skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Holocene Paleointensity of the Island of Hawai `i From Glassy Volcanics (Dataset)
Paleomagnetic, rock magnetic, or geomagnetic data found in the MagIC data repository from a paper titled: Holocene Paleointensity of the Island of Hawai `i From Glassy Volcanics  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2126298
PAR ID:
10558664
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Magnetics Information Consortium (MagIC)
Date Published:
Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
Extrusive Igneous Lava Flow Basalt 0 10000 Years BP
Format(s):
Medium: X
Location:
(East Bound Longitude:-154.9552; North Bound Latitude:19.903266; South Bound Latitude:19.059109; West Bound Longitude:-156.0349); (Latitude:19.05911; Longitude:-155.68943); (Latitude:19.06497; Longitude:-155.61325); (Latitude:19.06497; Longitude:-155.61325); (Latitude:19.06497; Longitude:-155.61325); (Latitude:19.0746; Longitude:-155.74689); (Latitude:19.1097; Longitude:-155.53525); (Latitude:19.1097; Longitude:-155.53525); (Latitude:19.1097; Longitude:-155.53525); (Latitude:19.1097; Longitude:-155.53525); (Latitude:19.1097; Longitude:-155.53525); (Latitude:19.1308; Longitude:-155.50905); (Latitude:19.23524; Longitude:-155.47927); (Latitude:19.42336; Longitude:-155.90027); (Latitude:19.42336; Longitude:-155.90027); (Latitude:19.42336; Longitude:-155.90027); (Latitude:19.42336; Longitude:-155.90027); (Latitude:19.42336; Longitude:-155.90027); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.42976; Longitude:-155.91368); (Latitude:19.45743; Longitude:-155.9181); (Latitude:19.61138; Longitude:-155.03302); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.61994; Longitude:-155.10703); (Latitude:19.62631; Longitude:-155.56196); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.6292; Longitude:-155.54832); (Latitude:19.63142; Longitude:-155.52462); (Latitude:19.65984; Longitude:-156.00861); (Latitude:19.65984; Longitude:-156.00861); (Latitude:19.65984; Longitude:-156.00861); (Latitude:19.65984; Longitude:-156.00861); (Latitude:19.65984; Longitude:-156.00861); (Latitude:19.65984; Longitude:-156.00861); (Latitude:19.67236; Longitude:-155.38526); (Latitude:19.67236; Longitude:-155.38526); (Latitude:19.68128; Longitude:-155.46512); (Latitude:19.68128; Longitude:-155.46512); (Latitude:19.68128; Longitude:-155.46512); (Latitude:19.68128; Longitude:-155.46512); (Latitude:19.70004; Longitude:-155.09063); (Latitude:19.70004; Longitude:-155.09063); (Latitude:19.70004; Longitude:-155.09063); (Latitude:19.70004; Longitude:-155.09063); (Latitude:19.7099; Longitude:-155.13395); (Latitude:19.7099; Longitude:-155.13395); (Latitude:19.7099; Longitude:-155.13395); (Latitude:19.76632; Longitude:-155.94019); (Latitude:19.78445; Longitude:-155.90021); (Latitude:19.79963; Longitude:-155.9997); (Latitude:19.89764; Longitude:-155.88864)
Right(s):
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Institution:
Paleomagnetic Lab Scripps Institution Of Oceanography, UCSD, USA
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; (, Electronics)
    null (Ed.)
    Blockchain is a developing technology that can be utilized for secure data storage and sharing. In this work, we examine the cost of Blockchain-based data storage for constrained Internet of Things (IoT) devices. We had two phases in the study. In the first phase, we stored data retrieved from a temperature/humidity sensor connected to an Ethereum testnet blockchain using smart contracts in two different ways: first, appending the new data to the existing data, storing all sensor data; and second, overwriting the new data onto the existing data, storing only a recent portion of the data. In the second phase, we stored simulated data from several sensors on the blockchain assuming sensor data is numeric. We proposed a method for encoding the data from the sensors in one variable and compared the costs of storing the data in an array versus storing the encoded data from all sensors in one variable. We also compared the costs of carrying out the encoding within the smart contract versus outside the smart contract. In the first phase, our results indicate that overwriting data points is more cost-efficient than appending them. In the second phase, using the proposed encoding method to store the data from several sensors costs significantly less than storing the data in an array, if the encoding is done outside the smart contract. If the encoding is carried out in the smart contract, the cost is still less than storing the data in an array, however, the difference is not significant. The study shows that even though expensive, for applications where the integrity and transparency of data are crucial, storing IoT sensor data on Ethereum could be a reliable solution. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Earth System Science Data)
    Abstract. The Global Ocean Data Analysis Project (GLODAP) is asynthesis effort providing regular compilations of surface to bottom oceanbiogeochemical data, with an emphasis on seawater inorganic carbon chemistryand related variables determined through chemical analysis of water samples.This update of GLODAPv2, v2.2019, adds data from 116 cruises to the previousversion, extending its coverage in time from 2013 to 2017, while also addingsome data from prior years. GLODAPv2.2019 includes measurements from morethan 1.1 million water samples from the global oceans collected on 840cruises. The data for the 12 GLODAP core variables (salinity, oxygen,nitrate, silicate, phosphate, dissolved inorganic carbon, total alkalinity,pH, CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113, and CCl4) have undergone extensive qualitycontrol, especially systematic evaluation of bias. The data are available intwo formats: (i) as submitted by the data originator but updated to WOCEexchange format and (ii) as a merged data product with adjustments appliedto minimize bias. These adjustments were derived by comparing the data fromthe 116 new cruises with the data from the 724 quality-controlled cruises ofthe GLODAPv2 data product. They correct for errors related to measurement,calibration, and data handling practices, taking into account any known orlikely time trends or variations. The compiled and adjusted data product isbelieved to be consistent to better than 0.005 in salinity, 1 % in oxygen,2 % in nitrate, 2 % in silicate, 2 % in phosphate, 4 µmol kg−1 in dissolved inorganic carbon, 4 µmol kg−1 in totalalkalinity, 0.01–0.02 in pH, and 5 % in the halogenated transienttracers. The compilation also includes data for several other variables,such as isotopic tracers. These were not subjected to bias comparison oradjustments. The original data, their documentation and DOI codes are available in theOcean Carbon Data System of NOAA NCEI(https://www.nodc.noaa.gov/ocads/oceans/GLODAPv2_2019/, last access: 17 September 2019). Thissite also provides access to the merged data product, which is provided as asingle global file and as four regional ones – the Arctic, Atlantic, Indian,and Pacific oceans – under https://doi.org/10.25921/xnme-wr20(Olsen et al., 2019). Theproduct files also include significant ancillary and approximated data.These were obtained by interpolation of, or calculation from, measured data.This paper documents the GLODAPv2.2019 methods and provides a broad overviewof the secondary quality control procedures and results. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; (, Journal of transportation engineering)
    Automated or semi-automated pavement condition data collection is replacing manual data collection in many state and local highway agencies due to its advantages of reducing labor, time, and cost. However, the practical experience of highway agencies indicates that there are still data quality issues with the pavement condition data collected using existing image and sensor-based data collection technologies. This study aims to investigate the implementation experiences and issues of automated or semi-automated pavement condition surveys. An online questionnaire survey was conducted, along with scheduled virtual/phone interviews to gather information from government, industry, and academia about the state of the practice and state of the art. Open questions about the data quality and quality control & quality assurance (QC/QA) were used to receive first-hand inputs from highway agencies and pavement experts. The study has compiled the following observations: (1) Highway agencies urgently need a uniform data collection protocol for automated data collection; (2) the current QA requires too much human intervention; (3) cost ($100–$200 per mile) is a significant burden for state and local agencies; (4) the main issues regarding data quality are data inconsistencies and discrepancies; (5) agencies expect a greater accuracy once the image processing algorithms are improved using artificial intelligence technologies; and (6) existing automated data collection methods are not available for project-level data collection. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, Statistical Journal of the IAOS)
    null (Ed.)
    Statistical and administrative agencies often collect information on related parameters. Discrepancies between estimates from distinct data sources can arise due to differences in definitions, reference periods, and data collection protocols. Integrating statistical data with administrative data is appealing for saving data collection costs, reducing respondent burden, and improving the coherence of estimates produced by statistical and administrative agencies. Model based techniques, such as small area estimation and measurement error models, for combining multiple data sources have benefits of transparency, reproducibility, and the ability to provide an estimated uncertainty. Issues associated with integrating statistical data with administrative data are discussed in the context of data from Namibia. The national statistical agency in Namibia produces estimates of crop area using data from probability samples. Simultaneously, the Namibia Ministry of Agriculture, Water, and Forestry obtains crop area estimates through extension programs. We illustrate the use of a structural measurement error model for the purpose of synthesizing the administrative and survey data to form a unified estimate of crop area. Limitations on the available data preclude us from conducting a genuine, thorough application. Nonetheless, our illustration of methodology holds potential use for a general practitioner. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Journal of chemical and engineering data)
    As molecular modeling and simulation techniques become increasingly important sources of thermophysical property and phase equilibrium data, the ability to assess the robustness of that data becomes more critical. Recently, the use of the compressibility factor (Z) has been suggested as a metric for testing the quality of simulation data for vapor−liquid equilibria (VLE). Here, we analyze predicted VLE data from the transferable potentials for phase equilibria (TraPPE) database and show that, apart from data entry or typographical errors, Z will always be well-behaved in Gibbs ensemble Monte Carlo (GEMC) simulations even when the simulations are not sufficiently equilibrated. However, this is not true for grand canonical Monte Carlo simulations. When the pressure is calculated from the internal forces, then pressure and density are strongly correlated for the vapor phase and, for GEMC simulations, it is recommended to treat Z as an instantaneous mechanical property. From analysis of the TraPPE VLE data, we propose a complementary metric based on the predicted vapor pressures at three neighboring temperatures and their deviation from a local Clausius−Clapeyron fit. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email