DATAWorks Sessions Archive

The Icing Research Tunnel (IRT) at NASA Glenn Research Center follows the recommended practice for icing tunnel calibration outlined in SAE’s ARP5905 document. The calibration team has followed the schedule of a full calibration every five years with a check calibration done every six months following. The liquid water content of the IRT has maintained stability within in the specifications presented to customers that the variation is within +/- 10% of the calibrated, target measurement. With recent measurements and instrumentation errors, a more thorough assessment of error source was desired. By constructing statistical process control charts, the ability to determine how the instrument varies in the short term, mid term, and long term was gained. The control charts offer a view of instrument error, facility error, or installation changes. It was discovered that there was a shift from target to mean baseline thus leading to the study of the overall capability indices of the liquid water content measuring instrument to perform within specifications defined in the IRT. This presentation describes data processing procedures for the Multi-Element Sensor in the IRT, including collision efficiency corrections, canonical correlation analysis, Chauvenet’s Criterion for rejection of data, distribution check of data, and mean, median and mode for construction of control charts. Further data is presented to describe the repeatability of the IRT with the Multi-Element Sensor and the ability to maintain a stable process for the defined calibration schedule.

Problems faced in defense and aerospace often go well beyond textbook problems presented in academic settings. Textbook problems are typically very well defined, and can be solved through application of one “correct” tool. Conversely, many defense and aerospace problems are ill-defined, at least initially, and require an overall strategy to attack, one involving multiple tools and often multiple disciplines. Statistical engineering is an approach recently developed for addressing large, complex, unstructured problems, particularly those for which data can be effectively utilized. This session will present a brief overview of statistical engineering, and how it can be applied to engineer solutions to complex problems. Following this introduction, two case studies of statistical engineering will be presented, to illustrate the concepts.

Problems faced in defense and aerospace often go well beyond textbook problems presented in academic settings. Textbook problems are typically very well defined, and can be solved through application of one “correct” tool. Conversely, many defense and aerospace problems are ill-defined, at least initially, and require an overall strategy to attack, one involving multiple tools and often multiple disciplines. Statistical engineering is an approach recently developed for addressing large, complex, unstructured problems, particularly those for which data can be effectively utilized. This session will present a brief overview of statistical engineering, and how it can be applied to engineer solutions to complex problems. Following this introduction, two case studies of statistical engineering will be presented, to illustrate the concepts.

This presentation will use a notional armament system case-study to illustrate the use of M&S DOE, surrogate modeling, sensitivity analysis, multi-objective optimization and model calibration during early lifecycle development and design activities in the context of a new armament system. In addition to focusing on the statistician’s, data scientist’s, or analyst’s role and the key statistical techniques in engineering DoD systems, this presentation will also emphasize the non-statistical / engineering domain-specific aspects in a multidisciplinary design and development process which make uses of these statistical approaches at the subcomponent and subsystem-level as well as the end-to-end system modeling. A statistical engineering methodology which emphasizes the use of ‘virtual’ DOE-based model emulators developed at the subsystem-level and integrated using a systems-engineering architecture framework can yield a more tractable engineering problem compared to traditional ‘design-build-test-fix’ cycles or direct simulation of computationally expensive models. This supports a more informed prototype design for physical experimentation while providing a greater variety of materiel solutions thereby reducing development and testing cycles and time to field complex systems.

David Harrison and Kelsey Cannon from Lockheed Martin Space will present on STAT and UQ implementation lessons learned within Lockheed Martin. Faced with training 60,000 engineers in statistics, David and Kelsey formed a plan to make STAT and UQ processes the standard at Lockheed Martin. The presentation includes a range of information from initial communications plan, to obtaining leader adoption, to training engineers across the corporation. Not all programs initially accepted this process, but implementation lessons have been learned over time as many compounding successes and savings have been recorded. ©2022 Lockheed Martin, all rights reserved

The spread of COVID-19 across the United States provides an interesting case study in the modeling of spatio-temporal data. In this breakout session we will provide an overview of commonly used spatio-temporal models and demonstrate how Bayesian Inference can be performed using both exact and approximate inferential techniques. Using COVID data, we will demonstrate visualization techniques in R and introduce “off-the-shelf” spatio-temporal models. We will introduce participants to the Integrated Nested LaPlace approximation (INLA) methodology and show how results from this technique compare to using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques. Finally, we will demonstrate the short-falls in using “off-the-shelf” models and show how epidemiological motivated partial differential equations can be used to generate spatio-temporal models and discuss inferential issues when we move away from common models.

To identify the robust settings of the control factors, it is very important to understand how they interact with the noise factors. In this article, we propose space-filling designs for computer experiments that are more capable of accurately estimating the control-by-noise interactions. Moreover, the existing space-filling designs focus on uniformly distributing the points in the design space, which are not suitable for noise factors because they usually follow non-uniform distributions such as normal distribution. This would suggest placing more points in the regions with high probability mass. However, noise factors also tend to have a smooth relationship with the response and therefore, placing more points towards the tails of the distribution is also useful for accurately estimating the relationship. These two opposing effects make the experimental design methodology a challenging problem. We propose optimal and computationally efficient solutions to this problem and demonstrate their advantages using simulated examples and a real industry example involving a manufacturing packing line.

No set of experimental data is perfect and researchers are aware that data from experimental studies invariably contain some margin of error. This is particularly true of studies with human subjects since human behavior is vulnerable to a range of intrinsic and extrinsic influences beyond the variables being manipulated in a controlled experimental setting. Potential sources of error may lead to wide variations in the interpretation of results and the formulation of subsequent implications. This talk will discuss specific sources of error and bias in the design of experiments and present systematic ways to overcome these effects. First, some of the basic errors in general experimental design will be discussed, including human errors, systematic errors and random errors. Second, we will explore specific types of experimental error that appear in human subjects research. Lastly, we will discuss the role of bias in experiments with human subjects. Bias is a type of systematic error that is introduced into the sampling or testing phase and encourages one outcome over another. Often, bias is the result of the intentional or unintentional influence that an experimenter may exert on the outcomes of a study. We will discuss some common sources of bias in research with human subjects, including biases in sampling, selection, response, performance execution, and measurement. The talk will conclude with a discussion of how errors and bias influence the validity of human subjects research and will explore some strategies for controlling these errors and biases

In recent years, software testing techniques based on formal methods have made their way into industrial practice as a supplement to system and unit testing. I will discuss three core techniques that have proven particularly amenable to transition: 1) Concolic execution, which enables the automatic generation of high-coverage test suites; 2) Property-based randomized testing, which automatically checks sequences of API calls to ensure that expected high-level behavior occurs; and 3) Bounded model checking, which enables systematic exploration of both concrete systems and high-level models to check temporal properties, including ordering of events and timing requirements.

Many software reliability models characterize the number of faults detected during the testing process as a function of testing time, which is performed over multiple stages. Typically, the later stages are progressively more expensive because of the increased number of personnel and equipment required to support testing as the system nears completion. Such transitions from one stage of testing to the next change in the operational environment. One statistical approach to combine software reliability growth models in a manner capable of characterizing multi-stage testing is the concept of a change-point process, where the intensity of a process experiences a distinct change at one or more discrete times during testing. Thus, change-point processes can be used to model change in the failure rate of software due to changes in the testing strategy and environment, integration testing, and resource allocation as it proceeds through multiple stages of testing. This presentation generalizes change-point models to the heterogeneous case, where fault detection before and after a change-point can be characterized by distinct nonhomogeneous Poisson processes (NHPP). Experimental results suggest that heterogeneous change-point models better characterize some failure data sets, which can improve the applicability of software reliability models to large-scale software systems that are tested over multiple stages.

Software reliability models enable several quantitative predictions such as the number of faults remaining, failure rate, and reliability (probability of failure free operation for a specified period of time in a specified environment). This talk will describe recent efforts in collaboration with NASA, including (1) the development of an automated script for the SFRAT (Software Failure and Reliability Assessment Tool) to streamline application of software reliability methods to ongoing programs, (2) application to a NASA program, (3) lessons learned, (4) and future directions for model and tool development to support the practical needs of the software reliability and security assessment frameworks.