Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
424
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
424 results for “Scale models”
WILLOW - Norther: data set for the full-scale validation of model-based virtual sensing methods for an operational offshore wind turbine
<h1><em><strong>1. General description </strong></em></h1> <p>This data set contains as-build design information, as well as full-scale vibration response measurements from an operational offshore wind-turbine. The turbine is part of the Norther wind farm which is located in the Belgian North Sea<em> </em>and includes a total of 44 Vestas V164 (8.4MW) wind turbines on monopile foundations, see <a href="../api/records/11093262/draft/files/Fig1_Norther_locaction.png/content" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Fig1_Norther_locaction.png</a>. This data set is intended to verify and validate model-based virtual sensing algorithms, using data as well as modeling information from a real turbine. </p> <h2><em><strong>1.1 Summary of the shared structural information</strong></em></h2> <p>The included information entails a detailed description of the geometric properties of the monopile and transition piece, distributed and lumped structural masses . All information shared in this record is conform the as-designed documentation. An example of the lumped masses considered in the model input files is presented in "<a href="../api/records/11093262/draft/files/Fig2_Sensor_Network.png/content" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Fig2_Sensor_Network.png"</a></p> <h2><em><strong>1.2 Summary of the shared geotechnical information</strong></em></h2> <p>Monopiles are distinguished by the significant role of soil-structure interaction. Ground reaction is most typically included in the structural model as non-linear p-y curves. Different p-y curves are available for a certain number of soils in the standards applicable to offshore structures (API RP 2GEO, 2011, and ISO 19901-4:2016(E), 2016).</p> <p>The required soil properties to define p-y curves according to the API framework are given in the soil profile provided in a separate Excel. Rather than symbols, the name of the soil properties is generally used as column header (e.g., <em>Undrained shear strength</em>). Therefore, it is straightforward to identify each soil parameter. The only soil parameter that might lead to confusion is:</p> <ul> <li><em>"epsilon50 [-]" </em>represents the vertical strain at half the maximum principal stress difference in a static undrained triaxial compression test on an undisturbed soil sample.</li> </ul> <p>It's worthy to note that estimates for the small shear strain stiffness, referred to as Gmax, are also included. Despite not being required as an input to define the API p-y curves, this parameter remains a key input for other soil reaction frameworks than the API (e.g., PISA). </p> <h2><em><strong>1.3 Summary of the shared measurement data</strong></em></h2> <p>Two sets of measurement data have been curated for validation purposes; the first interval has been collected during parked conditions, whereas the second interval has been collected during rated operational conditions. Both records have a length of 2 hours, and are subdivided into 10-minute data sets. Furthermore 1Hz SCADA data has been made available for the selected intervals. All different data sources are time synchronized and have been subjected to several internal quality checks. </p> <p>The sensor network on NRT-WTG is illustrated in in <strong>Fig. 2, </strong>whereas a description of the sensor types is presented in <strong>Tab.1.</strong> The acceleration sensors are installed in the horizontal plane, and measure tangential (Y) and orthogonal (X) to the wall, where the positive Y direction is pointing clockwise and the positive X direction is pointing inwards. All strain sensors are installed vertically and are located on the inside of the wall.</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>Data type </strong></td> <td><strong>Sensor type</strong></td> <td><strong>Fs (Hz)</strong></td> <td> <p><strong>Level mLAT (m)</strong></p> </td> <td><strong>Description </strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Acceleration (g) </td> <td>Piezo-electric acc. sensor (<strong>ACC</strong>)</td> <td>30</td> <td>15, 69, 97 </td> <td>3 Bi-directional accelerometers at different levels. LAT 15 installed at 240 degree heading; LAT 69 and 97 at 60 degree.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Strain (micro strain)</td> <td>Resistive strain gauge (<strong>SG</strong>)</td> <td>30</td> <td>14</td> <td>6 SGs: equally spaced around the inner circumference of the can. Headings: 50, 110, 170, 230, 290, 350 degree.</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Strain (micro strain)</td> <td>Fiber-Bragg Grating strain gauge (<strong>FBG</strong>)</td> <td>100</td> <td>-17, -19</td> <td>2 FBGs per level at 165 and 255 degree respectively.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Table 1. Description of sensor types.</strong></p> <p>The FBG strain time series have been synchronized with the SG time series using using a cross-correlation based approach. Therefore the SG data has been used to genereate refrence strain time series at the headings of the FBG sensors; the FBG data is subsequently synchronized with regard to this reference time series. No synchronization of the acceleration data was needed, since these are collected using the same data aquisition system as the SG data. </p> <p>The SG strain time series have been calibrated and temperature compensated, whereas this is not the case for the FBG strain time series. The latter have a yet to be determined calibration offset. </p> <p>In conjunction to the sensor channels presented in <strong>Tab. 1</strong>, 1 Hz SCADA data is provided. A summary of the provided SCADA parameters, all sampled at 1Hz, is presented in <strong>Tab 2.</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>Parameter</strong></td> <td><strong>Unit</strong></td> <td><strong>Description</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Wind speed</td> <td>m/s</td> <td>Wind speed as recorded in the turbine SCADA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Wind direction</td> <td>°</td> <td>Wind direction relative to North (0°) as recorded in the turbine SCADA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Yaw angle</td> <td>°</td> <td>Yaw orientation of the nacelle relative to North (0°) as recorded in the turbine SCADA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Pitch angle</td> <td>°</td> <td>Rotor blade pitch as recorded in the turbine SCADA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rotor speed</td> <td>rpm</td> <td>Rotor speed in rotations per minute as recorded in the turbine SCADA</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Power</td> <td>kW</td> <td>Active power of the turbine as recorded in the turbine SCADA</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Table 2. </strong>List of provided SCADA parameters</p> <p> </p> <p>A summary of the selected intervals and relevant corresponding scada parameters is given in <strong>Tab 3</strong>.</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>Scenario </strong></td> <td><strong>T1 (UTC)</strong></td> <td><strong>T2 (UTC) </strong></td> <td><strong>Windspeed</strong></td> <td><strong>RPM </strong></td> <td><strong>Pitch </strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Parked</td> <td> <p>03/07 01:30</p> </td> <td> <p>03/07 03:30</p> </td> <td>< 4.5 m/s</td> <td>~1</td> <td>~18 °</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rated</td> <td> <p>05/07 22:30</p> </td> <td> <p>06/07 00:30 </p> </td> <td>~15 m/s</td> <td>10.5</td> <td>8.1°</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Table 3. </strong>Selected data intervals and relevant scada parameters</p> <p> </p> <h1><em><strong>2. Included in this version </strong></em></h1> <h2><em><strong>2.1 Version - 0.1.0</strong></em></h2> <ul> <li>Relevant Design information can be found in: <ul> <li>Geometry data for NRT-WTG: "WILLOW-Geometry_v4.xlsx"</li> <li>Best estimate soil profile: "WILLOW-BE_soil_profile.xlsx"</li> </ul> </li> <li>Acceleration, strain and scada data can be found in the following parquet files: <ul> <li>Measurement data for the parked case: "NRT-WTG_Parked.parquet.gz"</li> <li>Measurement data for the rated case: "NRT-WTG_Rated.parquet.gz"</li> </ul> </li> </ul> <p> </p> <h1><em><strong>3. Importing parquet files </strong></em></h1> <p>To import the measurement data into Python it is recommended to use pandas:</p> <pre>import pandas as pd<br># Read Parquet file with Pandas: relative_file_path = '<a href="../api/records/11093262/draft/files/NRT-WTG_Parked.parquet.gz/content" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">NRT-WTG_Parked.parquet.gz</a>' data = pd.read_parquet(relative_file_path ) <br><br>Once the dataframe has been imported, the users can process/re-arrange the raw data according the their needs; it should be noted that the imported dataframe contains NAN values - these are caused by the different sampling rates of the provided signals. </pre>
Global 1km Land Surface Parameters for Kilometer-Scale Earth System Modeling (SAI_2016_2020)
<p>Earth system models (ESMs) are progressively advancing towards the kilometer scale (k-scale). However, the surface parameters for Land Surface Models (LSMs) within ESMs running at the k-scale are typically derived from coarse resolution and outdated datasets. This study aims to develop a new set of global land surface parameters with a resolution of 1 km for multiple years from 2001 to 2020, utilizing the latest and most accurate available datasets. Specifically, the datasets consist of parameters related to land use and land cover, vegetation, soil, and topography. Differences between the newly developed 1k land surface parameters and conventional parameters emphasize their potential for higher accuracy due to the incorporation of the most advanced and latest data sources. To demonstrate the capability of these new parameters, we conducted 1 km resolution simulations using the E3SM Land Model version 2 (ELM2) over the contiguous United States. Our results demonstrate that land surface parameters contribute to significant spatial heterogeneity in ELM2 simulations of soil moisture, latent heat, emitted longwave radiation, and absorbed shortwave radiation. On average, about 31% to 54% of spatial information is lost by upscaling the 1 km ELM2 simulations to a 12 km resolution. Using eXplainable Machine Learning (XML) methods, the influential factors driving the spatial variability and spatial information loss of ELM2 simulations were identified, highlighting the substantial impact of the spatial variability and information loss of various land surface parameters, as well as the mean climate conditions. The comparison against four benchmark datasets indicates that ELM generally performs well in simulating soil moisture and surface energy fluxes. The new land surface parameters are tailored to meet the emerging needs of k-scale LSMs and ESMs modeling with significant implications for advancing our understanding of water, carbon, and energy cycles under global change.</p> <p>This data repository is linked to <a href="../records/10815170" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815170</a></p>
Global 1km Land Surface Parameters for Kilometer-Scale Earth System Modeling
<p><strong>Summary</strong>: Earth system models (ESMs) are progressively advancing towards the kilometer scale (k-scale). However, the surface parameters for Land Surface Models (LSMs) within ESMs running at the k-scale are typically derived from coarse resolution and outdated datasets. This study aims to develop a new set of global land surface parameters with a resolution of 1 km for multiple years from 2001 to 2020, utilizing the latest and most accurate available datasets. Specifically, the datasets consist of parameters related to land use and land cover, vegetation, soil, and topography. Differences between the newly developed 1k land surface parameters and conventional parameters emphasize their potential for higher accuracy due to the incorporation of the most advanced and latest data sources. To demonstrate the capability of these new parameters, we conducted 1 km resolution simulations using the E3SM Land Model version 2 (ELM2) over the contiguous United States. Our results demonstrate that land surface parameters contribute to significant spatial heterogeneity in ELM2 simulations of soil moisture, latent heat, emitted longwave radiation, and absorbed shortwave radiation. On average, about 31% to 54% of spatial information is lost by upscaling the 1 km ELM2 simulations to a 12 km resolution. Using eXplainable Machine Learning (XML) methods, the influential factors driving the spatial variability and spatial information loss of ELM2 simulations were identified, highlighting the substantial impact of the spatial variability and information loss of various land surface parameters, as well as the mean climate conditions. The comparison against four benchmark datasets indicates that ELM generally performs well in simulating soil moisture and surface energy fluxes. The new land surface parameters are tailored to meet the emerging needs of k-scale LSMs and ESMs modeling with significant implications for advancing our understanding of water, carbon, and energy cycles under global change.</p> <p><br><strong>Format</strong>: NetCDF.<br><strong>Institution</strong>: Atmospheric, Climate, and Earth Sciences Division, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory<br><strong>Contacts</strong>: Lingcheng Li (lingcheng.li@pnnl.gov; lingchengliwhu@gmail.com), Gautam Bisht (gautam.bisht@pnnl.gov)</p> <p><strong>Description</strong>: This dataset provides land surface parameters specifically designed for global kilometer scale earth system modeling.<br><strong>Spatial resolution</strong>: ~1 km, corresponding to 1/120 degree.<br><strong>Temporal resolution</strong>: includes yearly (2001-2020), monthly (2001-2020), and static data for different parameters.</p> <p><br><strong>Reference</strong>: <strong>Li, L., Bisht, G., Hao, D., and Leung, L.-Y. R.: Global 1km Land Surface Parameters for Kilometer-Scale Earth System Modeling, Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss. [preprint], https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2023-242, Acceptance, 2023.</strong></p> <p>It includes four categories of parameters, Please refer to the readme file for details:<br>1. LULC: land use and land cover parameters<br>2. VEGE: vegetation paramertes<br>3. SOIL: soil parameters<br>4. TOPO: topography parameters</p> <p>Due to storage limitations, the LAI and SAI files are stored in the following repositories:</p> <p>1) LAI 2001-2005: <a href="../records/10815637" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815637</a>; 2) LAI 2006-2010: <a href="../records/10815649" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815649</a>; 3) LAI 2011-2015: <a href="../records/10815658" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815658</a>; 4) LAI 2016-2020: <a href="../records/10815662" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815662</a>;</p> <p>5) SAI 2001-2005: <a href="../records/10815623" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815623</a>; 6) SAI 2006-2010: <a href="../records/10815629" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815629</a>; 7) SAI 2011-2015: <a href="../records/10790724" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10790724</a>; 8) SAI 2016-2020: <a href="../records/10790758" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10790758</a></p>
Hydroelastic response of the scaled model of a floating offshore wind turbine platform in waves: HELOFOW Project Database
<p>This dataset contains the data measured during the <strong>HELOFOW </strong>model test campaign, performed at the Ocean and Hydrodynamic Engineering wave tank of Ecole Centrale Nantes (ECN): decay tests, regular wave tests and irregular waves tests. The preprocessed measured data is contained in MAT files.</p> <p>The model, the measurements and the tests are described in the appended Excel files. A Matlab(R) function is given as a short example to show how the MAT files are structured and how data may be handled for a plot. </p> <p>As stated in the reference paper (Leroy et al., <em>Ocean Engineering</em>, 2022):</p> <p>"As the size of floating wind turbines continues to increase, floating platforms reach dimensions that make their elastic and hydro-elastic behaviour significant. Several works in connection with the numerical modelling of the elastic behaviour of these wind turbines have been carried out but few validation data are available. This study focuses on the hydro-elastic response of a large floating wind turbine, in regular waves and severe sea-states. A new experimental wind turbine model has been designed to represent a 1:40 Froude-scaled spar platform carrying the DTU 10 MW turbine. The main challenge is here to reproduce a 1st bending mode frequency and hydrodynamic loads representative of a realistic large floating wind turbine. The platform model is made of a flexible backbone, reproducing the correct flexibility, and light floaters fixed on it provide the correctly scaled geometry. This experimental model is tested in various conditions including regular waves of several periods and steepness, and irregular waves of various intensity, including extreme 50-year return period conditions."</p> <p> </p> <p>This work was carried out within the framework of the WEAMEC, West Atlantic Marine Energy Community, and with funding from the Pays de la Loire Region and Europe (European Regional Development Fund). <br><br>HELOFOW project on <a href="https://www.weamec.fr/en/projects/helofow/">the WEAMEC website</a>. </p>
The data that support the findings of a review paper "From urban data to city-scale models: A review of traffic simulation case studies"
<p>This dataset contains the data that were used in a review paper "From urban data to city-scale models: A review of traffic simulation case studies". It contains the following files:</p> <ul> <li>keywords with counts.txt - list of keywords and their counts in the considered corpus of traffic simulation case studies. The data were used to produce Figure 2 and Figure 3 in the paper.</li> <li>Papers analysis.xlsx - Excel file containing the data on the reviewed studies. The document has the following sheets: <ul> <li> Appendix A - contains a table short reference, location, simulation period, spatial scale, simulated units and marked categories for a paper;</li> <li>Geography - contains data on geographical distribution of simulated areas between world regions and countries, these data were used to produce Figure 4 in the paper;</li> <li>Software tools - contains data on simulation tools used in the studies. </li> <li>Journals and conferences - contains data on where the reviewed papers were published.</li> </ul> </li> </ul>
Data for Marine Ecological Niche Models, for 2019 and across RCP 2.6, 4.5, and 8.5 scenarios in 2050 and 2100: Global-scale Environmental parameters at 0.1° and 0.5° resolutions, Presence and Absence Records of 1508 European-seas Species
<p>Data for Ecological Niche Models: Global-scale Environmental parameters at 0.1° and 0.5° resolutions, Presence and Absence Records of 1508 European-seas Species.</p>
Final models for "Global-Scale Full-Waveform Ambient Noise Inversion" by Sager et al. (2020)
<p>The exodus model contains the inverted structure model and the source distribution can be found in the HDF5 file. Both can be visualized in ParaView. For the source model, we recommend opening it with the correspoding XDMF file (select "XDMF Reader" in the dialogue box).</p>
Hydraulic scale model experiments on the two-dimensional run-up of impulse wave trains on steep to vertical slopes
<p>This dataset includes the experimental data and videos, which were generated during the study on the run-up of impulse wave trains at the Laboratory of Hydraulics, Hydrology and Glaciology (VAW), ETH Zurich.</p>
Genome-scale metabolic model of Quercus suber
<p>Genome-scale metabolic model of Quercus suber in SBML Level 3 Version 2 format. This model was reconstructed using <em>merlin</em> (https://merlin-sysbio.org), an open-source software.</p>
Supplementary Data: Global fits of GUT-scale SUSY models with GAMBIT (arXiv:1705.07935)
<p>Supplementary Data</p> <p><em>Global fits of GUT-scale SUSY models with GAMBIT</em><br> <em>arXiv:1705.07935</em></p> <p>The files in this record contain data for the CMSSM, NUHM1 and NUHM2 models considered in the GAMBIT "Round 1" GUT-scale SUSY paper.</p> <p>For each model, there are</p> <ul> <li>A number of YAML files, each corresponding to a different set of sampling parameters and/or priors</li> <li>A set of YAML files used for postprocessing: CMSSM_intermediate.yaml, CMSSM.yaml, NUHM1.yaml and NUHM2.yaml</li> <li>A final hdf5 file, containing the combined results of all sampling runs</li> <li>An example pip file, for producing plots from the hdf5 file using pippi</li> <li>SLHA1 and SLHA2 files for the best-fit point in each subregion of the fit. These can be found inside the tarball best_fits_SLHA.tar.gz.</li> </ul> <p>The record also contains</p> <ul> <li>StandardModel_SLHA2_scan.yaml and StandardModel_SLHA2_postprocessing.yaml, two universal YAML fragments included from other yaml files</li> <li>gambit_preamble.py, a collection of python functions used for in-line data processing in the pip files</li> </ul> <p>The different YAML files corresponding to different samplers and/or priors follow the naming scheme [model]_[scanner]_[prior]_[slice]_[special].yaml, where</p> <ul> <li>model = CMSSM, NUHM1, NUHM2</li> <li>scanner = Diver, MN</li> <li>prior = log, flat</li> <li>slice = pmu, nmu (positive or negative mu)</li> <li>special = sqcoann, slcoann, [blank] (squark co-annihilation, slepton co-annihilation, or bulk)</li> </ul> <p>A few caveats to keep in mind:</p> <ol> <li> <p>For each model, the final hdf5 results file included here was generated in the following way:</p> <ul> <li>carry out initial runs using YAML files following the naming scheme above</li> <li>combine the resulting hdf5 output files into a single file, using gambit/Printers/scripts/combine_hdf5.py</li> <li>postprocess the samples to remove all points more than 5 sigma from the current best fit, using [model]_strip.yaml</li> <li>postprocess the samples to include a new likelihood term for LHC Run II searches, and to recompute the FlavBit likelihoods (these were buggy in a pre-release version of GAMBIT). For the CMSSM, this happened in two steps, due to persistent flavour bugs, using CMSSM_intermediate.yaml and CMSSM.yaml. For the NUHM1 and NUHM2, this was done in a single step each, using NUHM1.yaml and NUHM2.yaml.</li> </ul> </li> <li> <p>It is not necessary to repeat the steps listed in point 1 when running new scans; the LHC Run II likelihoods can be included in the original YAML file, so that no postprocessing step is required.</p> </li> <li> <p>The YAML files that we give here are updated compared to the ones that we used when generating the hdf5 file, in order to match the set of available options in the release version of GAMBIT 1.0.0. The included physics and numerics are however identical.</p> </li> <li> <p>The YAML files are designed to work with the tagged release of GAMBIT 1.0.0, and the pip files are tested with pippi 2.0, commit 2ab061a8. They may or may not work with later versions of either software (but you can of course always obtain the version that they do work with via the git history).</p> </li> <li> <p>The pip file for each model is an example only. Users wishing to reproduce the more advanced plots in any of the GAMBIT papers should contact us for tips or scripts, or experiment for themselves. Many of these scripts are in multiple parts and require undocumented manual interventions and steps in order to implement various plot-specific customisations, so please don't expect the same level of polish as for files provided here or in the GAMBIT repo.</p> </li> </ol>
Global 1km Land Surface Parameters for Kilometer-Scale Earth System Modeling (SAI_2001_2005)
<p>Earth system models (ESMs) are progressively advancing towards the kilometer scale (k-scale). However, the surface parameters for Land Surface Models (LSMs) within ESMs running at the k-scale are typically derived from coarse resolution and outdated datasets. This study aims to develop a new set of global land surface parameters with a resolution of 1 km for multiple years from 2001 to 2020, utilizing the latest and most accurate available datasets. Specifically, the datasets consist of parameters related to land use and land cover, vegetation, soil, and topography. Differences between the newly developed 1k land surface parameters and conventional parameters emphasize their potential for higher accuracy due to the incorporation of the most advanced and latest data sources. To demonstrate the capability of these new parameters, we conducted 1 km resolution simulations using the E3SM Land Model version 2 (ELM2) over the contiguous United States. Our results demonstrate that land surface parameters contribute to significant spatial heterogeneity in ELM2 simulations of soil moisture, latent heat, emitted longwave radiation, and absorbed shortwave radiation. On average, about 31% to 54% of spatial information is lost by upscaling the 1 km ELM2 simulations to a 12 km resolution. Using eXplainable Machine Learning (XML) methods, the influential factors driving the spatial variability and spatial information loss of ELM2 simulations were identified, highlighting the substantial impact of the spatial variability and information loss of various land surface parameters, as well as the mean climate conditions. The comparison against four benchmark datasets indicates that ELM generally performs well in simulating soil moisture and surface energy fluxes. The new land surface parameters are tailored to meet the emerging needs of k-scale LSMs and ESMs modeling with significant implications for advancing our understanding of water, carbon, and energy cycles under global change. </p> <p>This data repository is linked to <a href="../records/10815170" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815170</a></p>
Global 1km Land Surface Parameters for Kilometer-Scale Earth System Modeling (SAI_2006_2010)
<p>Earth system models (ESMs) are progressively advancing towards the kilometer scale (k-scale). However, the surface parameters for Land Surface Models (LSMs) within ESMs running at the k-scale are typically derived from coarse resolution and outdated datasets. This study aims to develop a new set of global land surface parameters with a resolution of 1 km for multiple years from 2001 to 2020, utilizing the latest and most accurate available datasets. Specifically, the datasets consist of parameters related to land use and land cover, vegetation, soil, and topography. Differences between the newly developed 1k land surface parameters and conventional parameters emphasize their potential for higher accuracy due to the incorporation of the most advanced and latest data sources. To demonstrate the capability of these new parameters, we conducted 1 km resolution simulations using the E3SM Land Model version 2 (ELM2) over the contiguous United States. Our results demonstrate that land surface parameters contribute to significant spatial heterogeneity in ELM2 simulations of soil moisture, latent heat, emitted longwave radiation, and absorbed shortwave radiation. On average, about 31% to 54% of spatial information is lost by upscaling the 1 km ELM2 simulations to a 12 km resolution. Using eXplainable Machine Learning (XML) methods, the influential factors driving the spatial variability and spatial information loss of ELM2 simulations were identified, highlighting the substantial impact of the spatial variability and information loss of various land surface parameters, as well as the mean climate conditions. The comparison against four benchmark datasets indicates that ELM generally performs well in simulating soil moisture and surface energy fluxes. The new land surface parameters are tailored to meet the emerging needs of k-scale LSMs and ESMs modeling with significant implications for advancing our understanding of water, carbon, and energy cycles under global change.</p> <p>This data repository is linked to <a href="../records/10815170" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://zenodo.org/records/10815170</a></p>
Data for: Deriving early hydration cement paste phase assemblage, microstructure development and elastic properties using thermodynamic simulation and multi-scale material modeling
<h2>Description</h2> <p>DATA REPOSITORY FOR</p> <p>Title: Deriving early hydration cement paste phase assemblage, microstructure development and elastic properties using thermodynamic simulation and <br> multi-scale material modeling<br>By: Eva Jägle, Jithender J. Timothy, Daniel Jansen, Alisa Machner<br>Accepted by: Cement and Concrete Research</p> <p>This dataset presents the data of the paper 'Deriving early hydration cement paste phase assemblage, microstructure development and elastic properties using thermodynamic simulation and multi-scale material modeling' submitted to and accepted by Cement and Concrete Research. The dataset follows the structure of the paper such that the calculations described therein can be reproduced.</p> <p>Data is available on three types of cement: Two ordinary Portland cements of different grinding fineness (CEM I 42.5 R und CEM I 52.5 R) and one limestone-containing blended cement (CEM II/A-LL 42.5 R). The data refer to the first 24 hours of hydration and temperature conditions of 20°C (for CEM I 42.5 R, CEM I 52.5 R, CEM II/A-LL 42.5 R) and 35°C (for CEM I 52.5 R). All data were retrieved for cement pastes with a water-to-cement ratio of 0.45.</p> <p>The dataset contains raw and processed data from quantitative X-ray diffraction, 5PL cement dissolution fitting, thermodynamic simulation with GEMS, multi-scale material modeling, ultrasonic testing and Vicat penetration tests. The data is mainly available in .xlsx files together with short descriptions in ReadMe.txt files.</p>
Modelling impacts of tramlines on soil erosion processes at the catchment scale.
<p>The data refers to the following article:</p> <p>Saggau, P., M. Kuhwald, W. B. Hamer, R. Duttmann (2021): Are compacted tramlines underestimated features in soil erosion modelling? A catchment‐scale analysis using a process‐based soil erosion model. In: Land Degradtaion & Development. doi: 10.1002/ldr.4161</p> <p>The data only contains distributable raw data and R-codes.</p>
Final model for "Automated Large-Scale Full Seismic Waveform Inversion for North America and the North Atlantic" by Krischer et al. (2018)
<p>The HDF5 file contains the final model of the paper "Automated Large-Scale Full Seismic Waveform Inversion for North America and the North Atlantic" by Krischer et al. (2018), soon to be published in the Journal of Geophysical Research - Solid Earth.</p> <p>The "coordinates_0", "coordinates_1", and "coordinates_2" data sets are the coordinates along each dimension, here colatitude in degree, longitude in degree, and radius in meter, respectively. The regularly sampled data is available in five 3D-arrays in the "data" group: "vp", "vsv", "vsh", "rho", and "Q". Velocities are defined at 1 Hertz and are given in km/s, the density in kg/m^3. Q is Q_mu.</p> <p>The coordinates have to be rotated to yield true spherical Earth coordinates. They have to be rotated around on axis vector of 0.766044443118978/0.6427876096865393/0.0 in cartesian x/y/z coordinates by -30.0 degrees. Conversion of spherical to cartesian coordinates happens with the standard convention:</p> <p>x = r sin(theta) cos(phi)<br> y = r sin(theta) sin(phi)<br> z = r cos(theta)</p>
Assessment of mutation probabilities of KRAS G12 missense mutants and their long-time scale dynamics by atomistic molecular simulations and Markov state modeling: Datasets.
<p>Datasets related to the publication [1].<br> Including:</p> <ul> <li>KRAS G12X mutations derived from COSMIC v.79 [http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic/] (KRAS_G12X_mut_COSMICv79..xlsx)</li> <li>RMSFs (300-2000ns) of GDP-systems (300_2000rmsf_GDP_systems_RAW_AVG_SE.xlsx)</li> <li>RMSFs (300-2000ns) of GTP-systems (300_2000RMSF_GTP_systems_RAW_AVG_SE.xlsx)</li> <li>PyInteraph analysis data for salt-bridges and hydrophobic clusters (.dat files for each system in the PyInteraph_data.zip-file)</li> <li>Backbone trajectories for each system (residues 4-164; frames for every 1ns). Last number (e.g. _1) refers to the replica of the simulated system.</li> <li>backbone_4-164.gro/.pdb/.tpr -files (resid 4-164) </li> </ul> <p><br> [1] Pantsar T et al. Assessment of mutation probabilities of KRAS G12 missense mutants and their long-time scale dynamics by atomistic molecular simulations and Markov state modeling. <em>PLoS Comput Biol Submitted</em> (2018)</p>
GPP: Site-scale and global model outputs from P-model used for Stocker et al. (2019) Nature Geosci.
<p><strong>Data from article Stocker et al. (in review) *Nature Geosci.*</strong></p> <p>The datasets provided here include:</p> <ul> <li>Site-level GPP model results from the P-model (Wang et al., 2017)</li> <li>Model outputs from global simulations with the P-model (Wang et al., 2017) as implemented for the study by Stocker et al. (2019)</li> </ul> <p>This data may be used to partly reproduce results presented in Stocker et al. (2019) <em>Nature Geosci</em>. "Partly" because we used data for our analysis that was not open access but was confidentially shared with us. This includes remote sensing-based GPP estimates from the BESS and VPM models. Other open access data that was used for the analysis may not be distributed under this DOI. This includes FLUXNET 2015 data and MODIS data.</p> <p>For reproducing results of Stocker et al. (2019) regarding site-scale evaluations, run for example the scripts `plot_bias_all.R` and `plot_bias_problem.R`, available from <a href="https://github.com/stineb/soilm_global">Github</a> or <a href="http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1423328">Zenodo</a>, using CSV files provided here (see comments in scripts). For more insight, including analysis of global simulation outputs, see RMarkdown file `si_soilm_global.Rmd`. This renders the supplementary information PDF document provided along with Stocker et al. (2019), which is available also on <a href="http://rpubs.com/stineb/si_soilm_global2">RPubs</a>.</p> <p>The present datasets are prepared by script `prepare_data_openaccess.R ` on <a href="https://github.com/stineb/soilm_global">Github</a> or <a href="https://zenodo.org/record/1286966#.W6TFipMzbUI">Zenodo</a>.</p> <p><strong>Data description</strong></p> <p><em>Site-level data</em></p> <p>Data is provided as CSV files:</p> <ul> <li>`gpp_daily_fluxnet_stocker18natgeo.csv`: Daily data for full time series (not including MODIS GPP)</li> <li>`gpp_8daily_fluxnet_stocker18natgeo.csv`: Data aggregated to 8-day periods corresponding to MODIS dates (including MODIS GPP)</li> <li>`gpp_alg_daily_fluxnet_stocker18natgeo.csv`: Data filtered to periods with substantial soil moisture effects ("fLUE droughts" following Stocker et al. (2018a))</li> <li>`gpp_alg_8daily_fluxnet_stocker18natgeo.csv`: Data aggregated to 8-day periods and filtered to periods with substantial soil moisture effects.</li> </ul> <p>Each column is a variable with the following name and units (not all variables are available in all files):</p> <ul> <li>`site_id`: FLUXNET site ID </li> <li>`date`: Date of measurement, units: YYYY-MM-DD</li> <li>`gpp_pmodel` and `gpp_modis`: Simulated GPP from the P-model and MODIS (see Stocker et al. (2018b), Methods, RS models), units: g C m-2 d-1 (mean across 8 day periods in respective files)</li> <li>`aet_splash`: Simulated actual evapotranspiration from the SPLASH model (Davis et al., 2017), units: mm d-1</li> <li>`pet_splash`: Simulated potential evapotranspiration from the SPLASH model (Davis et al., 2017), units: mm d-1</li> <li>`soilm_splash`: Soil moisture simulated by the SPLASH model (Davis et al., 2017), normalised to vary between zero and one at the maximum water holding capacity, unitless.</li> <li>`flue`: fLUE estimate from Stocker et al. (2018). Estimates soil moisture stress on light use efficiency from flux data, unitless.</li> <li>`beta_a`, `beta_b`, and `beta_c`: Empirical soil moisture stress, used as multiplier to simulated GPP as described in Stocker et al. (2018b), unitless.</li> </ul> <p><em>Global P-model simulation outputs</em></p> <p>GPP and soil moisture output is provided as NetCDF files for simulations s0, and s1b (see Stocker et al. (2018b)). All meta information is provided therein. Files for simulation s1b are names as follows (for outputs from other simulations replace s1b with other simulation name). The fraction of each gridcell covered by land (not open water or ice) is given by separate file `s1b_fapar3g_v2_global.fland.nc`.</p> <ul> <li>`s1b_fapar3g_v2_global.d.gpp.nc`: Daily GPP from simulation s1b.</li> <li>`s1b_fapar3g_v2_global.d.wcont.nc`: Daily soil moisture from simulation s1b (is identical in other simulations, therefore not provided.)</li> </ul> <p>Due to limited total file size allowed for uploads to Zenodo, only outputs from s1b are provided here. Other outputs may be obtained upon request addressed to benjamin.stocker@gmail.com. </p> <p><strong>References</strong></p> <p>Davis, T. W. et al. Simple process-led algorithms for simulating habitats (SPLASH v.1.0): robust indices of radiation, evapotranspiration and plant-available moisture. Geoscientific Model Development 10, 689–708 (2017).<br> Hufkens, K. khufkens/gee_subset: Google Earth Engine subset script & library. (2017). doi:10.5281/zenodo.833789Running, S. W. et al. A Continuous Satellite-Derived Measure of Global Terrestrial Primary Production. Bioscience 54, 547–560 (2004).<br> Stocker, B. et al., Quantifying soil moisture impacts on light use efficiency across biomes, New Phytologist, doi: 10.1111/nph.15123 (2018a).<br> Stocker, B. et al., Satellite monitoring underestimates the impact of drought on terrestrial primary productivity, Nature Geoscience (2019).<br> Wang, H. et al. Towards a universal model for carbon dioxide uptake by plants. Nat Plants 3, 734–741 (2017).<br> </p>
Research Data/Code for "Scale-bridging within a complex model hierarchy for investigation of a metal-fueled circular energy economy by use of Bayesian model calibration with model error quantification"
<p>This repository contains research data and code for supplementing the manuscript <br>"Scale-bridging within a complex model hierarchy for investigation of a metal-fueled circular energy economy by use of Bayesian model calibration with model error quantification" <br>by L. Gossel, E. Corbean, S. Dübal, P. Brand, M. Fricke, H. Nicolai, C. Hasse, S. Hartl, S. Ulbrich, and D. Bothe. </p> <p>There is a corresponding preprint available on Arxiv: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2404.13092</p> <p><br>Users are referred to the manuscript for background information. This repository shall enable reproduction of the reported results and does not stand alone. </p> <p>Please read important information in the README in the top-level directory. </p> <p>Funded by the Hessian Ministry of Higher Education, Research, Science and the Arts - cluster project Clean Circles. </p>
Raw data from Qin et al. (2018) "Modeling the kinetics of hydrogen formation by zerovalent iron: Effects of sulfidation on micro- and nano-scale particles"
<p>Raw hydrogen concentration vs. time data from Qin, H., X. Guan, J. Z. Bandstra, R. L. Johnson, and P. G. Tratnyek (2018) “Modeling the kinetics of hydrogen formation by zerovalent iron: Effects of sulfidation on micro- and nano-scale particles” Environ. Sci. Technol. 52(23): 13887-13896. [10.1021/acs.est.8b04436]</p> <p>This manuscript reports a large set of new concentration vs. time data for dihydrogen (H2) produced by corrosion of granular zerovalent iron (i.e., the hydrogen evolution reaction, HER) in aqueous media relevant to groundwater remediation. Four alternative kinetic models are evaluated by fitting the data using global non-linear regression. Details are given in the main text and supporting information of the (open access) manuscript. </p> <p>The data provided here are in two formats: (i) a .csv file that contains only data and labels, and (ii) a .pxp file that includes the data and graphs (without fits) in the same layout as figures in the original manuscript. The .pxp file was prepared with Igor Pro 8.02 (https://www.wavemetrics.com).</p>
New insights into crustal deformation of the Indonesia-Australia-New Guinea collision zone from a broad-scale kinematic model: Supplementary Model Files
<p>Supplementary kinematic model input for the JGR: Solid Earth publication "New insights into crustal deformation of the Indonesia-Australia-New Guinea collision zone from a broad-scale kinematic model".</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.