modifying criteria for analyzing projects: access for modifying criteria is limited to managers according to levels of administrative privilege. PAT affords flexibility for modifying criteria for particular "focus areas" so as to enable standardization of criteria among similar projects, thereby making it possible to improve assessments without need to rewrite computer code or to rehire experts, and thereby further reducing the cost of maintaining and upgrading computer code. Information in the PAT database and results of PAT analyses can be incorporated into a variety of ready-made or customizable tabular or graphical displays.

Barth, Tim↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Portfolio Analysis Tool for Measuring NASAs Aeronautics Research Progress toward Planned Strategic Outcomes

Description of a tool for portfolio analysis of NASA's Aeronautics research progress toward planned community strategic Outcomes is presented. The strategic planning process for determining the community Outcomes is also briefly described. Stakeholder buy-in, partnership performance, progress of supporting Technical Challenges, and enablement forecast are used as the criteria for evaluating progress toward Outcomes. A few illustrative examples are also presented.

Portfolio Analysis↗
NASA NTRS2012

System-of-Systems Technology-Portfolio-Analysis Tool

Advanced Technology Life-cycle Analysis System (ATLAS) is a system-of-systems technology-portfolio-analysis software tool. ATLAS affords capabilities to (1) compare estimates of the mass and cost of an engineering system based on competing technological concepts; (2) estimate life-cycle costs of an outer-space-exploration architecture for a specified technology portfolio; (3) collect data on state-of-the-art and forecasted technology performance, and on operations and programs; and (4) calculate an index of the relative programmatic value of a technology portfolio. ATLAS facilitates analysis by providing a library of analytical spreadsheet models for a variety of systems. A single analyst can assemble a representation of a system of systems from the models and build a technology portfolio. Each system model estimates mass, and life-cycle costs are estimated by a common set of cost models. Other components of ATLAS include graphical-user-interface (GUI) software, algorithms for calculating the aforementioned index, a technology database, a report generator, and a form generator for creating the GUI for the system models. At the time of this reporting, ATLAS is a prototype, embodied in Microsoft Excel and several thousand lines of Visual Basic for Applications that run on both Windows and Macintosh computers.

O'Neil, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2010

Risk Assessment and Integration Team (RAIT) Portfolio Risk Analysis Strategy

Impact at management level: Qualitative assessment of risk criticality in conjunction with risk consequence, likelihood, and severity enable development of an "investment policy" towards managing a portfolio of risks. Impact at research level: Quantitative risk assessments enable researchers to develop risk mitigation strategies with meaningful risk reduction results. Quantitative assessment approach provides useful risk mitigation information.

Edwards, Michelle↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Tool for Measuring NASA's Aeronautics Research Progress Toward Planned Strategic Community Outcomes

Description of a tool for portfolio analysis of NASA's Aeronautics research progress toward planned community strategic Outcomes is presented. For efficiency and speed, the tool takes advantage of a function developed in Excels Visual Basic for Applications. The strategic planning process for determining the community Outcomes is also briefly discussed. Stakeholder buy-in, partnership performance, progress of supporting Technical Challenges, and enablement forecast are used as the criteria for evaluating progress toward Outcomes. A few illustrative examples of using the tool are also presented.

Thrusts↗
NASA NTRS2010

Marshall Application Realignment System (MARS) Architecture

The Marshall Application Realignment System (MARS) Architecture project was established to meet the certification requirements of the Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDAF) V2.0 Federal Enterprise Architecture Certification (FEAC) Institute program and to provide added value to the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Application Portfolio Management process. The MARS Architecture aims to: (1) address the NASA MSFC Chief Information Officer (CIO) strategic initiative to improve Application Portfolio Management (APM) by optimizing investments and improving portfolio performance, and (2) develop a decision-aiding capability by which applications registered within the MSFC application portfolio can be analyzed and considered for retirement or decommission. The MARS Architecture describes a to-be target capability that supports application portfolio analysis against scoring measures (based on value) and overall portfolio performance objectives (based on enterprise needs and policies). This scoring and decision-aiding capability supports the process by which MSFC application investments are realigned or retired from the application portfolio. The MARS Architecture is a multi-phase effort to: (1) conduct strategic architecture planning and knowledge development based on the DoDAF V2.0 six-step methodology, (2) describe one architecture through multiple viewpoints, (3) conduct portfolio analyses based on a defined operational concept, and (4) enable a new capability to support the MSFC enterprise IT management mission, vision, and goals. This report documents Phase 1 (Strategy and Design), which includes discovery, planning, and development of initial architecture viewpoints. Phase 2 will move forward the process of building the architecture, widening the scope to include application realignment (in addition to application retirement), and validating the underlying architecture logic before moving into Phase 3. The MARS Architecture key stakeholders are most interested in Phase 3 because this is where the data analysis, scoring, and recommendation capability is realized. Stakeholders want to see the benefits derived from reducing the steady-state application base and identify opportunities for portfolio performance improvement and application realignment.

Belshe, Andrea↗
NASA NTRS2015

Identification and Analysis of National Airspace System Resource Constraints

This analysis is the deliverable for the Airspace Systems Program, Systems Analysis Integration and Evaluation Project Milestone for the Systems and Portfolio Analysis (SPA) focus area SPA.4.06 Identification and Analysis of National Airspace System (NAS) Resource Constraints and Mitigation Strategies. "Identify choke points in the current and future NAS. Choke points refer to any areas in the en route, terminal, oceanic, airport, and surface operations that constrain actual demand in current and projected future operations. Use the Common Scenarios based on Transportation Systems Analysis Model (TSAM) projections of future demand developed under SPA.4.04 Tools, Methods and Scenarios Development. Analyze causes, including operational and physical constraints." The NASA analysis is complementary to a NASA Research Announcement (NRA) "Development of Tools and Analysis to Evaluate Choke Points in the National Airspace System" Contract # NNA3AB95C awarded to Logistics Management Institute, Sept 2013.

Smith, Jeremy C.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Langley Systems Analysis & Concepts Directorate Technology Assessment/Portfolio Analysis

Systems analysis develops and documents candidate mission and architectures, associated system concepts, enabling capabilities and investment strategies to achieve NASA s strategic objectives. The technology assessment process connects the mission and architectures to the investment strategies. In order to successfully implement a technology assessment, there is a need to collect, manipulate, analyze, document, and disseminate technology-related information. Information must be collected and organized on the wide variety of potentially applicable technologies, including: previous research results, key technical parameters and characteristics, technology readiness levels, relationships to other technologies, costs, and potential barriers and risks. This information must be manipulated to facilitate planning and documentation. An assessment is included of the programmatic and technical risks associated with each technology task as well as potential risk mitigation plans. Risks are assessed and tracked in terms of likelihood of the risk occurring and consequences of the risk if it does occur. The risk assessments take into account cost, schedule, and technical risk dimensions. Assessment data must be simplified for presentation to decision makers. The Systems Analysis and Concepts Directorate (SACD) at NASA Langley Research Center has a wealth of experience in performing Technology Assessment and Portfolio Analysis as this has been a business line since 1978.

Cavanaugh, Stephen↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High Speed Point-to-Point Market Analysis Quick Review

A brief and final update is presented that summarizes recent high-speed studies conducted under different sponsorships leading up to 2021. Specifically, work sponsored by the Portfolio Analysis and Management Office is reflected against contracted efforts sponsored by the Hypersonic Technology Project.

Aeronautics↗
NASA NTRS2015

Analysis of Aviation Safety Reporting System Incident Data Associated with the Technical Challenges of the System-Wide Safety and Assurance Technologies Project

The Aviation Safety Program (AvSP) System-Wide Safety and Assurance Technologies (SSAT) Project asked the AvSP Systems and Portfolio Analysis Team to identify SSAT-related trends. SSAT had four technical challenges: advance safety assurance to enable deployment of NextGen systems; automated discovery of precursors to aviation safety incidents; increasing safety of human-automation interaction by incorporating human performance, and prognostic algorithm design for safety assurance. This report reviews incident data from the NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS) for system-component-failure- or-malfunction- (SCFM-) related and human-factor-related incidents for commercial or cargo air carriers (Part 121), commuter airlines (Part 135), and general aviation (Part 91). The data was analyzed by Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) part, phase of flight, SCFM category, human factor category, and a variety of anomalies and results. There were 38 894 SCFM-related incidents and 83 478 human-factorrelated incidents analyzed between January 1993 and April 2011.

Withrow, Colleen A.↗
NASA NTRS2012

NASA Tech Briefs, March 2012

The topics include: 1) Spectral Profiler Probe for In Situ Snow Grain Size and Composition Stratigraphy; 2) Portable Fourier Transform Spectroscopy for Analysis of Surface Contamination and Quality Control; 3) In Situ Geochemical Analysis and Age Dating of Rocks Using Laser Ablation-Miniature Mass Spectrometer; 4) Physics Mining of Multi-Source Data Sets; 5) Photogrammetry Tool for Forensic Analysis; 6) Connect Global Positioning System RF Module; 7) Simple Cell Balance Circuit; 8) Miniature EVA Software Defined Radio; 9) Remotely Accessible Testbed for Software Defined Radio Development; 10) System-of-Systems Technology-Portfolio-Analysis Tool; 11) VESGEN Software for Mapping and Quantification of Vascular Regulators; 12) Constructing a Database From Multiple 2D Images for Camera Pose Estimation and Robot Localization; 13) Adaption of G-TAG Software for Validating Touch and Go Asteroid Sample Return Design Methodology; 14) 3D Visualization for Phoenix Mars Lander Science Operations; 15) RxGen General Optical Model Prescription Generator; 16) Carbon Nanotube Bonding Strength Enhancement Using Metal Wicking Process; 17) Multi-Layer Far-Infrared Component Technology; 18) Germanium Lift-Off Masks for Thin Metal Film Patterning; 19) Sealing Materials for Use in Vacuum at High Temperatures; 20) Radiation Shielding System Using a Composite of Carbon Nanotubes Loaded With Electropolymers; 21) Nano Sponges for Drug Delivery and Medicinal Applications; 22) Molecular Technique to Understand Deep Microbial Diversity; 23) Methods and Compositions Based on Culturing Microorganisms in Low Sedimental Fluid Shear Conditions; 24) Secure Peer-to-Peer Networks for Scientific Information Sharing; 25) Multiplexer/Demultiplexer Loading Tool (MDMLT); 26) High-Rate Data-Capture for an Airborne Lidar System; 27) Wavefront Sensing Analysis of Grazing Incidence Optical Systems; 28) Foam-on-Tile Damage Model; 29) Instrument Package Manipulation Through the Generation and Use of an Attenuated-Fluent Gas Fold; 30) Multicolor Detectors for Ultrasensitive Long-Wave Imaging Cameras; 31) Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) Command and Data Handling Flight Electronics Subsystem; and 32) Electro-Optic Segment-Segment Sensors for Radio and Optical Telescopes.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2005

NASA Tech Briefs, August 2005

Topics include: Hidden Identification on Parts: Magnetic Machine-Readable Matrix Symbols; System for Processing Coded OFDM Under Doppler and Fading; Multipurpose Hyperspectral Imaging System; Magnetic-Flux-Compensated Voltage Divider; High-Performance Satellite/Terrestrial-Network Gateway; Internet-Based System for Voice Communication With the ISS; Stripline/Microstrip Transition in Multilayer Circuit Board; Dual-Band Feed for a Microwave Reflector Antenna; Quadratic Programming for Allocating Control Effort; Range Process Simulation Tool; Simulator of Space Communication Networks; Computing Q-D Relationships for Storage of Rocket Fuels; Contour Error Map Algorithm; Portfolio Analysis Tool; Glass Frit Filters for Collecting Metal Oxide Nanoparticles; Anhydrous Proton-Conducting Membranes for Fuel Cells; Portable Electron-Beam Free-Form Fabrication System; Miniature Laboratory for Detecting Sparse Biomolecules; Multicompartment Liquid-Cooling/Warming Protective Garments; Laser Metrology for an Optical-Path-Length Modulator; PCM Passive Cooling System Containing Active Subsystems; Automated Electrostatics Environmental Chamber; Estimating Aeroheating of a 3D Body Using a 2D Flow Solver; Artificial Immune System for Recognizing Patterns; Computing the Thermodynamic State of a Cryogenic Fluid; Safety and Mission Assurance Performance Metric; Magnetic Control of Concentration Gradient in Microgravity; Avionics for a Small Robotic Inspection Spacecraft; and Simulation of Dynamics of a Flexible Miniature Airplane.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2014

Aviation Safety Risk Modeling: Lessons Learned From Multiple Knowledge Elicitation Sessions

Aviation safety risk modeling has elements of both art and science. In a complex domain, such as the National Airspace System (NAS), it is essential that knowledge elicitation (KE) sessions with domain experts be performed to facilitate the making of plausible inferences about the possible impacts of future technologies and procedures. This study discusses lessons learned throughout the multiple KE sessions held with domain experts to construct probabilistic safety risk models for a Loss of Control Accident Framework (LOCAF), FLightdeck Automation Problems (FLAP), and Runway Incursion (RI) mishap scenarios. The intent of these safety risk models is to support a portfolio analysis of NASA's Aviation Safety Program (AvSP). These models use the flexible, probabilistic approach of Bayesian Belief Networks (BBNs) and influence diagrams to model the complex interactions of aviation system risk factors. Each KE session had a different set of experts with diverse expertise, such as pilot, air traffic controller, certification, and/or human factors knowledge that was elicited to construct a composite, systems-level risk model. There were numerous "lessons learned" from these KE sessions that deal with behavioral aggregation, conditional probability modeling, object-oriented construction, interpretation of the safety risk results, and model verification/validation that are presented in this paper.

Luxhoj, J. T.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Mobility Metrics Summary Report

Mobility Metrics Summary developed by Crown Consulting Inc. for the NASA Portfolio Analysis and Management Office from January 24, 2017.

George Price↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Modeling Approach to Support Changeability Analysis and Management of Earth Observation Portfolios

Earth observing (EO) mission portfolios provide data on many geophysical parameters that collectively inform our understanding of the Earth system. To observe large-scale climate trends, it is important to collect data on many parameters over time. However, gaps may occur between missions due to formulation complexity, development delays, and uncertain events in operations. These gaps may impact the ability to provide sustained measurements. Developing a balanced EO mission portfolio is key to supporting study of the Earth system. Yet, decision-making at the portfolio level is a complex task because missions often address multiple parameters. Currently, the likelihood of data gaps is often assessed for an individual parameter, but decisions and events can impact data collection for many parameters. This poster introduces a modeling approach that supports management of the many parameter impacts of decisions and uncertain events. The approach provides a foundation for analyzing changeability in EO mission portfolios. Changeability analysis provides insight into a portfolio’s sensitivity to changes caused by decisions or uncertain events. The model is developed to analyze two aspects of changeability, robustness and flexibility, in EO mission portfolios. In context of these portfolios, the authors define robustness as a portfolio’s ability to provide sustained measurements despite future uncertainties, and they define flexibility as the availability of decision alternatives that contribute to parameter coverage at little detriment to the rest of the portfolio. The proposed model characterizes a portfolio’s sensitivity to change by capturing mission-parameter interconnectivity and redundancy in parameter coverage. The model can be analyzed to identify events that can create substantial gaps, thereby revealing focus areas for mitigation efforts. The model can also be analyzed to identify gap mitigation decisions that may improve parameter coverage with little detriment to the rest of the portfolio, thereby revealing favorable pathways for portfolio improvement. Developing a process for identifying these threats and opportunities will be the focus of future work. A parallel poster proposes a standard for visualizing and communicating portfolio-level impacts of decisions and uncertain events.

Lindsey Jacobson↗
NASA NTRS2001

Methodology Development for Assessment of Spaceport Technology Returns and Risks

As part of Kennedy Space Center's (KSC's) challenge to open the space frontier, new spaceport technologies must be developed, matured and successfully transitioned to operational systems. R&D investment decisions can be considered from multiple perspectives. Near mid and far term technology horizons must be understood. Because a multitude of technology investment opportunities are available, we must identify choices that promise the greatest likelihood of significant lifecycle At the same time, the costs and risks of any choice must be well understood and balanced against its potential returns The problem is not one of simply rank- ordering projects in terms of their desirability. KSC wants to determine a portfolio of projects that simultaneously satisfies multiple goals, such as getting the biggest bang for the buck, supporting projects that may be too risky for private funding, staying within annual budget cycles without foregoing the requirements of a long term technology vision, and ensuring the development of a diversity of technologies that, support the variety of operational functions involved in space transportation. This work aims to assist in the development of in methods and techniques that support strategic technology investment decisions and ease the process of determining an optimal portfolio of spaceport R&D investments. Available literature on risks and returns to R&D is reviewed and most useful pieces are brought to the attention of the Spaceport Technology Development Office (STDO). KSC's current project management procedures are reviewed. It is found that the "one size fits all" nature of KSC's existing procedures and project selection criteria is not conducive to prudent decision-making. Directions for improving KSC's - procedures and criteria are outlined. With help of a contractor, STDO is currently developing a tool, named Change Management Analysis Tool (CMAT)/ Portfolio Analysis Tool (PAT), to assist KSC's R&D portfolio determination. A critical review of CMAT/PAT is undertaken. Directions for the improvement of this tool are provided. STDO and KSC intend to follow up on many, if not all, of the recommendations provided.

Joglekar, Prafulla↗
NASA NTRS2006

Postoptimality Analysis in the Selection of Technology Portfolios

This slide presentation reviews a process of postoptimally analysing the selection of technology portfolios. The rationale for the analysis stems from the need for consistent, transparent and auditable decision making processes and tools. The methodology is used to assure that project investments are selected through an optimization of net mission value. The main intent of the analysis is to gauge the degree of confidence in the optimal solution and to provide the decision maker with an array of viable selection alternatives which take into account input uncertainties and possibly satisfy non-technical constraints. A few examples of the analysis are reviewed. The goal of the postoptimality study is to enhance and improve the decision-making process by providing additional qualifications and substitutes to the optimal solution.

prioritization↗