The 10 things you wont see confident people do

The 10 things you wont binnensee confident people doThe 10 things you wont see confident people doIn The Empire Strikes Back, when Yoda is training Luke to be a Jedi, he demonstrates the power of the Force by raising an X-wing fighter from a swamp. Luke mutters, I dont believe it. Yoda replies, That is why you fail.As usual, Yoda was right - and science backs him up. Numerous studies have proved that confidence is the real key to success.Studies exploring the performance gap between men and women in math and spatial skills have found that confidence plays a huge role. Women who were asked to identify their gender before taking a spatial skills test performed more poorly than those who werent. Women also performed better when they were told to envision themselves as men, and both genders performed better when they were told that their gender is better at the task.Follow Ladders on FlipboardFollow Ladders magazines on Flipboard covering Happiness, Productivity, Job Satisfaction, Neuro science, and moreWhats even more interesting is that the gender gap practically disappeared when parteicipants were required to answer every question. Apparently, when the women were allowed to skip questions, they did so bedrngnis because of a lack of knowledge, but because of a lack of confidence.If you hear a voice within you say you cannot paint, then by all means paint, and that voice will be silenced. - Vincent Van GoghTrue confidence is very different from egotistical swagger. When people believe in themselves and their abilities without bravado, there are certain things they simply dont do.They dont make excusesIf theres one trait confident people have in spades, its self-efficacy - the belief that they can make things happen. Its about having an internal locus of control rather than an external one. Thats why you wont hear confident people blaming traffic for making them late or an unfair boss for their failure to get a promotion. Confident people dont make excuses, becaus e they believe theyre in control of their own lives.They dont quitConfident people dont give up the first time something goes wrong. They see both problems and failures as obstacles to overcome rather than impenetrable barriers to success. That doesnt mean, however, that they keep trying the same thing over and over. One of the first things confident people do when something goes wrong is to figure out why it went wrong and how they can prevent it the next time.They dont wait for permission to actConfident people dont need somebody to tell them what to do or when to do it. They dont waste time asking themselves questions like Can I? or Should I? If they ask themselves anything, its Why wouldnt I? Whether its running a meeting when the chairperson doesnt show up or going the extra mile to solve a customers problem, it doesnt even occur to them to wait for somebody else to take care of it. They see what needs to be done, and they do it.They dont seek attentionPeople are turned off by those who are desperate for attention. Confident people know that being yourself is much more effective than trying to prove that youre important. People catch on to your attitude quickly and are more attracted to the right attitude than what, or how many, people you know. Confident people always seem to bring the right attitude. Confident people are masters of attention diffusion. When theyre receiving attention for an accomplishment, they quickly shift the focus to all the people who worked hard to help get them there. They dont crave approval or praise because they draw their self-worth from within.They dont need constant praiseHave you ever been around somebody who constantly needs to hear how great he or she is? Confident people dont do that. It goes back to that internal locus of control. They dont think that their success is dependent on other peoples approval, and they understand that no matter how well they perform, theres always going to be somebody out there offering noth ing but criticism. Confident people also know that the kind of confidence thats dependent on praise from other people isnt really confidence at all its narcissism.They dont put things offWhy do people procrastinate? Sometimes its simply because theyre lazy. A lot of times, though, its because theyre afraid - that is, afraid of change, failure, or maybe even success. Confident people dont put things off. Because they believe in themselves and expect that their actions will lead them closer to their goals, they dont sit around waiting for the right time or the perfect circumstances. They know that today is the only time that matters. If they think its not the right time, they make it the right time.They dont reisepass judgmentConfident people dont pass judgment on others because they know that everyone has something to offer, and they dont need to take other people down a notch in order to feel good about themselves. Comparing yourself to other people is limiting. Confident people do nt waste time sizing people up and worrying about whether or not they measure up to everyone they meet.They dont avoid conflictConfident people dont see conflict as something to be avoided at all costs they see it as something to manage effectively. They dont go along to get along, even when that means having uncomfortable conversations or making unpleasant decisions. They know that conflict is part of life and that they cant avoid it without cheating themselves out of the good stuff, too.They dont let a lack of resources get in their wayConfident people dont get thrown off course just because they dont have the right title, the right staff, or the money to make things happen. Either they find a way to get what they need, or they figure out how to get by without it.They dont get too comfortableConfident people understand that getting too comfortable is the mortal enemy of achieving their goals. Thats because they know that comfort leads to complacency, and complacency leads to stagn ation. When they start feeling comfortable, they take that as a big red flag and start pushing their boundaries again so that they can continue to grow as both a person and a professional. They understand that a little discomfort is a good thing.Bringing it all togetherEmbracing the behaviors of confident people is a great way to increase your odds for success, which, in turn, will lead to more confidence. The science is clear now you just have to decide to act on it.This column first appeared on LinkedIn.You might also enjoyNew neuroscience reveals 4 rituals that will make you happyStrangers know your social class in the first seven words you say, study finds10 lessons from Benjamin Franklins daily schedule that will double your productivityThe worst mistakes you can make in an interview, according to 12 CEOs10 habits of mentally strong peopleThe 10 things you wont see confident people doIn The Empire Strikes Back, when Yoda is training Luke to be a Jedi, he demonstrates the power of the Force by raising an X-wing fighter from a swamp. Luke mutters, I dont believe it. Yoda replies, That is why you fail.As usual, Yoda was right - and science backs him up. Numerous studies have proved that confidence is the real key to success.Studies exploring the performance gap between men and women in math and spatial skills have found that confidence plays a huge role. Women who were asked to identify their gender before taking a spatial skills test performed more poorly than those who werent. Women also performed better when they were told to envision themselves as men, and both genders performed better when they were told that their gender is better at the task.Follow Ladders on FlipboardFollow Ladders magazines on Flipboard covering Happiness, Productivity, Job Satisfaction, Neuroscience, and moreWhats even more interesting is that the gender gap practically disappeared when participants were required to answer every question. Apparently, when the women were allowed to skip questions, they did so not because of a lack of knowledge, but because of a lack of confidence.If you hear a voice within you say you cannot paint, then by all means paint, and that voice will be silenced. - Vincent Van GoghTrue confidence is very different from egotistical swagger. When people believe in themselves and their abilities without bravado, there are certain things they simply dont do.They dont make excusesIf theres one trait confident people have in spades, its self-efficacy - the belief that they can make things happen. Its about having an internal locus of control rather than an external one. Thats why you wont hear confident people blaming traffic for making them late or an unfair boss for their failure to get a promotion. Confident people dont make excuses, because they believe theyre in control of their own lives.They dont quitConfident people dont give up the first time something goes wrong. They see both problems and failures as obstacles to overcome rathe r than impenetrable barriers to success. That doesnt mean, however, that they keep trying the same thing over and over. One of the first things confident people do when something goes wrong is to figure out why it went wrong and how they can prevent it the next time.They dont wait for permission to actConfident people dont need somebody to tell them what to do or when to do it. They dont waste time asking themselves questions like Can I? or Should I? If they ask themselves anything, its Why wouldnt I? Whether its running a meeting when the chairperson doesnt show up or going the extra mile to solve a customers problem, it doesnt even occur to them to wait for somebody else to take care of it. They see what needs to be done, and they do it.They dont seek attentionPeople are turned off by those who are desperate for attention. Confident people know that being yourself is much more effective than trying to prove that youre important. People catch on to your attitude quickly and are mor e attracted to the right attitude than what, or how many, people you know. Confident people always seem to bring the right attitude. Confident people are masters of attention diffusion. When theyre receiving attention for an accomplishment, they quickly shift the focus to all the people who worked hard to help get them there. They dont crave approval or praise because they draw their self-worth from within.They dont need constant praiseHave you ever been around somebody who constantly needs to hear how great he or she is? Confident people dont do that. It goes back to that internal locus of control. They dont think that their success is dependent on other peoples approval, and they understand that no matter how well they perform, theres always going to be somebody out there offering nothing but criticism. Confident people also know that the kind of confidence thats dependent on praise from other people isnt really confidence at all its narcissism.They dont put things offWhy do peopl e procrastinate? Sometimes its simply because theyre lazy. A lot of times, though, its because theyre afraid - that is, afraid of change, failure, or maybe even success. Confident people dont put things off. Because they believe in themselves and expect that their actions will lead them closer to their goals, they dont sit around waiting for the right time or the perfect circumstances. They know that today is the only time that matters. If they think its not the right time, they make it the right time.They dont pass judgmentConfident people dont pass judgment on others because they know that everyone has something to offer, and they dont need to take other people down a notch in order to feel good about themselves. Comparing yourself to other people is limiting. Confident people dont waste time sizing people up and worrying about whether or not they measure up to everyone they meet.They dont avoid conflictConfident people dont see conflict as something to be avoided at all costs th ey see it as something to manage effectively. They dont go along to get along, even when that means having uncomfortable conversations or making unpleasant decisions. They know that conflict is part of life and that they cant avoid it without cheating themselves out of the good stuff, too.They dont let a lack of resources get in their wayConfident people dont get thrown off course just because they dont have the right title, the right staff, or the money to make things happen. Either they find a way to get what they need, or they figure out how to get by without it.They dont get too comfortableConfident people understand that getting too comfortable is the mortal enemy of achieving their goals. Thats because they know that comfort leads to complacency, and complacency leads to stagnation. When they start feeling comfortable, they take that as a big red flag and start pushing their boundaries again so that they can continue to grow as both a person and a professional. They understand that a little discomfort is a good thing.Bringing it all togetherEmbracing the behaviors of confident people is a great way to increase your odds for success, which, in turn, will lead to more confidence. The science is clear now you just have to decide to act on it.This column first appeared on LinkedIn.You might also enjoyNew neuroscience reveals 4 rituals that will make you happyStrangers know your social class in the first seven words you say, study finds10 lessons from Benjamin Franklins daily schedule that will double your productivityThe worst mistakes you can make in an interview, according to 12 CEOs10 habits of mentally strong people

Facts About Use of Force in Law Enforcement

Facts About Use of Force in Law EnforcementFacts About Use of Force in Law EnforcementWithin criminal justice careers, perhaps no other area or action draws the public scrutiny, and sometimes ire, than a use of force. Law enforcement and corrections officers are necessarily authorized to employ various forms of physical control in order to carry out their jobs. The circumstances, level, and the degree to which that force is used, however, is often the subject of serious debate. Law Enforcement History and the Use of Force Though the idea of law enforcement has a long history, in truth modern policing as we know it is a relatively recent societal institution. The history of the professional polizze force is less than two centuries old. Prior to the establishment of standing law enforcement agencies, there welches a great deal of public concern over granting power and authority to what they feared would become aleidher occupying force, and thus there has always been a slight level of mistrust between society at large and those who have been sworn to serve and protect them. Though they have been granted the authority to use force when necessary, the public has long been wary of the abuse of this power. Nevertheless, in a more rough-and-tumble era, more rough-and-tumble tactics were called for. Officers did not have as many force options available to them as they do now, and society did not have the same distaste for harsh justice as it now seems to. Changing Times, Changing Temperament As society has advanced and evolved, though, so have public attitudes toward crime and punishment, as well as law enforcement and police tactics. Over time, the public began to demand more mild and measured responses to crime as opposed to brute force. Increased Scrutiny This has been accentuated in recent history with the proliferation of video and photographic technology, first on television and then on the Internet. From Rodney King and Marvin Anderson to Andrew Dont taze me, bro Meyer and the latest YouTube police video, law enforcement and corrections officers have been placed on notice that the public is watching what they do and how they do it. The added scrutiny has gone a long way towards keeping officers honest and to expose those who are not. In response to the increased attention, police, correctional officers and other criminology and criminal justice professionals have made advances in policies as well as technology. In addition, courts and criminal justice standards and POST commissions have introduced guidelines to aid officers in making sound decisions on when and how to use force. The Disconnect in the Discourse Despite this evolution in police tactics and technology, a disconnect still exists between what the public sees, expects and understands about law enforcement training, goals and practices and how police and corrections officers are actually trained to respond to use of control situations. The Goal of Law Enforcemen t in Uses of Control Most often, when members of the public question an officers use of force, they first question whether force was necessary in the first place. Likewise, courts tend to focus first on whether or not any force was justified at all before broaching the topic of excessive force. To look at this question properly, we must first understand the ultimate goal of officers when they apply force. Generally, the purpose is to effect an arrest and bring a potentially dangerous situation to as quick and peaceful a conclusion as possible, without injuring the officer or innocent members of the public. Obviously, the preferred outcome would be for a resisting subject to allow himself to be arrested peacefully. When that doesnt occur, though, officers must make a quick, split-second decision whether or not to employ force and just what force to employ. During that decision-making process, the well-being of the suspect is most often a secondary concern. Objective Reasonablenes s Because behauptung decisions must be made quickly, officers may not have all of the information regarding the level of threat a subject actually poses before they feel that they must take action. In Graham vs. Connor, the U.S. Supreme Court established the objective reasonableness standard to determine whether or not force was justified. Objective reasonableness simply asks whether or not a reasonable person with the similar training, knowledge, and experience would have acted the same under similar circumstances. In making this determination, three factors are applied whether or not the subject poses an immediate threat, the severity of the alleged crime, and whether or not the subject is attempting to flee or resist arrest attempts. Implicit in the so-called Graham factors is the question of whether or not the officer was justified in exercising his arrest authority, to begin with. Most importantly, the objective reasonableness standard recognizes that officers must think fast and act fast. Under these circumstances, the facts available to the officer at the time she made her decision to use force are what the officer is judged by, as opposed to what may come to light after the fact. For example, if an officer shoots a subject who is threatening him and pointing a gun at him, it does not matter if it turns out later that the gun was not loaded. If the officer can articulate that at the time of the incident he believed his life or the life of someone else was in danger, then he will have been justified in his use of deadly force. Just the Facts If an officer learns after the fact that what he perceived to be a weapon was actually a toy gun, a cell phone, or even a wallet, the standard by which the action will be judged will come from what the officer knew at the time. Officers need not, and often times cannot afford to, wait for a subject to pull the trigger or try to stab them before they react. Instead, they must weigh the totality of the circumstanc es and make a decision based on the facts available to them at the moment. Reasonable Choices The objective reasonableness standard also establishes that officers are not necessarily limited to the least amount of force possible. Rather, officers are called to use only that force which falls within the range of what might be considered reasonable. This is an important distinction to make because in most situations there is a range of force options available, all of which may be an appropriate response. For example, if a subject is fighting and resisting arrest, an officer may choose to use pepper spray, an electronic control device, or hands-on control techniques such as joint manipulation in order to gain compliance. Anyone of these choices may be reasonable, though the public may perceive the taser or pepper spray to be more invasive and less necessary than going hands on. An officers actions, then, are not evaluated based on what she could have done differently, but rather th ey are assessed based on what might be considered reasonable. Judging Deadly Force Situations This standard becomes especially important when looking at instances of deadly force by police officers. By and large, officers are taught at the police academy to meet deadly force with deadly force. They are trained and given the techniques and tactics to make sure they make it home at the end of their shift, and they spend extensive time training in the use of firearms. Its important to recognize that, when discussing the use of deadly force by officers, the expected result of a subjects actions dont have to be death. Instead, deadly force is described as actions that are likely to cause either death or great bodily harm, which could include permanent disfigurement without causing death. The type of weapon used is an important factor in an officers decision to use deadly force, but it is not the only factor. To a police officer, deadly force is deadly force, whether the subject is wi elding a knife, an ax, a gun or a baseball bat. All of these have the potential to take a life or cause great bodily harm. Instead, to be justified in employing deadly force, officers must be able to articulate that the suspect had the apparent ability, opportunity and reasonably perceived intent to commit an act likely to cause death or great bodily harm. Justifiable Decisions Though important to law enforcement and correctional officers, this standard is often the source of confusion on the part of the public when it comes to police use of force. As an example, an officer may shoot a suspect who is holding a knife. Some members of the public may disagree with the officers decision, suggesting instead that he should have used a non-lethal weapon such as a taser to disarm the subject. While a taser may have been one of many possible options available, it may not have been the most reasonable or, more likely, it may have been one of many reasonable force options and thus, given t he fact that a knife is quite capable of causing death or great bodily harm, the officer is very likely justified in the use of deadly force. Officer and Subject Factors Another important consideration in evaluating an officers use of forces is the officer himself as compared to the subject in question. An officer who is 52 and 100 pounds may be justified in using greater force against a subject who is 62 250 pounds than would a taller, heavier and presumably stronger officer in similar circumstances. Uses of Force More Complicated Than First Looks Suggest All of this goes to demonstrate that uses of force by corrections and police officers are most often far more complicated than a single news story or Internet video may initially make them appear. Law enforcement careers are known to be inherently dangerous jobs, and officers are often placed in situations where they are required to make instantaneous life and death decisions. While it is entirely correct and appropriate t o evaluate and scrutinize the actions of the police, especially when they employ control techniques, it is also very important to withhold judgment until all of the facts leading up to the incident are known. It is especially important to judge these decisions based only on those facts that were known or perceived by the officer at the time of the incident, as opposed to those facts that may become known after the fact. Sound Law Enforcement Requires Sound Judgement Likewise, it is important for officers to use sound judgment and due diligence when determining whether or not to employ force and exactly what force to use. The public rightly holds its law enforcement officers to a high ethical standard. It is incumbent upon officers, then, to adhere to that standard and to always act in the interest of safeguarding lives and property, while at the same time preserving and protecting the rights of the innocent.

Engines of the Future

Engines of the Future Engines of the Future Engines of the FutureOver the past several years, road transportation has seen some significant advances in what are considered alternative technologies. Energy storage, electric drive systems, and fuel cell technology all seem to be poised to find a significant place in the automotive marketplace.But it would be a mistake to believe that such technologies will completely sweep aside what has come before. Instead, the internal combustion engine will continue to be integral to the transportation of people and goods for the foreseeable future.That is not to say that things will stay as they are now. The engine is undergoing a significant evolution of its own, as new fuel economy and emissions standards in the light-duty and heavy-duty sectors push the development of new technologies on an unprecedented scale toward the theoretical limits of engine operation. Coupled with continuing research into fundamental engine processes, the introduction of affordable high-performance computing, and the annahme an kindes statt of advanced manufacturing techniques throughout industry, those new technologies are leading to tauglichkeitly disruptive opportunities for the introduction of engines with extraordinarily high efficiencies. How these new engines perform and how they will be integrated into new vehicle architectures will be the story of personal mobility for this half of the 21st century.From my position at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, I have been able to see the intersection of knowledge discovery, advanced engine and vehicle technology development, and the use of one-of-a-kind computing resurces. Although the public tends to think of automobile and engine research as a purely private-sector concern, my colleagues and I at ORNL are helping to realize the full efficiency potential of internal combustion engines.The internal combustion engine has seen a remarkable evolution over the past century. Before 1970 the evolution of engine design was driven by a quest for performance and an increase in octane in the fuel supply. Since then, however, the imperative was the need to meet new emissions and fuel economy regulations. Vitaly Prikhodko of ORNLs Fuels, Engines and Emissions Research studying advanced catalysts which are used to reduce vehicle pollution. Image ORNLInternal combustion engine efficiency has historically been limited mora by the state of technology than innovation. As an example, the potential of technologies such as gasoline direct injection were known and attempted in production mora than 50 years ago, but direct injection has only become widely available in production within the last decade and now makes up approximately 38 percent of new light-duty vehicle sales. Another example is low-temperature combustion modes such as homogeneous charge compression ignition combustion- in which fuel and air are injected during the intake stroke and then compressed until the entire mixture reacts sp ontaneously- which were demonstrated in a laboratory more than 30 years ago but are still many years away from market introduction. Game-changing advances in recent years are improvements in engine technologies, sensors, and onboard computing power. This combination of technologies will enable unprecedented control of the combustion process, which in turn will enable real-world implementations of low-temperature combustion and other advanced strategies as well as improved robustness and fuel flexibility. In fact, technological advances are blurring our historical distinction between spark-ignition and compression-ignition engines we will see new engine concepts that blend the best characteristics of both engine types to push the boundaries of efficiency while meeting stringent emissions regulations worldwide. The push toward higher-efficiency engines will alter exhaust temperatures and chemistry and may create challenges for emission control technologies. For example, new higher-eff iciency engines will have lower exhaust temperatures, due to more efficient work extraction at the piston. Lower exhaust temperatures will, in turn, require the development of new emission control technologies, which must not only be effective at low temperatures but also must survive high exhaust temperatures encountered under high load conditions. custompagebreak Even the most efficient and robust engine technologies will never make it to market without the vehicle system meeting emissions regulations. But this is not the first instance where significant emissions control advances were needed to transition a combustion technology to market. Advances in catalyst technologies more than 40 years ago were critical to meeting emerging emissions regulations the effectiveness of catalysts for conventional spark-ignition engines has since improved by a factor of 100 while achieving a substantial reduction in expensive platinum group metals. Meeting the new challenges is a very active area of research at ORNL and other U.S. Department of Energy national laboratories, as well as in industry.Low-temperature combustion processes are of significant interest due to very high thermal efficiencies with significant reductions in many criteria pollutants. As mentioned above, LTC has been a challenge due to the state of technology unlike conventional spark-ignition and compression-ignition combustion modes, most LTC modes are kinetically controlled and hence much more sensitive to environmental conditions and ever-changing speed/load demands. Recent advances in enabling technologies such as fuel injection systems, turbomachinery, valve actuation, sensors, and onboard computers have led to new real-time control opportunities which are enabling the potential of LTC engines with production-viable hardware. Glass capillaries with diameters on the order of a human hair allow sampling of exhaust pollutants inside the flow channels of catalytic converters (left) yielding critical und erstanding of the chemical process for the whole devise (below). Photo ORNLGasoline compression ignition combustion is an advanced combustion mode that has received considerable attention in recent years. While GCI combustion is not a new concept, it has evolved over the past several decades as technologies improve. Earlier GCI research was focused primarily on homogeneous charge compression ignition combustion, but in recent years, we have seen increasing interest in a continuous range of GCI combustion modes spanning fully homogeneous HCCI to partial fuel stratification modes to full stratification modes which are diesel-like in execution. These technologies have also led to a strong interest in reactivity controlled compression ignition combustion (RCCI), which makes use of the differences in reactivity of two fuels to manage the combustion process for maximum efficiency with lowest possible emissions. Understanding the potential of these combustion modes- as well as understandin g emissions and emissions control challenges and fuel technologies opportunities- forms the foundation of much of the fuels, engines, and emissions research at ORNL and builds upon more than two decades of experience in these areas. This research also includes a detailed comparison of the landscape of GCI and RCCI combustion modes to better understand the challenges and opportunities from efficiency, emissions, noise, and controllability perspectives. Simultaneously, other national laboratories are performing complementary and synergistic research providing new insight into areas such as combustion fundamentals, advanced engine technologies, spray atomization, and simulation. Stability and control have been major roadblocks to the implementation of many advanced combustion modes. Many low-temperature combustion modes such as GCI and RCCI operate on the edge of stability- in other words, at conditions under which very small variations in engine boundary conditions (such as intake tem perature) may result in unintended excursions that result in undesirable emissions, reduced efficiency, and the potential to destroy the engine or emissions control system. One can imagine the challenge of these types of combustion modes under ever-changing conditions of a real-world drive cycle where a single unintended excursion could be catastrophic. Meeting that challenge requires a control system which is predictive for avoidance rather than reactive after the occurrence of a potentially damaging event. ORNL has a long history in improving the understanding and control of these combustion instabilities to push the operating window and benefits of advanced combustion modes. That research and approach has a foundation in deterministic chaos theory and has evolved over the years from high-dilution spark-ignited combustion to include GCI and RCCI combustion in more recent years.ORNL research has shown that for those combustion modes, the cyclic dispersion is made up of stochastic, or random, processes driven by in-cylinder fuel-air mixing and deterministic, or non-random, processes driven by the previous combustion event through residual gases. The resulting high level of instability is further amplified by cylinder-to-cylinder variations. While the high level of instability is a challenge, the existence of deterministic structure- non-random behavior- enables the potential for short-term prediction and control and ultimately to force stabilization of inherently unstable combustion modes. That sort of prediction and control would have been inconceivable with production-viable technologies even 10 years ago. With the recent significant advances in low-cost sensors, nahe daran sein actuators, and onboard computers, however, that level of control will be possible on production vehicles in the very near future.While significant advances in engine control technologies, sensors, and onboard computers are leading to unprecedented opportunity, that work is also leadi ng to an ever-expanding and unmanageable parameter space in modern engines. Current trends are showing an exponential increase in the parameter space which is expected to continue to grow for the foreseeable future. The inability to efficiently and effectively optimize this parameter space is leading to sub-optimal engines in the market and pushing the need for new approaches to engine design and optimization. custompagebreakModel-based and self-learning controls will be important for more robust and optimal calibration as well as for accelerating the calibration process. Current approaches to engine calibration depend primarily on reference tables, experimentally derived algorithms for parameter interactions, and manual optimization of calibration vehicles. Model-based controls will reduce the amount of experiments while better representing the complex interactions of engine hardware. Self-learning controls will take this one step further to enable autonomous intelligent systems wh ich will have the ability to learn, adapt, and manipulate engine controls to maximize efficiency and minimize emissions under ever-changing vehicle demands. Self-learning controls will also be a critical component to the development of connected and autonomous vehicles that make use of vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure information for the further optimization of engine and vehicle fuel efficiency.Faster and more predictive simulation will be important to the design and optimization of the next generation of internal combustion engines. This will be important to critical knowledge discovery, managing the ever-expanding parameter space, and the development of reduced order models amenable to real-time control implementations. The continuing increase in computational speed and affordability of high-performance computing is leading to a new frontier in engine and vehicle development, including the ability to solve problems that were once deemed unsolvable.Using neutrons t o penetrate the internal structure of the engine part, researchers are studying cavitation, the physical event that leads to bubble formation inside the body of a gasoline fuel injector. Image ORNLTrends in the cost of high-performance computing indicate that petascale computers (and beyond) will be affordable to industry within a decade. For reference, a petaflop is one quadrillion floating point operations per second. The ORNL Titan supercomputer has a theoretical peak performance exceeding 27 petaflops. (To put this in perspective, 28 petaflops is equivalent to all 7 billion people in the world simultaneously performing 4 million calculations per second.) The affordability and availability of these types of resources to industry will be revolutionary to the design and calibration of engines as well as vehicles.The supercomputers at the national laboratories are currently being used in support of DOE and in collaboration with industry for improved simulation of sprays, advanced co mbustion, and engine design. ORNL has ongoing projects which make use of these resources for furthering the understanding of combustion instabilities, accelerating injector design optimization, and even bridging high-fidelity combustion and structural codes for material property prediction.ORNL recently led an industry stakeholder meeting with several other national laboratories to explore next steps in leveraging the massive power of high-performance computing for vehicle design. More specifically, the meeting focused on the potential of high-performance computing and industry interest in the development of an integrated software environment for bridging multiple technologies for multi-physics full 3-D high-fidelity vehicle simulation to make use of the power of the next generation of advanced computing architectures. The new simulation environment would be developed specifically for vehicles, based on recent experience developing similar environments for nuclear reactors and batte ries. As an example, consider the integration of 3-D high-fidelity models for the integrated design of thermal management, aerodynamics, and structure this approach not only has the potential to greatly accelerate the design process, but also to reveal synergistic opportunities beyond what could be identified with more conventional approaches.Most of the discussion up to now has focused on knowledge discovery and the development of better engine technologies- all areas within the control of automobile and engine manufacturers. There is now an ambitious program at the DOE and the national laboratories which is addressing the co-optimization of fuel and engine technologies for maximum performance with minimum greenhouse gas emissions, in other words removing the constraint that current fuels impose on engine design. custompagebreakThe Optima program bridges the broad expertise and resources of the Vehicle Technologies Office and the Bioenergy Technologies Office at the DOE. The overal l plan includes a near-term phase which builds upon current engine technologies with a goal of new fuel and vehicle technologies in the marketplace by 2025, together with a longer-term- and arguably more ambitious- phase focused on kinetically controlled combustion processes and fuel technologies with impact expected in the 2030 timeframe. The Optima team is working closely with a broad range of stakeholders representing vehicle and engine manufacturers, energy companies, biofuel producers, fuel distributors and retailers as well as identifying and addressing potential deployment issues to ensure maximum success.One way to cut engine emissions is to reduce the workload on the vehicle. Supercomputer simulations conducted at Oak Ridge modeled a system that could reduce drag and increase freight efficiency in long-haul trucks. Image Michael Matheson, ORNLThe combination of new regulations, consumer expectations, and the changing role of internal combustion engines with advanced vehic le architectures is increasing the demands on the next generation of engines and driving technology development at a rapid pace. An automotive executive recently said that the engine has changed more in the past 10 years than in the previous 100 years. I completely agree and believe the next 10 years will bring even more rapid change with advances which were well beyond the realm of imagination just a few years ago. I encourage members of ASME to explore the extensive research supported by DOE and under way at many of the national laboratories. The national laboratories are in a unique position to bridge large one-of-a-kind science resources with application and drive solutions to the energy challenges of the future. MERobert M. Wagner is the director of the Fuels, Engines, and Emissions Research Center and a distinguished member of the technical staff at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. He is also a Fellow of the Society of Automotive Engineers and a Professor with the B redesen Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. He is technical chair of the 2015 ASME-ICEF conference in Houston.Advances are enabling new concepts that blend the best characteristics of both spark-ignition and compression-ignition engines.