SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “software verification”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Software Verification of VARPOW

The VARPOW program is a post-processing utility program for DIF3D, specifically DIF3DVARIANT, and it was developed to provide interface files for the thermal analysis program DASSH. The basic methodology of VARPOW is to take the neutron and gamma flux (moments) calculated by DIF3D (or GAMSOR) and combine them with the heating (coefficient) cross sections to calculate the spatial power distributions using the DIF3DVARIANT spatial basis. VARPOW can use the output from GAMSOR (both steady state neutron and gamma flux calculations) or standard DIF3D/REBUS calculations (neutron flux only). The correct approach for defining the power distribution is to use GAMSOR as its purpose was to properly compute the gamma heating throughout the modeled domain. The power desnities calculated by VARPOW are broken into fuel, cladding and coolant terms for which isotope-wise categorization is needed. VARPOW has built in options the user can select for the isotope categorization or VARPOW can import a file that details the isotope categorization. VARPOW can export the solution in the polynomial basis of DIF3D-VARIANT or the monomial basis of DIF3D-VARIANT. The purpose of this work is to verify the power distribution results calculated by VARPOW from both the GAMSOR and DIF3D input options and verify that the input and output options are consistent with the manual. Hand calculation and independent numerical calculation are used for this verification work.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Software Verification of VARPOW

The VARPOW program is a post-processing utility program for DIF3D, specifically DIF3DVARIANT, and it was developed to provide interface files for the thermal analysis program DASSH. The basic methodology of VARPOW is to take the neutron and gamma flux (moments) calculated by DIF3D (or GAMSOR) and combine them with the heating (coefficient) cross sections to calculate the spatial power distributions using the DIF3DVARIANT spatial basis. VARPOW can use the output from GAMSOR (both steady state neutron and gamma flux calculations) or standard DIF3D/REBUS calculations (neutron flux only). The correct approach for defining the power distribution is to use GAMSOR as its purpose was to properly compute the gamma heating throughout the modeled domain. The power desnities calculated by VARPOW are broken into fuel, cladding and coolant terms for which isotope-wise categorization is needed. VARPOW has built in options the user can select for the isotope categorization or VARPOW can import a file that details the isotope categorization. VARPOW can export the solution in the polynomial basis of DIF3D-VARIANT or the monomial basis of DIF3D-VARIANT. Recently the clad neutron damage calculation capability was introduced into VARPOW, and it now allows a pathway to get distributions of clad DPA. The purpose of this work is to verify the power distribution, fast neutron flux and clad DPA results calculated by VARPOW from both the GAMSOR and DIF3D input options and verify that the input and output options are consistent with the manual. Hand calculation and independent numerical calculation are used for this verification work.

Zhong, Zhaopeng [Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)↗

DOE OSTI2025

Fiscal Year 2025 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software

The continued goal of the ARC SQA project in the Advanced Reactor Technologies program of DOE is to resolve the QA gaps for the ARC software that limit, or prevent, commercialization of the software for industry users. This project started in earnest in fiscal year 2023 which saw the entire code system moved from a SVN repository to a GitLab repository and an associated software quality assurance plan (SQAP) developed and ratified. Most of the QA gaps in the ARC software were identified in collaboration with industry partners and work begin in fiscal year 2023 and continued through 2024 and 2025. The continuous integration testing was extended to RCT, DASSH, and SE2ANL. Minor changes were required to the original continuous integration methodology to make this happen. When full confidence in the methodology is complete, a report will be created to detail the automated regression testing methodology and minor reports will be created to detail the tolerance settings that have been applied to the output for each ARC code. The primary documentation that is missing includes user manuals, user guides, software verification reports, and code coverage assessments. The DASSH, SE2ANL, and SE2RCT manuals were completed this fiscal year. A review of the SE2ANL software identified that it is unrealistic to include updated correlations or different geometry models and it was scheduled for deprecation in favor of DASSH. The SE2ANL manual is essential for SE2RCT as they are similar but quite different in purpose. The only piece of software missing a manual consistent with the source code is NUBOW-3D which is a focus of the coming year. The code coverage report for DIF3D was updated and code coverage reports were created for REBUS, RCT, PERSENT, GAMSRC, and DASSH. Minor coverage issues were identified for all of these pieces of software which did not prevent the work done to transition them to the OneAPI compiler. Because SE2ANL was scheduled for deprecation, it was not transitioned, but it was successfully tested with the OneAPI compiler. This leaves SE2RCT and NUBOW-3D as the only pieces of software not transitioned to OneAPI and further work is required to get SE2RCT to work properly. The SE2RCT software transition will begin early next year while the NUBOW-3D software requires a manual before it can begin. Software verification work has been completed for DIF3D, REBUS, GAMSOR, GAMSRC, VARPOW, EvaluateFlux, and SUMMAR. The PERSENT software verification work was completed this year which was somewhat delayed because of unexpected bugs in the software. The PERSENT manual was updated to detail some of the issues and discuss the bowing reactivity worth feature added in the previous fiscal year. The RCT, DASSH, SE2RCT, and NUBOW-3D software are the only maintained pieces of software without verification reports. The software verification work for DASSH will be a focus in the upcoming fiscal year and it is hoped that some of the test cases created can serve as verification tests for SE2RCT. The NUBOW-3D work will begin when the manual and requirements report are completed. Only minor industry partner software development funds were provided this year. The DASSH software was updated to handle general axial geometry for each assembly and the NUBOW-3D software was updated to incorporate a new input format and better output. Overall progress on resolving the QA gaps has been good this year.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Fiscal Year 2025 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Package Testing Program Process for Validation and Verification of Software

The purpose of this document is to define the process for validation and verification (V&V) of software used to test the thermal data acquisition equipment in the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Package Testing Program (PTP) as part of the testing configuration(s). This process adheres to all applicable ORNL Standards Based Management System requirements and correlates with the PTP Quality Management System and the Software Quality Assurance Plan.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2026

RAPIDS2: A SciDAC Institute for Computer Science, Data, and Artificial Intelligence (University of Delaware)

This report summarizes the activities, technical accomplishments, and outcomes of the RAPIDS2 Institute project at the University of Delaware (UD). The RAPIDS2 Institute was a large multi-institution project with the objective of assisting SciDAC and Office of Science application teams in the use of DOE supercomputing resources to achieve scientific breakthroughs. The UD team contributed to this effort through work on formal software verification. This thrust aims to reduce software developer time and effort, especially regarding debugging and testing, and to increase confidence in the correctness of the results computed by the software.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Verification of the REBUS Software

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. REBUS is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the Triangular-Z and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of REBUS to be verified. Previous work identified the REBUS features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying REBUS’s ability to correctly intepret the user input model, verifying that the features identified yield the intended results, and verifying the correctness of the REBUS output tables. The REBUS software verification relies heavily upon the accuracy of the embedded DIF3D software, the verification of which was completed and documented elsewhere. Given that DIF3D produces an accurate solution, the primary focus of the verification in the REBUS software is to ensure that it properly uses the DIF3D solution and that the depletion system (Bateman equations) are correctly implemented. This manuscript reiterates the verification tasks and displays results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Analytic solutions of the Batemen equations are displayed and the results calculated with REBUS are displayed demonstrating the accuracy. Since coupled Bateman and neutron diffusion/transport solutions are extremely difficult to obtain, much of the focus is placed on how REBUS uses a given DIF3D solution assuming the accuracy of the DIF3D solution. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to the design usage of REBUS, and thus REBUS version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. It is important to note that several outputs of REBUS are identified to be inaccurate, such as burnup in MWD/MT. Most of the relevant ones for VTR are generally accurate with 10-20% errors which is not impactful as all regular REBUS users are aware of this issue and know how to hand calculate the results. The REBUS manual further makes it clear that these values are consistent with the methodology being used by REBUS and thus the “errors” are more of an inconsistent definition with respect to what a user would expect given a definition in literature. Other issues that were identified included unclear documentation and software bugs all of which were inconsequential to the final results.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Software Quality Assurance Plan ANSYS LSDYNA Version 2023R1

ANSYS Inc. develops and markets engineering simulation software and services used in the aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, electronics, biomedical, energy, defense, and many other industries. ANSYS is dedicated to engineering simulation and is the world’s leading software provider. ANSYS was founded in 1970 and is headquartered in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania. ANSYS provides an engineering analysis tool combining structural, thermal, computational fluid dynamics, acoustic and electromagnetic simulation capabilities. ANSYS LS-DYNA is the most used explicit simulation program capable of simulating the response of materials to short periods of severe loading. Its many elements, contact formulations, material models, and other controls can be used to simulate complex models with control over all the details of the problem. ANSYS LS-DYNA has a vast array of capabilities to simulate extreme deformation problems using its explicit solver. Engineers can tackle simulations involving material failure and look at how the failure progresses through a part or through a system. Models with large amounts of parts or surfaces interacting with each other are also easily handled, and the interactions and load passing between complex behaviors are modeled accurately. Using computers with higher numbers of CPU cores can drastically reduce solution times. In addition, many consulting firms and hundreds of universities use ANSYS for analysis, research, and educational purposes. ANSYS is recognized worldwide as one of the most widely used and capable programs of its type. ANSYS has successfully passed over 100 customer quality system audits against American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) NQA-1 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, since the company was founded, over 60 of which have been since 1997. ANSYS has successfully passed over 100 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 assessments. ANSYS design analysis software is the first created within a quality system with ISO 9001 certification, which is the internationally accepted quality standard. Product development, testing, maintenance, and support processes also meet the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) quality requirements, as they have for nearly four decades. ANSYS staff perform more than 60,000 software verification tests before releasing each new product. ASME NQA-1-2012 (Subpart 2.7 is specific to software) is the industry- and NRC-accepted approach (consensus standard) for meeting 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, requirements.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Code Coverage Status of the ARC Code DIF3D

The Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) software system supports users in their fast reactor design goals by providing neutronic, thermal-hydraulic, and structural analysis capabilities. DIF3D plays a pivotal role in the ARC system as the primary homogenized assembly neutronic calculation methodology for fast reactor problems. Over its 40 years history, ARC software usage with DIF3D has been applied to numerous fast and thermal spectrum reactor analysis projects with good to excellent comparison against experiments. With continued improvement of computation resources, many of the geometry modeling capabilities in DIF3D that were primarily used in low order schemes are not really needed anymore. Today, the diffusion and transport capabilities of DIF3D-VARIANT are primarily used in the reactor design process with some scattered usage of DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-Nodal. In recent work, the DIF3D software verification was completed for DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT on the geometry options used in the Versatile Test Reactor project. While we can be confident that these capabilities of DIF3D are well used and thus trusted, it does not demonstrate that all possible input options of DIF3D are actually working, but just those that were tested as part of VTR are and that they are correct. Thus, the purpose of the present work is to identify a set of test problems for DIF3D and assess the code coverage of DIF3D for those test problems. The goal is to document what parts of the existing DIF3D code are touched by the set of test problems and which are not. Because the verification work done on DIF3D-VARIANT and DIF3D-FD was focused on the most common uses of DIF3D for fast reactor analysis, the code coverage assessment of those capabilities is the highest priority. This will ensure that nothing is being missed by the existing verification test problems that DIF3D relies upon. The DIF3D-Nodal capability will also be inspected for code coverage as part of this work to further ensure that regular regression testing of DIF3D will trap any likely errors the end user might experience with the DIF3D software. The code coverage analysis of DIF3D was performed with the Code Coverage Tool of the Intel Fortran compiler which requires modifications to the compilation of DIF3D. The detailed coverage tables are given for each submodule of DIF3D separately, and for the submodules which are primarily developed for DIF3D, most of the source files could be at least partially touched. Most of the uncovered parts/files could be easily ignored, because they are either for error message and debugging output or obviously not needed by DIF3D. Out of the entire source codes of DIF3D, only a few uncovered modules deserve further investigation.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Gamma Source Verification for GAMSRC and GAMSOR

Nuclear reactors that rely upon the fission reaction have two modes of thermal energy deposition in the reactor system: neutron absorption and gamma absorption. The gamma rays are typically generated by neutron capture reactions or during the fission process which means the primary driver of energy production is of course the neutron interactions. The GAMSOR program was first built in the mid 1980s to properly account for the gamma heating in an operating reactor core on core internals. The GAMSOR code is sequence of DIF3D calculations to compute the neutron and gamma flux and combine them to define both the neutron and gamma heating throughout the modeled domain. The goal of this manuscript is to present the software verification of GAMSOR. The first step of the GAMSOR sequence of calculations involves of a modified version of DIF3D (called DIF3D-GAMSOR) which generates a gamma source distribution for the follow-on DIF3D gamma transport calculation (step 2). This modified version of DIF3D increases the burden of maintenance and verification work on GAMSOR as one must reverify the DIF3D capabilities which is undesirable. Because the calculation of the gamma source is the only unique aspect of GAMSOR beyond the regular DIF3D capabilities, that part was put in a standalone code called GAMSRC such that one can use the verified DIF3D code in step 1 followed by GAMSRC to carry out the same GAMSOR calculation step. As a consequence, this manuscript is focused on verification of the gamma source files generated by GAMSRC. The verification of the modified version of DIF3D (DIF3D-GAMSOR) will be done less rigorously in that it will be verified that it produces the same output that GAMSRC does and thus GAMSRC is equivalent to GAMSOR on the problems studied here. Hand calculations and independent numerical calculations of the gamma source generation are used for the verification work. This work follows the same methodology of GAMSRC. As expected, the results agree well with those calculated by GAMSRC as will be shown.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Verification of the EvaluateFlux Utility Program

The EvaluateFlux program is a post-processing utility program for DIF3D, specifically DIF3D-VARIANT which handles Cartesian and hexagonal geometries. The EvaluateFlux program was developed to allow users to obtain flux and power traverses through the geometry domain, and its initial purpose was to facilitate foil analysis by evaluating the flux solution from DIF3D-VARIANT and combining it with foil cross section data. The EvaluateFlux program can calculate the neutron flux, as well as the reaction rates, at any user provided evaluation point. It does this by identifying the spatial mesh associated with the evaluation point and then evaluates the polynomial based neutron flux moments stored in the NHFLUX file at that point. The output of EvaluateFlux varies depending on the input setup. The maximum output includes the neutron flux and microscopic and macroscopic reaction rates at each evaluation point. The purpose of this work is to verify the outputs of EvaluateFlux. Simple models that have hand calculatable results are first defined and used to verify the EvaluateFlux outputs. More complex cases are then added where a duplicate program of EvaluateFlux that uses PrintTables outputs of the binary files is used to verify the EvaluateFlux outputs. In those complex cases, hand calculations of selected evaluation points were also displayed to confirm the software verification. For all the tests done, the hand calculations agreed well with those calculated by EvaluateFlux. For the larger complex problems, the duplicate program that can process hundreds of evaluation points was able to identify that zero points within some meshes have large errors. This aspect was attributed to the truncation error on the input provided to the duplicate program and is not a concern for the accuracy of the EvaluateFlux software.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2025

An open-access simulated earthquake ground-motion database for an M7 Hayward Fault earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Region

Comprehensive understanding of earthquake ground motions, particularly in the near-fault region of large-magnitude events, is limited by gaps in strong-motion data. This challenge is prominent in areas with high seismic hazard but infrequent large earthquakes where data is sparse and difficult to interpret. These data limitations lead to uncertainties in the development of site-specific ground motions, which are crucial for engineering risk assessments. To address these challenges, physics-based regional-scale ground-motion simulations have been developed. With the emergence of exaflop-scale computing ecosystems, it is now possible to simulate regional earthquake processes at unprecedented fidelity and generate the large number of fault rupture realizations necessary to characterize both intra- and inter-event ground-motion variability. This article introduces a new database of simulated earthquake ground motions, created for applications in earthquake engineering, earthquake planning, and emergency response. The inaugural version of the database features simulated ground motions for a magnitude 7 Hayward Fault earthquake in the San Francisco Bay Region (SFBR), using the EarthQuake SIMulation (EQSIM) simulation framework and the Graves–Pitarka kinematic rupture model. The aim is to provide high-fidelity, spatially dense, three-component motions generated on the Department of Energy’s (DOE) newest generation of graphics processing unit (GPU)-accelerated supercomputers. These motions are being made openly available to the engineering, scientific, and disaster planning communities. In addition, this work develops protocols for the efficient dissemination of these large data sets and emphasizes community engagement to build confidence in their application. This article discusses the methodology behind the data, underlying software verification and validation, scalable data management, and a user interface for data access. The goal is to facilitate widespread use and elicit expert feedback to maximize the utility and exploitation of simulated motions. While the initial focus is on the San Francisco Region, simulations for additional regions will be added as the DOE program progresses.

Simulated ground-motion database↗

DOE OSTI2026

Towards a Verifiable Domain-Specific Language for Hardware-Accelerated Stencils

Defining a domain-specific language (DSL) that supports vector-calculus abstractions eases the porting of partial differential equation (PDE) solvers to specialized architectures. Sufficiently high-level abstractions empower users to express universal laws with sufficient generality that the laws must always hold true within their domain of validity. A broad class of PDE solvers employs stencil-based algorithms, the target domain of Berkeley Lab's stencil accelerator chip co-design project. First released as open-source in January 2026, the Formal software framework lays a foundation for defining an embedded DSL based on composable operators that implement mimetic numerical methods -- stencil algorithms that guarantee satisfaction of discrete versions of important vector calculus theorems. The Formal DSL will be the frontend to a new class of stencil-PDE accelerators developed jointly by LBNL, UHCL, and UC Berkeley through the DOE Competitive Portfolios for Computer Science Project. This offers the potential of an order of magnitude acceleration for this important category of computational methods to serve the DOE mission. Future work on the Formal DSL will facilitate software verification via type-safe templates that enable problem-specific correctness proofs relying upon generic function theory and carefully crafted unit tests.

Rouson, Damian↗

DOE OSTI2025

The Fluid Dynamics Uncertainty Quantification Challenge Problem: XFOIL vs. MFOIL

Uncertainty quantification (UQ) has become more critical in aerospace engineering due to the growing dependence on computational tools for design optimization and performance analyses of aerospace vehicles. Even though the significance of UQ in assessing the credibility of computational analyses is well recognized, its costs and complexity impede its integration into standard practices, particularly in computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and other fluid analyses. This paper presents a UQ study for low-fidelity computational aerodynamics analyses with XFOIL and mfoil (i.e., the MATLAB version of XFOIL with several implementation modifications); these tools are utilized widely in both research and education. The main contributions of this paper are as follows: 1) improved precision in quantifying the uncertainty of the baseline Monte Carlo results used to benchmark surrogate modeling techniques for UQ, 2) quantification of the effect of the implementation differences between XFOIL and mfoil on solution quantities of interest (QoIs), such as lift and pitching moment coefficients, and 3) development of an open-source UQ library for use with XFOIL and mfoil, which has educational values and helps promote UQ for fluid analyses with aerospace applications. Results and discussions revolve around cases 1-4 of the challenge problem posed by the AIAA Fluid Dynamics Technical Committee’s Uncertainty Quantification Discussion Group (UQDG). In case 3, this work employs CFDverify, an open-source solution verification software, to quantify the discretization error and evaluate the extrapolated QoIs based on the grid convergence index (GCI). This UQ study differentiates itself from previous studies in the rigor of handling baseline Monte Carlo uncertainty and in including mfoil, which is a more accessible alternative to XFOIL. Finally, despite the growing computing power, low-fidelity computational tools remain valuable, such as for aerodynamic shape optimization at Mach numbers below 0.65 and low-to-mid Reynolds numbers.

Lay, Aidan S [University of Tennessee, Knoxville (↗

DOE OSTI2026

Vision and Development of a Design, Implementation, and Verification Automation (DIVA) Software Platform for DNA Construction

Abstract DNA construction, while a prerequisite to many biological endeavors, is often a time-consuming distraction from an individual’s primary research objectives. We envisioned that with the right software infrastructure and cultural mindset, a single person could execute in parallel the batched DNA construction tasks of an entire research institute, at scales realizing efficiency gains through process and laboratory automation. In pursuit of this vision, we developed the Design, Implementation, and Verification Automation (DIVA) software platform. DIVA’s web interface enables researchers to design DNA constructs (using visual biological computer-aided design tools and biological parts repositories), submit designs for construction to dedicated staff, and track DNA construction as it progresses. DIVA supports the dedicated staff through the DNA construction process and records both successful and unsuccessful attempts toward improving the overall process. The platform is publicly available at public-diva.jbei.org and its open-source code through github.com/JBEI/DIVA.

Plahar, Hector [DOE Agile BioFoundry , , ,; DOE Jo↗

DOE OSTI2025

Verification of the PERSENT Software

Ongoing commercial design activities require a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. DIF3D is central to this system and substantial work has been done to verify its accuracy on several identified commercial needs. This manuscript details the verification work done on PERSENT which relies upon the DIF3D code for its forward and adjoint flux solution. Previous work identified the PERSENT features required to be verified to support commercial design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying PERSENT’s ability to correctly calculate four key quantities: perturbation worth distributions, kinetics parameters, sensitivity coefficients, and cross section uncertainty quantification. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to these quantities needed for commercial design activities. For the perturbation worth distributions, hand calculations are deployed to verify the PERSENT calculated results. Similarly, hand calculation of the PERSENT computed kinetics parameters is also used to verify the PERSENT results. In both of these, the input to PERSENT is manipulated to ensure the hand calculation exactly matches the equations PERSENT is calculating. The sensitivity coefficients involve calculating the derivatives of a parameter (such as reactivity worth), with respect to the cross section data. Direct finite difference calculations with DIF3D are used to verify the PERSENT calculated results. For the uncertainty quantification, manufactured input to PERSENT is used to allow an exact hand calculation to reproduce the PERSENT calculated results. The work detailed in this report verified that significant issues were identified for earlier versions of PERSENT for sensitivity coefficients which were corrected in this work and thus version 12.1.0 of PERSENT must be used to reproduce all of the verified work in this report.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Resilience Through Data-Driven, Intelligent Designed Control: A Formal Methods Approach

The PNNL and GTRI team developed a strategy to integrate temporal logic rule specification for detection of cyber-intrusion in the source code and control algorithms of CPS using advanced cyber-data. The GTRI team utilized its capabilities in rule synthesis and temporal logic specifications for software assurance and verification to detect and predict impact of cyber-intrusions and malware in the computational and control algorithms of cyber-physical systems. The team also developed a testing and verification approach that could be used to validate the suggested approach against a realistic use-case CPS showcasing improvements in system impact prediction performance. Temporal logic offers a compact expression of events in absolute and relative time and has a formalized translation to state machines. As such, temporal logic rules can feasibly be synthesized to any system as a rule engine, with the process being formally verified to be correct. The goal here is to utilize temporal logic rules to detect cyber-attacks and manipulations in the computational algorithms and provide real-time software assurance and verification guarantees.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Software Quality Assurance for the MOOSE-Based Open-Source Multiphysics Code Cardinal - An Expanded CI Testing Suite

Cardinal is a wrapping of the GPU-oriented spectral element Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) code NekRS and the Monte Carlo particle transport code OpenMC within the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE). Cardinal provides high-resolution thermal-hydraulics and/or radiation transport feedback to MOOSE multiphysics simulations. Multiphysics feedback is implemented in a geometry-agnostic manner which eliminates the need for rigid one-to-one mappings. A generic data transfer implementation also allows NekRS and OpenMC to couple to any MOOSE application, enabling a broad set of multiphysics capabilities. Cardinal simulations can also leverage combinations of MPI, OpenMP, and GPU resources. Cardinal continuous development and improvement efforts have led to the software being considered as a high-fidelity design and licensing tool for key areas of nuclear reactor relevant physics, including neutron transport, fluid flow, heat transfer, and mechanical processes. The fast development and expansion of the software from a pure R&D framework towards its application in the nuclear industry and regulation require a focus on developing, enhancing and, maintaining Cardinal’s software quality through strict adherence to a Software Quality Assurance (SQA) framework and SQA program. To facilitate compliance with SQA standards, the Cardinal SQA Program has been initiated during Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23). During the development of the Cardinal SQA Program, multiple gaps have been identified. These gaps are primarily related to model verification and code pedigree as they relate to the use of Cardinal as a safety analysis tool. These gaps have been captured in a report published in 2023. A second report highlighted the progress made during Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) and described Argonne’s effort to document and integrate software verification within Cardinal’s software development process. This report documents a snapshot of the verification test cases currently available for Cardinal and NekRS in their assimilation into a Continuous Integration (CI) platform. Following the CI practice permits the integrating of source code changes frequently and ensuring that the integrated codebase clears the verification testing for the software. It should be noted that the SQA program itself, including the program plans, procedures, configuration management, and testing strategies, need to be developed in a future step of this task.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗