![](media/image1.jpeg){width="5.291666666666667in"
height="1.4986111111111111in"}

U.S. ATLAS PROJECT OFFICE

**Physics Department**

**UPTON, NEW YORK 11973**

9 January, 2004

Mr. Pepin Carolan

Department of Energy

Fermi Area Office

POB 2000

Batavia, IL 60510

Dr. Thomas Kirk

Associate Laboratory Director

Brookhaven National Laboratory

Upton, NY 11973

SUBJECT: U.S. ATLAS Physics and Computing Project Quarterly Status
Report for Q4 2003

Dear Sirs:

Attached please find Quarterly Status Report Q4 2003 for the U.S. ATLAS
Physics and Computing Project for the period July-September, 2003.

Sincerely yours,

![](media/image2.png)

James Shank

U.S. ATLAS Executive Project Manager

for Physics and Computing

[Distribution]{.underline}:

Abolins, M.

Adams, D.

Baker, R.

Barnett, M.

Bensinger, J.

Blair, R.

Butehorn, C.

Byon, A. - DOE

Carolan, P. - DOE

Crawford, G.

Dodd, G.

Ernst, R.

Firestone, A. -- NSF

Gardner, R.

Gibbard, B.

Gilchriese, M.

Goldberg, M. - NSF

Gordon, H.

Harrison, M. -- PAP

Hinchliffe, I.

Huth, J.

Kagan, H.

Kirk, T.

Kroon, P. -- PAP

Lankford, A.

Larsen, R. - PAP

Lokan, S.

Lubatti, H.

Malon, D.

Mantsch, P. - PAP

Meyers, P. -- PAP

Mooney, J.

Neal, H.

Ogren, H.

Oh, S.

Parsons, J.

Pilcher, J.

Price, L.

Quarrie, D.

Rajagopalan, S.

Seiden, A.

Shank, J.

Shapiro, M.

Siegrist, J.

Sikinger, P.

Sinkular, M., NSF

Stroynowski, R.

Taylor, F.

Tull, C.

Tuts, M. -- PAP

Wenaus, T.

Whitmore, J. -- NSF

Wolbers, S. - PAP

Williams, H.

Willis, W.

Yeck, J.

**Computing and Physics PROJECT STATU.S. REPORT**

**REPORTING PERIOD**

##### Q4 2003 {#q4-2003 .unnumbered}

**July-September, 2003**

![](media/image3.wmf){width="3.3895833333333334in" height="4.0in"}

#  {#section .unnumbered}

# Table of Contents {#table-of-contents .unnumbered}

[Table of Contents 4](#table-of-contents)

[1. Project Manager's Summary (J. Shank, Boston University)
6](#project-managers-summary-j.-shank-boston-university)

[2. WBS 2.1 Physics Manager's Report (Ian Hinchliffe, LBNL)
6](#wbs-2.1-physics-managers-report-ian-hinchliffe-lbnl)

[3. WBS 2.2 Software Manager's Report (Srini Rajagopalan, BNL)
7](#wbs-2.2-software-managers-report-srini-rajagopalan-bnl)

[WBS 2.2.1 Software Coordination 7](#wbs-2.2.1-software-coordination)

[WBS 2.2.2 Core Services (D. Quarrie)
8](#wbs-2.2.2-core-services-d.-quarrie)

[WBS 2.2.2.1 Framework 8](#wbs-2.2.2.1-framework)

[Core Services & Program Flow (2.2.2.1.1)
8](#core-services-program-flow-2.2.2.1.1)

[User Interfaces (2.2.2.1.2) 8](#user-interfaces-2.2.2.1.2)

[WBS 2.2.2.2 EDM Infrastructure 8](#wbs-2.2.2.2-edm-infrastructure)

[Core Functionalities (2.2.2.2.1) (P. Calafiura, S. Rajagopalan)
8](#core-functionalities-2.2.2.2.1-p.-calafiura-s.-rajagopalan)

[Back-end Services (2.2.2.2.2) 8](#back-end-services-2.2.2.2.2)

[Navigation Support (2.2.2.2.4) 8](#navigation-support-2.2.2.2.4)

[WBS 2.2.2.3 Detector Description 9](#wbs-2.2.2.3-detector-description)

[WBS 2.2.2.4 Graphics 9](#wbs-2.2.2.4-graphics)

[WBS 2.2.2.5 Analysis Tools 9](#wbs-2.2.2.5-analysis-tools)

[WBS 2.2.2.6 Grid Integration 9](#wbs-2.2.2.6-grid-integration)

[WBS 2.2.3 Databases and Data Management (D. Malon)
9](#wbs-2.2.3-databases-and-data-management-d.-malon)

[WBS 2.2.3.1 Database services and servers (Vaniachine)
9](#wbs-2.2.3.1-database-services-and-servers-vaniachine)

[WBS 2.2.3.2 Common data management software (Fine, Adams,
Perevoztchikov)
10](#wbs-2.2.3.2-common-data-management-software-fine-adams-perevoztchikov)

[WBS 2.2.3.3 Event store (Adams, Malon)
10](#wbs-2.2.3.3-event-store-adams-malon)

[WBS 2.2.3.4 Detector data management (Vaniachine)
10](#wbs-2.2.3.4-detector-data-management-vaniachine)

[WBS 2.2.3.5 Collections, catalogs, and metadata (Karr, Malon)
11](#wbs-2.2.3.5-collections-catalogs-and-metadata-karr-malon)

[WBS 2.2.4 Application Software (F. Luehring)
11](#wbs-2.2.4-application-software-f.-luehring)

[The application software includes reconstruction, simulation and
analysis work performed by U.S. institutes in ATLAS. The U.S. is
involved in almost all aspects of the software and analysis work
including prominent coordination activities of major ATLAS software
components.
11](#the-application-software-includes-reconstruction-simulation-and-analysis-work-performed-by-u.s.-institutes-in-atlas.-the-u.s.-is-involved-in-almost-all-aspects-of-the-software-and-analysis-work-including-prominent-coordination-activities-of-major-atlas-software-components.)

[WBS 2.2.4.0 Coordination of Application Software
11](#wbs-2.2.4.0-coordination-of-application-software)

[WBS 2.2.4.1 Simulation 12](#wbs-2.2.4.1-simulation)

[WBS 2.2.4.2 Subsystem Reconstruction
13](#wbs-2.2.4.2-subsystem-reconstruction)

[WBS 2.2.4.3 Combined Reconstruction
13](#wbs-2.2.4.3-combined-reconstruction)

[WBS 2.2.4.4 Analysis 13](#wbs-2.2.4.4-analysis)

[WBS 2.2.4.5 Trigger 14](#wbs-2.2.4.5-trigger)

[WBS 2.2.4.6 Combined Testbeam 14](#wbs-2.2.4.6-combined-testbeam)

[WBS 2.2.5 Software Support (A. Undrus)
15](#wbs-2.2.5-software-support-a.-undrus)

[4. WBS 2.3 U.S. ATLAS Facility Manager's Report (B. Gibbard, R. Baker,
BNL)
15](#wbs-2.3-u.s.-atlas-facility-managers-report-b.-gibbard-r.-baker-bnl)

[WBS 2.3.1 Tier 1 Computing Facility at Brookhaven National Laboratory
16](#wbs-2.3.1-tier-1-computing-facility-at-brookhaven-national-laboratory)

[WBS 2.3.1.1 Management and Administration
16](#wbs-2.3.1.1-management-and-administration)

[WBS 2.3.1.2 Tier 1 Fabric Infrastructure
16](#wbs-2.3.1.2-tier-1-fabric-infrastructure)

[WBS 2.3.1.3 Tier 1 Linux Systems 16](#wbs-2.3.1.3-tier-1-linux-systems)

[WBS 2.3.1.4 Tier 1 Storage Systems
16](#wbs-2.3.1.4-tier-1-storage-systems)

[WBS 2.3.1.5 Tier 1 Wide Area Services
17](#wbs-2.3.1.5-tier-1-wide-area-services)

[WBS 2.3.1.6 Tier 1 Operations 17](#wbs-2.3.1.6-tier-1-operations)

[Summary of Major Milestones and Deliverables
17](#summary-of-major-milestones-and-deliverables)

[Forthcoming Milestones and Deliverables
17](#forthcoming-milestones-and-deliverables)

[WBS 2.3.2 Tier 2 Computing Facilities (S. Youssef, BU)
17](#wbs-2.3.2-tier-2-computing-facilities-s.-youssef-bu)

[WBS 2.3.3 Wide Area Network (Shawn McKee, UM)
18](#wbs-2.3.3-wide-area-network-shawn-mckee-um)

[Summary of Major Milestones and Deliverables
18](#summary-of-major-milestones-and-deliverables-1)

[Forthcoming Milestones and Deliverables
18](#forthcoming-milestones-and-deliverables-1)

[WBS 2.3.4 Grid Tools and Services
19](#wbs-2.3.4-grid-tools-and-services)

[Overview 19](#overview)

[WBS 2.3.4.1 Infrastructure 19](#wbs-2.3.4.1-infrastructure)

[WBS 2.3.4.2 Workflow Services 20](#wbs-2.3.4.2-workflow-services)

[WBS 2.3.4.3 Data Services 21](#wbs-2.3.4.3-data-services)

[WBS 2.3.4.4 Monitoring Services 21](#wbs-2.3.4.4-monitoring-services)

[WBS 2.3.4.5 Production Frameworks
21](#wbs-2.3.4.5-production-frameworks)

[WBS 2.3.4.6 Analysis Applications, Interactive Grid Analysis, Portals
22](#wbs-2.3.4.6-analysis-applications-interactive-grid-analysis-portals)

[WBS 2.3.5 Grid Production 23](#wbs-2.3.5-grid-production)

[Overview 23](#overview-1)

[WBS 2.3.5.1 Grid Production - Software Acceptance
23](#wbs-2.3.5.1-grid-production---software-acceptance)

[WBS 2.3.5.2 Grid Production - Deployment of Software & Services
23](#wbs-2.3.5.2-grid-production---deployment-of-software-services)

[WBS 2.3.5.3 Grid Production - Validation and Hardening
23](#wbs-2.3.5.3-grid-production---validation-and-hardening)

[WBS 2.3.5.4 Grid Production - Operations
24](#wbs-2.3.5.4-grid-production---operations)

[5. Financial Report (Computing Program Office, BNL)
24](#financial-report-computing-program-office-bnl)

[Table 1. Total Costs and Commitments to Date
25](#table-1.-total-costs-and-commitments-to-date)

[Table 2. Summary of Agency Funding Profile
25](#table-2.-summary-of-agency-funding-profile)

[Table 3. Summary of Allocations of Funding by Institutions
26](#table-3.-summary-of-allocations-of-funding-by-institutions)

#   {#section-1 .unnumbered}

# 

# Project Manager's Summary (J. Shank, Boston University)

Highlights of activities in this quarter were:

-   Preparations, under Grid Tools and Services, for the Pre-DC2
    exercise that we will execute in the Grid2003 project context.

-   Successful integration of the LCG POOL persistency into the ATLAS
    framework.

-   Great progress on a unified approach to ATLAS detector geometry
    using the GeoModel.

-   Preparations in facilities and the US ATLAS testbed for
    Grid3/Grid2003.

From this it is clear that Grid2003 is a major focus of activity during
this period, particularly for Grid Tools and Services and Facilities. We
will use the ATLAS Pre-DC2 production in Grid2003 as a major preparation
stage for the real Data Challenge 2 (DC2), which will start in April
2004. The core software development is focused on needed functionality
for DC2, with POOL persistency being one of the major goals.

The project is on schedule for the needed functionality for the
Pre-DC2/Grid3/Grid2003 exercise. Software preparation for the upcoming
DC2 and Combined Testbeam milestones (approximately April, 2004) is a
bit tight, but we expect to have enough functionality to start the DC2
on time. This will be a critical item in the next two quarters.

**[ATLAS and the Larger Projects (J. Huth, Harvard U.)]{.underline}**

An overall strategic plan was developed for the integration of grid
tools and efforts developed via collaboration with PPDG, iVDGL, LCG and
the US ATLAS Research Program to tie together a number of activities in
a coherent manner.   A collaboration of PPDG and iVDGL members is
currently developing a persistent grid for US applications: US ATLAS, US
CMS, SDSS, LIGO, CDF, DO and others.   US ATLAS is deeply involved in
the definition of this persistent grid, termed Grid 3.  In the 6 month
time frame, we intend to work on the development and deployment of this
grid, use it for event generation and simulation.  The data gathered
from this exercise in the US will be cached at the BNL Tier 1 center,
and transferred to CERN.  The data will then be reconstructed at CERN,
using the LCG-1 environment.   The reconstructed data will then be
shipped back to the US for analysis by US users.

 

This exercise is intended to understand better how to construct a
working, persistent grid, to exercise the computing model (simulation at
Tier 1 and Tier 2 centers, reconstruction at CERN, and analysis in the
US).   Beyond this, there is a need to understand what we mean by
\"interoperable\" grids.  The question of interoperability can only be
addressed by trying to run applications in different grid environments -
e.g. Grid3 and LCG-1.   Finally, it is important to establish working
ties with CERN computing in order to ensure that the grid tools being
developed are, indeed, interoperable.

# WBS 2.1 Physics Manager's Report (Ian Hinchliffe, LBNL)

The migration of Pythia from 6.203 to a more recent version has begun
(WBS 2.1.1.11).\
Release 6.2.0 included support for version 6.217 alongside the existing
version. The older version will be phased out once the physics groups
have validated the new one (tentatively scheduled for release 7.5.0).
The LHAPDF structure function package was integrated to Pythia in
release 6.4.0.  Tauola and Photos were upgraded to new version in
release 6.5.0 (WBS 2.1.1.10 and 2.1.1.11). Two new next-to-leading order
MC@nlo  and Madcup interfaces supported (WBS 2.1.1.18 and 2.1.1.19) in
release 6.5.0. These are required for cases where the general purpose
generators such as Pythia provide a poor description, for example, the
production of very energetic jets with top quarks. A CosmicGenerator
(WBS 2.1.1.20) to simulate cosmic rays entering the Cavern was
introduced. US support was provided to help in the initial deployment of
this package, which is a NIKHEF responsibility.

Evaluation took place of the early releases of the LCG Genser tool. This
will become the standard repository for all Monte Carlo event
generators, replacing the atlas copies currently held in
/offline/external. Several meetings were held with the Genser team and
feedback given to them. Following this, release 0-0-2 of GENSER is now
suitable for atlas use for some of the event generators. Hijing, Pythia
and Isajet will be migrated in the first quarter of FY04 and the atlas
copies dropped.

Release 6.4.0 saw the introduction of a new ParticleGenerator that will
replace the old SingleParticleGun at some future date. Work has begun on
persistency for the event generators using AthenaPool. This persistency,
which is required for DC2, will become available in release 7.2.0. Some
changes in the core generators code (WBS 2.1.1.1) were needed to
accommodate the requirements of AthenaPool.

# WBS 2.2 Software Manager's Report (Srini Rajagopalan, BNL)

The U.S. ATLAS software contributions during the fourth quarter of FY03
are summarized below in detail. The U.S. continues to play a leading
role in the ATLAS computing and participating in the LHC Computing and
Grid (LCG) project, which will provide common software solutions to the
LHC experiments. In addition to the project funded personnel
contributing extensively in the areas of Framework and Data Management,
base program physicists have played a significant role in sub-system
reconstruction and simulation; combined reconstruction and physics
analysis. Their roles have been described in some detail in this report.
In particular, several U.S. physicists have significant coordination
roles and are well represented in the various ATLAS computing boards.

## WBS 2.2.1 Software Coordination {#wbs-2.2.1-software-coordination .unnumbered}

##  {#section-3 .unnumbered}

David Quarrie is the ATLAS Software Project Coordinator and reports to
Dario Barberis (ATLAS Computing Coordinator) in ATLAS. David Malon is
the ATLAS offline database coordinator reporting to David Quarrie in
ATLAS. Both David Quarrie and David Malon are U.S. ATLAS Level 3
managers responsible for Core Services and Data Management issues
respectively.

## WBS 2.2.2 Core Services (D. Quarrie) {#wbs-2.2.2-core-services-d.-quarrie .unnumbered}

The main focus of Core activities has been to adapt the Core services to
the new Atlas persistency technology, LCG Pool, with the goal of
providing production-quality services in time for the Atlas Data
Challenge 2 and the 2004 Combined Test Beam Data Processing.

## WBS 2.2.2.1 Framework {#wbs-2.2.2.1-framework .unnumbered}

### Core Services & Program Flow (2.2.2.1.1) {#core-services-program-flow-2.2.2.1.1 .unnumbered}

1.  Migration of Atlas core software (including the Gaudi framework) to
    gcc 3.2 (P. Calafiura, W. Lavrijsen, C. Leggett).

2.  Continued support and expansion of ROOT Histograms in Athena (C.
    Leggett).

3.  Development of the core component infrastructure for the SEAL LCG\
    project. This includes plug-in management supporting dynamic loading
    and\
    unloading of components (M. Marino)

### User Interfaces (2.2.2.1.2) {#user-interfaces-2.2.2.1.2 .unnumbered}

1.  The ROOT python bindings (PyROOT) have been deployed as part of SEAL
    project (W. Lavrijsen)

2.  A prototype software bus in python (PyBus) has been developed, and a
    blueprint for Ganga II has been drawn(W. Lavrijsen, C.E. Tull)

3.  Several modules of ASK, the Athena Startup Kit, have been
    re-engineered to be used as PyBus components (W. Lavrijsen)

4.  Development of a python library (pylcgdict) to access the LCG
    dictionary meta-classes from the python prompt (M. Marino)

5.  Several Athena tutorials were organized to present, and get feedback
    on, the new python-based user interface. (W. Lavrijsen, M. Marino)

## WBS 2.2.2.2 EDM Infrastructure {#wbs-2.2.2.2-edm-infrastructure .unnumbered}

###  {#section-4 .unnumbered}

### Core Functionalities (2.2.2.2.1) (P. Calafiura, S. Rajagopalan) {#core-functionalities-2.2.2.2.1-p.-calafiura-s.-rajagopalan .unnumbered}

Restructured code in three EDM packages that reflect the different
 usage patterns:

-   StoreGate: data access API from algorithmic objects

-    DataModel: containers, smart refs and other tools for data object
    design

-   SGTools: shared low-level tools

-   New polymorphic containers with configurable element ownership
    policy.

###  {#section-5 .unnumbered}

### Back-end Services (2.2.2.2.2) {#back-end-services-2.2.2.2.2 .unnumbered}

Support established for Atlas polymorphic containers and persistable
references using AthenaRoot and LCG Pool persistence (P. Calafiura, H.
Ma, S. Rajagopalan)

### Navigation Support (2.2.2.2.4) {#navigation-support-2.2.2.2.4 .unnumbered}

Prototype framework to allow transparent navigation of data object\
association graphs (P. Calafiura, P. Loch, S. Rajagopalan)

## WBS 2.2.2.3 Detector Description {#wbs-2.2.2.3-detector-description .unnumbered}

In the fourth quarter the \"GeoModel\" description was propagated to all
major detector subsystems: the entire inner detector (Pixels, SCT, and
TRT) plus calorimeters (Tile and LAr) and the Muon Systems. The
completeness and accuracy, of the description varies across subsytem, as
does the level of integration of the raw geometry to the readout
geometry. However an important step has been achieved, because now ATLAS
has a single coherent description of all of its geometry that will be
applied to simulation and reconstruction, and can be tailored to
testbeam configurations. The source of all primary numbers is the NOVA
database. The description contains already important infrastructure
permitting a unified approach to propagating alignment, at least to the
level of rigid body transformations. Some of this work was carried out
by subsytems people, much of it was carried out by DD people themselves
when subsystems people were lacking. A low level of kernel maintenance
and kernel improvements was carried out, such as the introduction of
compressed versions of CLHEP transformation classes.

Measurements were made of the size in memory of the ATLAS GeoModel
description: it is approximately 6 MBytes. The sizes of individual
subsystems vary according to size, complexity, level of agressiveness in
optimizing for memory. We conclude that the memory requirements of a
GeoModel description of the ATLAS detector is not a problem.

The complete GeoModel description of ATLAS has not, in the fourth
quarter, been actually used within simulation or reconstruction, and so
we finish the quarter with our highest priority being: connecting this
to simulation and reconstruction\--in that order, roughly\-- and making
sure that all infrastructure and subsytems are ready and that they are
not the cause of operational problems when running either simulation or
reconstruction.

## WBS 2.2.2.4 Graphics {#wbs-2.2.2.4-graphics .unnumbered}

No U.S. project effort in this quarter.

## WBS 2.2.2.5 Analysis Tools {#wbs-2.2.2.5-analysis-tools .unnumbered}

No U.S. project effort in this quarter.

## WBS 2.2.2.6 Grid Integration {#wbs-2.2.2.6-grid-integration .unnumbered}

No U.S. project effort in this quarter.

##  {#section-6 .unnumbered}

## WBS 2.2.3 Databases and Data Management (D. Malon) {#wbs-2.2.3-databases-and-data-management-d.-malon .unnumbered}

## WBS 2.2.3.1 Database services and servers (Vaniachine) {#wbs-2.2.3.1-database-services-and-servers-vaniachine .unnumbered}

Support for ATLAS offline databases server and services, and leadership
of the corresponding ATLAS working group, remained a U.S. responsibility
in this reporting period. The U.S. team is also responsible for
equivalent servers and services, and for corresponding package
administration, for the LHC-wide POOL persistence project. Package and
platform changes and package dependency control, as well as increased
use of such servers and services, increased the support workload.
Policies and access control for POOL performance benchmarking, described
in a subsequent section, were also successfully developed and
administered by the U.S. group.

Work continued on strategies for access to database-hosted data for
standalone processors and grid compute elements behind firewalls.

### WBS 2.2.3.2 Common data management software (Fine, Adams, Perevoztchikov) {#wbs-2.2.3.2-common-data-management-software-fine-adams-perevoztchikov .unnumbered}

An Athena persistence service based upon the LHC-wide POOL persistence
project was delivered by the U.S. team in this reporting period. Early
adopters, primarily in the liquid argon and in the conditions data
infrastructure communities, began to use it. ATLAS is the first
experiment to integrate POOL collections infrastructure into its
software releases.

Design discussions between U.S. database and control framework teams and
the CERN-based POOL group were initiated, to agree upon a path toward
use of POOL without the POOL DataSvc, an ostensibly optional transient
cache component that currently forces ATLAS to use two transient caches.
Implementation of an appropriate strategy is expected in the next
reporting quarter.

### WBS 2.2.3.3 Event store (Adams, Malon)  {#wbs-2.2.3.3-event-store-adams-malon .unnumbered}

The U.S. group has lead responsibility for the software and data flow
aspects of an ATLAS computing model, as part of a team organized by
ATLAS computing management late in the previous reporting quarter. A
"reasonable" prototype of this model is intended to be tested in Data
Challenge 2 (2004) as input to an ATLAS Computing Technical Design
Report due in 2005. A U.S.-developed model for Tier 0 reconstruction in
Data Challenge 2, along with a corresponding event store model, was
presented in an ATLAS data challenge workshop in July. This model,
further articulated and described in the September ATLAS Software Week,
is the foundation for Data Challenge 2 planning.

The ability to write and read ATLAS event data, and infrastructure
classes in support of event data, using the Athena POOL persistence
infrastructure was demonstrated, with documentation and several examples
provided. Several bugs and deficiencies in POOL-provided software were
discovered and reported in the course of this work; some required
nontrivial and time-consuming workarounds by the U.S. team, though most
were eventually addressed by the POOL team.

### WBS 2.2.3.4 Detector data management (Vaniachine) {#wbs-2.2.3.4-detector-data-management-vaniachine .unnumbered}

The U.S.-provided "primary numbers" database (NOVA) saw even wider
adoption in this reporting quarter, requiring the addition of much new
data (e.g., structures like toroids, feet, and rails) and a
commensurately greater support workload. The increased stress on this
database uncovered deficiencies in the Gaudi/Athena architecture and in
the deployment model, some of which were addressed in this reporting
period, and some of which will require additional effort.

NOVA capabilities were extended in support of calibration data (via
"NovaBlobs"---a somewhat unfortunate name).

Building database software poses unique challenges. Debug and optimized
builds of executable code, for example, can proceed in parallel, but
databases should not be built twice, and code generation that depends
upon reading a single database to extract schema, for example, may
introduce contention in parallel builds. Several improvements to the
build process were made, as were a number of enhancements to keep up
with changes to Athena and to ATLAS code organization.

### WBS 2.2.3.5 Collections, catalogs, and metadata (Karr, Malon) {#wbs-2.2.3.5-collections-catalogs-and-metadata-karr-malon .unnumbered}

A highlight of this reporting period in the metadata work area was an
ATLAS metadata workshop, organized by the U.S. group, but held in
Oxford, UK, in an effort to engage much-needed additional effort from
the UK in the ATLAS cored database effort.

The U.S. continued to be responsible for coordination of the collections
and metadata work package for the LHC-wide POOL persistence project.
While some new functionality was added by U.S. developers, the principal
focus was on development of a comprehensive test suite, and on
performance testing and optimization. As a result of the performance
testing, cache optimization and other performance-enhancing measures
were implemented. A vision of the future of collections and metadata
work, and of how these components fit into a distributed data
architecture, was presented by the U.S. group at an LHC-wide meeting in
September.

Design of "link-table-based" collections, intended to reduce
substantially the space requirements of collections pointing to many
events resident in the same set of files, was completed in this
reporting period. An implementation is due in the coming quarter.

## WBS 2.2.4 Application Software (F. Luehring) {#wbs-2.2.4-application-software-f.-luehring .unnumbered}

##  {#section-7 .unnumbered}

### The application software includes reconstruction, simulation and analysis work performed by U.S. institutes in ATLAS. The U.S. is involved in almost all aspects of the software and analysis work including prominent coordination activities of major ATLAS software components. {#the-application-software-includes-reconstruction-simulation-and-analysis-work-performed-by-u.s.-institutes-in-atlas.-the-u.s.-is-involved-in-almost-all-aspects-of-the-software-and-analysis-work-including-prominent-coordination-activities-of-major-atlas-software-components. .unnumbered}

### WBS 2.2.4.0 Coordination of Application Software {#wbs-2.2.4.0-coordination-of-application-software .unnumbered}

-   P. Loch (Arizona) is the coordinator for the LAr subsystem specific
    reconstruction software.

-   P. Nevski (BNL) serves as the ATLAS GEANT3 Coordinator.

-   Hong Ma (BNL) serves as the LAr database coordinator. His
    responsibilities include establishing the database requirements and
    providing solutions consistent with the overall ATLAS database
    strategies.

-   S Rajagopalan (BNL) is the overall ATLAS LAr software coordinator.
    He coordinates activities in the LAr sub-system domain and closely
    collaborates with other sub-system group such as the Tile and
    Trigger groups.

-   A. Gupta (Chicago) is the package and software coordinator for Jet
    Reconstruction software.

-   F. Luehring (IU) serves as the TRT Software coordinator. Luehring
    also coordinates TRT effort on the combined testbeam software.

-   D. Costanzo (LBL) serves as the Pixel GEANT4 simulation and
    digitization coordinator. Costanzo serves as the ATLAS Digitization
    and ROD Processing Coordinator for the Inner Detector. Costanzo
    serves as the overall ATLAS-wide digitization coordinator.

-   S. Goldfarb (Michigan) is extensively involved in coordination work
    for the muon system simulation and reconstruction work.

-   M. Leltchouk (Nevis) serves as the LAr simulation software
    coordinator.

### WBS 2.2.4.1 Simulation {#wbs-2.2.4.1-simulation .unnumbered}

P. Loch (Arizona) finalized the geometry description of the ATLAS
Forward Calorimeter (FCal) in the Liquid Argon GEANT4 simulation package
LArG4. Loch also successfully implemented and tested a hit collection
mechanism for the signals in the FCal.

P. Nevski (BNL) continued to provide GEANT3 simulation support. The
basic maintenance and support continues to be needed during the Geant3
to Geant4 transition stage.

F. Luehring (Indiana) maintained the TRT GEANT3 simulation. He also
coordinated work on the GEANT4 TRT simulation and spent considerable
time helping compare the GEANT3 and GEANT4 TRT barrel geometries.

D. Costanzo (LBL) did code maintenance for the pixel simulation in
GEANT4 and the C++ digitization package used by both the pixels and SCT.
Costanzo also worked on the detector description of the pixel geometry
using the GeoModel system and worked on the readout geometry
description. Costanzo was responsible for the integration of the all of
the digitization codes for the entire ATLAS detector.

M. Leltchouk and W. Seligman (Nevis) prepared a converter from GeoModel
to GEANT4 geometry to test LArGeoModel detector description. They also
developed a new package (LarGeoNovaCnv) that uses the NOVA converters to
access the MySQL database for detector description parameters. In
addition, they put in a new identifier scheme into LarG4Algs and worked
on an identifier scheme for the dead material within the LAr.

E. Barberio (SMU) completed the fast parameterization of the
electromagnetic showers in the LAr EM barrel calorimeter before taking
up another position outside U.S.

Y. Gao and T. Ryan (SMU) generated 423 Higgs and 108 SUSY partitions
using the SMU farm during DC1 phase 2.

### WBS 2.2.4.2 Subsystem Reconstruction {#wbs-2.2.4.2-subsystem-reconstruction .unnumbered}

P. Loch (Arizona) performed routine maintenance work only (bug fixes)
for the full FCal reconstruction in Athena.

S. Grinstein (Harvard) ran the objected-oriented muon reconstruction
code (Moore) and discovered a number of bugs. He has been working on
understanding the CPU usage of Moore.

S. Goldfarb (Michigan) worked on the development and testing of the core
software for the Moore Reconstruction program. He was also involved
design and planning for the development of common tracking
reconstruction objects and algorithms for Inner Detector and Muon track
reconstruction.

### WBS 2.2.4.3 Combined Reconstruction {#wbs-2.2.4.3-combined-reconstruction .unnumbered}

P. Loch (Arizona) developed a new design for the Jet/E~T~/E~Miss~/tau
reconstruction software in Arthena, in collaboration with BNL,
University of Chicago, and the Universidad Autonoma de Barcelona.
Implementation of this new design has started.

F. Paige (BNL) continued to play a major role in the optimizations of
the Hadronic calibration.

F. Merritt and A. Gupta (Chicago) coordinate the activities in the Jet
Reconstruction software. Frank has taken over as the co-coordinator from
M. Bosman (Barcelona).

K. Baker et al. (Hampton) group have been running Athena.

S. Grinstein (Harvard) ran the full ATLAS reconstruction to understand
CPU usage.

J. Dodd, M. Leltchouk, J. Parsons, and W. Seligman (Nevis) worked on
reconstruction of top-quark events.

### WBS 2.2.4.4 Analysis {#wbs-2.2.4.4-analysis .unnumbered}

J. Rutherfoord (Arizona) The analysis of the 2003 FCal testbeam data is
ongoing at Arizona. The optimal filter coefficients for the physics
signal pulse shape have been calculated for the FCal for the first time
ever.

A. Savine (Arizona) studied the properties of the electronic calibration
system using the 2003 FCal testbeam data.

M. Shupe (Arizona) made additional studies of signal linearity and
energy resolution for electrons and pions in the 2003 FCal testbeam data
using improved clustering algorithms.

D Costanzo (LBL) made a study of a sample of 10^5^ fully
simulated/reconstructed SUSY events that he used to debugging the Atlas
software and to investigate the potential for discovering supersymmetry
with the ATLAS detector.

D. Levin and R. Avramidou (Michigan) contributed to the analysis of test
beam data from the Atlas Muon H8 test beam, collected in the summer of
2003. Their work has included studies of the alignment, calibration, and
response of the MDT chambers.

Y. Gao (SMU) worked on a note entitled "New analysis strategy to search
for new particles at LHC" (ATL-COM-PHYS-2003-047).

E. Barberio (SMU) made a lepton number violation study by Elisabetta
Barberio and began preparing an ATLAS note on it.

N. Ozturk (Texas - Arlington) did a blind data challenge analysis.

### WBS 2.2.4.5 Trigger {#wbs-2.2.4.5-trigger .unnumbered}

S. Goldfarb (Michigan) edited an ATLAS note ATL-SOFT-2003-008 "Moore as
Event Filter in the ATLAS High Level Trigger".

M. Abolins (MSU) worked on Region of Interest Distributions in the
calorimeter and muon system.

W. Wiedenmann and H. Zobernig (Wisconsin) worked on

-   Finalizing, verifying and improving the measurements that they
    provided for the Trigger TDR (CERN/LHCC/2003-022, ATLAS TDR 016).
    The work was a simulation of the trigger for a full e/gamma
    selection slice using a multi-node system. The setup simulated both
    the Level-2 trigger and the event filter.

-   Integrating the muon selection software into a Level-2 and Event
    filter setup. The obtained results were shown in the LHCC open
    presentation of the Trigger TDR.

-   Studied the possible reduction of package dependencies and code
    simplification for offline selection software components running in
    Level-2.

-   Created development environment for testing algorithms and
    supporting infrastructure code for Level-2 called \"athenaMT\".
    \"athenaMT\" allows the testing of code for the Level-2 in a multi
    threaded environment without the need to setup a complex data flow
    environment. A detailed description of this work is found in
    \"Studies for a common selection software environment in ATLAS: from
    the Level-2 Trigger to the offline reconstruction\",
    ATL-COM-DAQ-2003-057/ATL-DAQ-2003-037.

### WBS 2.2.4.6 Combined Testbeam {#wbs-2.2.4.6-combined-testbeam .unnumbered}

P. Loch (Arizona) provided a first implementation of the special data
classes in Athena for detectors that only exist in the testbeam setups.

M. Shupe (Arizona) is currently working on reconstruction and monitor
algorithms for the combined testbeam including a new event display.

D. Levin and R. Avramidou (Michigan) worked on the development of
software to be used in the 2004 combined test beam.

M. Leltchouk and W. Seligman (Nevis) are working on special calibration
hits for the combined testbeam GEANT4 simulation.

Y. Gao, L. Lu, and R Stroynowski (SMU) completed the note on the LAr
testbeam entitled "Electron identification and e-pi separation with
barrel Module P15" (ATL-LARG-2003-013).

## WBS 2.2.5 Software Support (A. Undrus) {#wbs-2.2.5-software-support-a.-undrus .unnumbered}

Alex Undrus continues to serve as the U.S. Atlas Software Librarian and
provides management for nightly build facilities of ATLAS and LCG
projects and participates in the work of LCG and ATLAS infrastructure
teams, SPI and SIT respectively. He also serves as a liaison between two
teams.

The ATLAS and LCG nightly build facilities were successfully operated at
CERN and BNL. Along with regular builds of latest software version, the
special High Level Trigger (HLT) branch ATLAS software was rebuilt daily
through August. This branch was by the HLT community to provide results
for their Technical Design Report. A new version (version 0.2) of
Nightly Control System, NICOS, was deployed. This version features an
improved web page design. The code was translated in PERL, portable
script language, and therefore can be used on different computing
platforms. The new version of NICOS was successfully applied for nightly
builds of LCG projects, POOL and SEAL and experimental ATLAS builds.

The SPI experience in testing tools, QMTest and Oval, was studied and
reported to SIT. The interface (\"glue\") packages for LCG projects
(POOL, SEAL and associated external software) were maintained in ATLAS
software releases.

New ATLAS software was promptly installed at the BNL Tier I Center,
usually in one to three days after CERN installation. The software
support was provided for users: in the third quarter 35
requests/questions from about 15 users were resolved. The BNL software
support page was updated in a timely way. In addition, LCG software was
installed and regularly updated.

The U.S. Atlas MySQL database, web server, and cvs pserver were
maintained and administered and their services were actively used by the
U.S. Atlas community.

# WBS 2.3 U.S. ATLAS Facility Manager's Report (B. Gibbard, R. Baker, BNL)

During the fourth quarter of FY'03, the focus of effort in the facility
sub project shifted from closing out the remnants of Data Challenge 1 to
participation in the new Grid2003 initiative and preparations for Data
Challenge 2. US ATLAS is very active in Grid2003 with thousands of ATLAS
jobs running across both ATLAS and non-ATLAS sites. In preparation for
DC2, the Tier 1 and Tier 2 facilities began planning hardware
procurements, and work in the Grid Tools and Services and Grid
Production areas began on preparing the production framework, analysis
framework and supporting tools that will be required.

## WBS 2.3.1 Tier 1 Computing Facility at Brookhaven National Laboratory {#wbs-2.3.1-tier-1-computing-facility-at-brookhaven-national-laboratory .unnumbered}

###  {#section-8 .unnumbered}

During the fourth quarter of FY'03, Tier 1 facility staffing was
maintained at the level of 4.5 FTE on project. The main focus of
activity was deployment and support of Grid2003 together with support
for ongoing ATLAS simulation and analysis activities. Much work was done
on deployment of the LHC Computing Grid (LCG-1), although the
installation was not fully functional by the end of the quarter.

### WBS 2.3.1.1 Management and Administration {#wbs-2.3.1.1-management-and-administration .unnumbered}

In addition to regular facility oversight, management activity during
the fourth quarter included resource prioritization and schedule
coordination for facility usage between Data Challenge activities and
other demands on the Tier 1 facility.

### WBS 2.3.1.2 Tier 1 Fabric Infrastructure {#wbs-2.3.1.2-tier-1-fabric-infrastructure .unnumbered}

This area includes both physical infrastructure (power, A/C) and the
basic elements of the local computing infrastructure including security,
local area network components and backup systems. Planning for FY'04
facility upgrades included reevaluation of these infrastructure elements
during the quarter. In particular, additional local area network
capacity will be needed and a purchase plan was prepared to be executed
early in the first quarter of FY'04.

### WBS 2.3.1.3 Tier 1 Linux Systems {#wbs-2.3.1.3-tier-1-linux-systems .unnumbered}

The Tier 1 Linux farm was very actively managed during the quarter to
balance priorities between Grid2003, local use, dedicated ATLAS
production and LCG deployment. The LSF queues and CONDOR pool
configurations were tuned to optimize the usage of the facility
according to established priorities (Dedicated ATLAS production first,
local use second, Grid2003 shared use third)

### WBS 2.3.1.4 Tier 1 Storage Systems {#wbs-2.3.1.4-tier-1-storage-systems .unnumbered}

###  {#section-9 .unnumbered}

Both the disk and tape storage systems were used heavily during the
quarter, primarily to support dedicated ATLAS production and local
users. Non-ATLAS Grid2003 users did not rely heavily on Tier 1 storage
resources.

### WBS 2.3.1.5 Tier 1 Wide Area Services {#wbs-2.3.1.5-tier-1-wide-area-services .unnumbered}

###  {#section-10 .unnumbered}

This was by far the most active area of work at the Tier 1 facility
during the quarter. The primary efforts were in support of Grid2003,
including deployment, configuration and operation with additional
contributions to monitoring and packaging. Another major effort was the
deployment of the first "production" release of LCG-1. For the first 2.5
months of the quarter, the "Lite" deployment method was attempted. This
involved fitting the LCG deployment on top of a locally installed
operating system. Although much progress was made in understanding and
resolving the dependencies of this configuration, but as of the end of
the quarter, we were unsuccessful in bringing up a fully working system.

### WBS 2.3.1.6 Tier 1 Operations {#wbs-2.3.1.6-tier-1-operations .unnumbered}

###  {#section-11 .unnumbered}

This item focuses primarily on Facility support and monitoring. During
the quarter, this effort was focused on deploying the Grid2003
monitoring system and integrating it with the rest of the facility
monitoring infrastructure.

## Summary of Major Milestones and Deliverables {#summary-of-major-milestones-and-deliverables .unnumbered}

The deployment of the first full release of LCG was scheduled for
completion during the quarter. As of the end of the quarter, work was
still in progress with completion expected during the first quarter of
FY'04.

## Forthcoming Milestones and Deliverables {#forthcoming-milestones-and-deliverables .unnumbered}

The next major facility hardware upgrade is planned to begin in early FY
'04 in preparation for ATLAS DC 2. Planning for this upgrade was started
in earnest during the fourth quarter of FY'03 and the hardware
acquisitions will begin in the first quarter. Pre-production for DC 2 is
expected to begin in the second quarter of FY'04.

## WBS 2.3.2 Tier 2 Computing Facilities (S. Youssef, BU) {#wbs-2.3.2-tier-2-computing-facilities-s.-youssef-bu .unnumbered}

The Indiana Tier 2 upgrade (jointly with the AVIDD cluster at Indiana)
has been purchased and delivered. Escalation and testing have just begun
at the end of this quarter. Boston University has done a technology
evaluation and sent an RFP for a new cluster to likely companies. The BU
Tier 2 facility will be managed jointly with the Center for
Computational Science at Boston University, continuing our very
productive relationship with the BU CCS and Scientific Computing and
Visualization group. BU Tier 2 will continue to be able to make use of
CCS/SCV facilities such as the 104 processor Linux farm a new Xeon
cluster as well as OC12 wide area networking. Planning proceeded at
U.Chicago for their Tier 2 facility. Chicago has also begun technology
evaluation for their new Tier 2 facility. UC has also joined in
collaboration with the U.C. TeraPort project. TeraPort will provide
TeraGrid compatible hardware (i.e. 64 bit) in early 2004.

## WBS 2.3.3 Wide Area Network (Shawn McKee, UM) {#wbs-2.3.3-wide-area-network-shawn-mckee-um .unnumbered}

The primary work related to networking during this period includes
ongoing activity as Chair of the Internet2 End-to-End(E2E) Technical
Advisory Group (TAG), planning and hosting the HENP Fall 2003 Internet2
meeting and creating the Alpha release of the host network monitoring
software.

A new activity in support of HENP networking was submission of a revised
UltraLight proposal to NSF Physics. This proposal focuses on integrating
an agile, configurable network infrastructure into our LHC grid
computing models.

The TAG work focuses on guiding the end-to-end network monitoring,
diagnosis and optimization and will be very important in enabling
end-users (physicists) to effectively utilize their network. For more
info on the I2 E2E effort see
[http://e2epi.internet2.edu](http://e2epi.internet2.edu/). The GGF and
Internet2 working group participation mentioned in Q3, continues.

We also had our Fall meeting of the HENP group. Details of the
presentations and meeting info are available at:
<http://henp.internet2.edu/fall03.shtml> Our next meeting is scheduled
for Sunday, January 25th, at the Joint-techs meeting where we will focus
on the synergies between HENP and Astronomy for using and developing
network infrastructure.

The Alpha release (projected completion mid-November, 2003) of the host
monitoring software is documented at: <http://monalisa.cern.ch/EMA/>
(EMA=Endhost Monitoring Agent) It works on Linux and Windows hosts.

We plan to demonstrate an updated version at the Internet2/ESNet
Joint-Techs meeting in Hawaii in January 2004. By the end of February,
we plan to produce a Beta version of the software which incorporates
feedback from the Joint-Techs demonstration. Near term developments will
include:

\- reporting monitoring Information into MonALISA via UDP

\- \"web 100\" client info access

Longer term we want to integrate this into the End-to-end effort at
Internet2 (PiPEs and AMI, NLANR Advisor work). The goal is to provide
HENP with access to end-to-end testing of the network for diagnostics,
performance monitoring and (eventually) scheduling support.

##  {#section-12 .unnumbered}

## Summary of Major Milestones and Deliverables {#summary-of-major-milestones-and-deliverables-1 .unnumbered}

The one minor milestone for WBS 2.3.3 during the fourth quarter was
"Tool testing for network monitoring and diagnoses" scheduled for
completion by September 30. This goal was met on schedule.

## Forthcoming Milestones and Deliverables {#forthcoming-milestones-and-deliverables-1 .unnumbered}

The projected October 31 milestone: "Alpha version host network
diagnostics deployed" is projected for completion in mid-November. The
Beta Version, scheduled for completion February 27, 2004 is on schedule.

## WBS 2.3.4 Grid Tools and Services {#wbs-2.3.4-grid-tools-and-services .unnumbered}

### Overview {#overview .unnumbered}

GTS is responsible for development, evaluation, and creation of
integrated grid-based systems for distributed production processing and
user analysis within the US ATLAS software and computing project.
Provide coherence, coordination with external grid projects. The project
is organized as:

-   2.3.4 Grid Tools and Services

    -   2.3.4.1 Grid Infrastructure

    -   2.3.4.2 Workflow Services

    -   2.3.4.3 Data Services

    -   2.3.4.4 Monitoring Services

    -   2.3.4.5 Production Frameworks and Environments

    -   2.3.4.6 Analysis Frameworks

### WBS 2.3.4.1 Infrastructure {#wbs-2.3.4.1-infrastructure .unnumbered}

#### Packaging and Configuration {#packaging-and-configuration .unnumbered}

During this quarter, work at Boston University proceeded on Pacman 3.
This effort reaching the stage of a functional prototype (see
<http://physics.bu.edu/~youssef/pacman/> ) able to demonstrate important
new features of the software. Work on CMT translation also reached the
prototype stage at the end of this quarter.

Work continues on packaging and configuration at Boston University (Saul
Youssef). Development work centered on Pacman3, which has new
functionality for multi-location, multi-site and multi-user
installations, with major enhancements needed for grid design and
stronger properties with respect to safe and effortless installations at
remote sites. New types of caches will also be needed to prevent
anticipated scaling problems and to provide tools to help VDT-like
groups who take responsibility for version choices and interoperability
testing for a body of software. See:
<http://physics.bu.edu/~youssef/pacman/>

Several ATLAS releases were Pacmanized and made available for deployment
to Grid3 sites (Y. Smirnov).

**VO Management**

#### Grid User Management System. {#grid-user-management-system. .unnumbered}

Deployment of the GUMS system at BNL by D. Yu (Brookhaven).
Presentations given at US ATLAS testbed meetings. Preparation to deploy
on DGT.

#### VOX Project with USCMS and iVDGL {#vox-project-with-uscms-and-ivdgl .unnumbered}

Regular weekly meetings of the VOX began during the third quarter and
ATLAS personnel (R. Baker and D. Yu) were very active in design of the
VOX architecture and data model.

### WBS 2.3.4.2 Workflow Services {#wbs-2.3.4.2-workflow-services .unnumbered}

#### Chimera Based Workflow Systems {#chimera-based-workflow-systems .unnumbered}

Work continued on development of GCE-Server and GCE-Client, which
together provide an integrated client-server virtual data system. This
is a collaborative effort between GriPhyN, iVDGL and PPDG.

Con

1\) Production Grid Systems: \[Performance, Operations, and Stability\]

Regression tests, capable of execution on any grid node, were developed
and used to validate various common grid services at the node. This set
of tests were used initially to debug emerging Grid3 sites and have now
been turned over to personnel at the iGOC at Indiana University. A
display of how these scripts have been used to monitor the
grid-availability status of a site can be seen at

<http://www.ivdgl.org/grid2003/catalog/index.php?site_name=grid3>

2\) Data Management: \[Virtual Data and Resource Location Services\] I
worked with Jason Smith at BNL, Ed May at Argonne, and Xin Zhao at
UChicago to validate the installation of Globus RLS Servers at both BNL
and the University of Chicago. These installations provide a tiered
RLI/LRC framework to support Atlas production efforts. I constructed,
tested, and validated a set of Pacman software distribution packages
based on Chimera+RLS+VDT to support ATLAS persistent grid challenges. I
tested and validated the virtual data services provided by Chimera in
support of Atlas simulation and reconstruction efforts. (Joint work with
Yuri Smirnov of UChicago).

3\) Interoperability: I participated in the design and development of
the Grid3/2003 project. Grid2003 is a coordinated project between iVDGL,
GriPhyN, PPDG, and the physics experiments, principally being led by
USCMS and USATLAS. The goal of the Grid2003 project is to develop,
integrate, deploy and apply a functional grid across (at least) the LHC
institutions, extending to non-LHC institutions and to international
sites, working closely together with the existing efforts. It is
expected that knowledge gained in this effort can be used to address
LCG-1 interoperability issues that may arise in its initial deployment.

### WBS 2.3.4.3 Data Services {#wbs-2.3.4.3-data-services .unnumbered}

Deployed Chimera Virtual Data Catalog in support of PreDC2. Continued
use and testing.

#### ATLAS Distributed Data Management -- MAGDA  {#atlas-distributed-data-management-magda .unnumbered}

Magada development has been frozen pending more information about RLS
interoperability. No update at this time.

#### RLS Service {#rls-service .unnumbered}

Continued testing of RLS deployments at U of Chicago and Brookhaven.
Client scripts written to facilitate population of/browsing of datasets
in RLS. Support for these services is provided by Xin Zhao (Chicago) and
Jason Smith (BNL). The distributed RLI functionality works and is in
regular use by the ATLAS GCE system.

### WBS 2.3.4.4 Monitoring Services {#wbs-2.3.4.4-monitoring-services .unnumbered}

#### PPDG Monitoring Effort {#ppdg-monitoring-effort .unnumbered}

No Report

#### iVDGL Monitoring Effort {#ivdgl-monitoring-effort .unnumbered}

A monitoring infrastructure based on Ganglia, MonALISA, and Globus MDS
is being deployed as part of the Grid2003 project.

### WBS 2.3.4.5 Production Frameworks {#wbs-2.3.4.5-production-frameworks .unnumbered}

R. Baker, K. De and R. Gardner attended production framework workshop at
ATLAS, hosted by L. Goosens (ATLAS responsible for production.). A new
architecture has been developed which separates ATLAS specifc job
management from grid specific infrastructures.

#### ATLAS Simulation, Reconstruction Software and Run Scripts for Production {#atlas-simulation-reconstruction-software-and-run-scripts-for-production .unnumbered}

New transformations and derivations have been defined for ATLSIM,
Athena-driven reconstruction, and Pythia event generation in support of
PreDC2 activities.

#### Production RLS {#production-rls .unnumbered}

As above.

#### Chimera Simulation and Reconstruction Bundles {#chimera-simulation-and-reconstruction-bundles .unnumbered}

Version 6.5.0 has been delivered, which should be adequate for PreDC2.

### WBS 2.3.4.6 Analysis Applications, Interactive Grid Analysis, Portals {#wbs-2.3.4.6-analysis-applications-interactive-grid-analysis-portals .unnumbered}

ARDA report has been released. See http://www.uscms.org/s&c/lcg/ARDA/

#### Grappa (Web Portal) {#grappa-web-portal .unnumbered}

Deprecated.

#### Ganga (Athena Grid Integration) {#ganga-athena-grid-integration .unnumbered}

There were meetings between DIAL and Ganga developers to explore
integration of the two projects.

#### DIAL (Interactive Analysis Framework) {#dial-interactive-analysis-framework .unnumbered}

David Adams: My major PPDG-related efforts are the development of the
dataset model for distributed datamanagement and and the design and
implementation of DIAL for distributed analysis. The web sites for these
projects may be found at

http://www.usatlas.bnl.gov/\~dladams/dataset

and

http://www.usatlas.bnl.gov/\~dladams/dial

Over the last quarter, I spent about 60% of my time on PPDG activities.

Considerable progress in understanding was made with the dataset model
and this understanding is summarized in the note \"Datasets for the
Grid\" which is available at the dataset web site. The properties of
datasets have been identified and datasets are categorized by the extent
of their location information. The dataset code was updated to reflect
some but not all of this new information.

DIAL advanced significantly during the quarter. Two releases (0.40 and
0.50 were made). These include locally distributed processing (i.e.
distributed within a site or farm). The processing may be distributed
with fork, LSF, lsrun or Condor. Datasets may be constructed from
logical files cataloged on local disk, NFS, AFS or Magda. A line
interface was added so that DIAL may be run either standalone or in the
ROOT environment. Wensheng Deng contributed heavily to the Magda, LSF
and Condor pieces.

I have also begun discussions with Gabrielle Carcassi of STAR on the
definition of a high-level job description language based on the
concepts introduced in DIAL.

In September, I met with GANGA developers and we worked out an
integration strategy that will enable GANGA users to access the upcoming
dataset catalogs and the DIAL schedulers.

I gave many talks on both datasets and DIAL. These may be found talks
section of the dataset and DIAL web pages. I participated in many
dataset discussions in the CS-11 meetings. I provided feedback to the
LHC HEPCAL and ARDA groups.

## WBS 2.3.5 Grid Production {#wbs-2.3.5-grid-production .unnumbered}

### Overview {#overview-1 .unnumbered}

During this quarter, the U.S. ATLAS facilities continued to produce data
for the first ATLAS Data Challenge (DC1). Officially, DC1 production has
concluded. However, requests continued for data from physics groups and
the HLT community in preparation for the trigger system review. Large
samples of events were processed for pile-up and reconstruction using
ATHENA. The U.S. continued to provide the largest grid-based production
system in all of ATLAS, through participation in the U.S. ATLAS Grid
Testbed.

A new initiative was started by ATLAS in August. The Data Challenge
group tasked a small working group (7 people) to develop plans for a
ATLAS-wide common production system for DC2. A workshop was organized at
CERN. The U.S. was well represented in this group -- Rich Baker, Kaushik
De and Rob Gardner attended the two day meetings. Design of a new
supervisor-executor system (now called Windmill) was developed at the
workshop. Work on this system from the U.S. will be a collaboration
between WBS 2.3.4 and 2.3.5. Kaushik De was assigned the responsibility
to oversee development of the supervisor, which will be a common ATLAS
specific component. Rob Gardner is responsible for overseeing the
Chimera executor. CERN will develop the Data Management System (DMS --
recently dubbed Don Quijote). The Milan group is developing the LCG
executor, while the Norway group is working on the NorduGrid executor.
The goal of this project is to have a common ATLAS production system for
DC2, which starts April 1, 2004. More information at
http://www-hep.uta.edu/windmill.

### WBS 2.3.5.1 Grid Production - Software Acceptance {#wbs-2.3.5.1-grid-production---software-acceptance .unnumbered}

New releases of the Chimera based reconstruction were produced and
tested by the UC and ANL groups. Yuri Fisyak from BNL started working
with the GCE group to make the transition from farm based production to
grid based production.

### WBS 2.3.5.2 Grid Production - Deployment of Software & Services {#wbs-2.3.5.2-grid-production---deployment-of-software-services .unnumbered}

New ATHENA releases were installed and tested. The Pacman packages of
ATLAS software for versions 6.0.3 and 6.0.5 were installed at many Grid
Testbed sites.

The U.S. Grid Testbed was successfully migrated to the Grid3 software,
including newer version of VDT 1.1.9. All old ATLAS installations from
summer 2002 and WorldGrid software were removed/updated. This was a
major task involving all 11 Testbed sites.

### WBS 2.3.5.3 Grid Production - Validation and Hardening {#wbs-2.3.5.3-grid-production---validation-and-hardening .unnumbered}

Grid Testbed system and services were fine tuned after the deployment of
new Pacman software packages.

### WBS 2.3.5.4 Grid Production - Operations {#wbs-2.3.5.4-grid-production---operations .unnumbered}

1.  Completed reconstruction of the 6000 file, 1 million events, 25 GeV
    jet sample for the HLT group. 3400 of these were done in the U.S.
    The remainder was farmed to 10 other sites in Europe, coordinated by
    the U.S., in order to finish the massive production in time for the
    HLT TDR. Among the 3400 files reconstructed in the U.S., 800 were
    generated with the new Chimera based GCE grid system. The remainder
    were done on the BNL farm system.

2.  Completed low luminosity min-bias pile-up of the 1200 file, half
    million events, 55 GeV jet sample. All of the production was done on
    the Grid Testbed. All the files (actually 4800 files including log
    files and replicas) were registered to magda and transferred to CERN
    upon completion. As usual, a major task was verification and
    validation of replicas.

3.  Completed reconstruction of the half million events 55 GeV jet
    sample. 383 of the files were processed in the BNL farm. 777 files
    were processed using the Chimera based system on the Grid Testbed.
    During this production, we made good use of the ANL JAZZ facility
    for the first time as part of the Grid Testbed.

4.  Continued other lower priority production requests.

# Financial Report (Computing Program Office, BNL)

##  {#section-13 .unnumbered}

**Financial Summary**

The total amount of funding for the US ATLAS Computing Program reached
\$10,907,000 dollars during Fiscal Year 2003. The Project is supported
by two funding agencies.

DOE program funding includes allocations from Fiscal Year 2000 through
2003, in the amount of \$8,357,000.

NSF funding through Fiscal Year 2003 totals 2,550,000.

### Table 1. Total Costs and Commitments to Date {#table-1.-total-costs-and-commitments-to-date .unnumbered}

![](media/image4.wmf){width="5.997916666666667in"
height="3.859027777777778in"}

###  {#section-14 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-15 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-16 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-17 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-18 .unnumbered}

### Table 2. Summary of Agency Funding Profile {#table-2.-summary-of-agency-funding-profile .unnumbered}

![](media/image5.wmf){width="4.716666666666667in"
height="1.0729166666666667in"}

###  {#section-19 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-20 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-21 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-22 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-23 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-24 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-25 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-26 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-27 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-28 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-29 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-30 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-31 .unnumbered}

### ![](media/image6.wmf){width="6.5in" height="2.5694444444444446in"}Table 3. Summary of Allocations of Funding by Institutions {#table-3.-summary-of-allocations-of-funding-by-institutions .unnumbered}