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

U.S. ATLAS PROJECT OFFICE

**Physics Department**

**UPTON, NEW YORK 11973**

19 November 2003

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 Q3 2003

Dear Sirs:

Attached please find Quarterly Status Report Q3 2003 for the U.S. ATLAS
Physics and Computing Project for the period April-June 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.

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

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

**REPORTING PERIOD**

##### Q3 2003 {#q3-2003 .unnumbered}

**April-June, 2003**

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

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

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

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

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

[WBS 2.2.1 Software Coordination 8](#wbs-2.2.1-software-coordination)

[WBS 2.2.2 Core Services (David Quarrie)
9](#wbs-2.2.2-core-services-david-quarrie)

[WBS 2.2.2.1 Framework 9](#wbs-2.2.2.1-framework)

[WBS 2.2.2.2 EDM Infrastructure 10](#wbs-2.2.2.2-edm-infrastructure)

[WBS 2.2.2.3 Detector Description Infrastructure
10](#wbs-2.2.2.3-detector-description-infrastructure)

[WBS 2.2.2.4 Graphics 11](#wbs-2.2.2.4-graphics)

[WBS 2.2.2.5 Analysis Tools 11](#wbs-2.2.2.5-analysis-tools)

[WBS 2.2.2.6 Grid Integration 11](#wbs-2.2.2.6-grid-integration)

[WBS 2.2.3 Data Management (David Malon)
11](#wbs-2.2.3-data-management-david-malon)

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

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

[WBS 2.2.3.3 Event store (Adams) 12](#wbs-2.2.3.3-event-store-adams)

[WBS 2.2.3.4 Detector data management (Vaniachine, Eckmann)
13](#wbs-2.2.3.4-detector-data-management-vaniachine-eckmann)

[WBS 2.2.3.5 Collections, catalogs, and metadata (Eckmann)
13](#wbs-2.2.3.5-collections-catalogs-and-metadata-eckmann)

[WBS 2.2.4 Application Software (Fred Luehring)
14](#wbs-2.2.4-application-software-fred-luehring)

[WBS 2.2.4.1 Simulation 14](#wbs-2.2.4.1-simulation)

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

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

[WBS 2.2.4.4 Analysis 17](#wbs-2.2.4.4-analysis)

[WBS 2.2.4.5 Trigger 18](#wbs-2.2.4.5-trigger)

[WBS 2.2.4.6 Combined Testbeam 18](#wbs-2.2.4.6-combined-testbeam)

[WBS 2.2.5 Software Support (Alexander Undrus)
19](#wbs-2.2.5-software-support-alexander-undrus)

[4. WBS 2.3 U.S. ATLAS Facility Manager's Report (B. Gibbard, R. Baker,
BNL)
20](#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
20](#wbs-2.3.1-tier-1-computing-facility-at-brookhaven-national-laboratory)

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

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

[WBS 2.3.1.3 Tier 1 Linux Systems 21](#wbs-2.3.1.3-tier-1-linux-systems)

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

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

[WBS 2.3.1.6 Tier 1 Operations 21](#wbs-2.3.1.6-tier-1-operations)

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

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

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

[WBS 2.3.2.1 IU/UC Tier 2 22](#wbs-2.3.2.1-iuuc-tier-2)

[WBS 2.3.2.2 BU Tier 2 22](#wbs-2.3.2.2-bu-tier-2)

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

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

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

[Summary of Major Milestones and Deliverables
24](#summary-of-major-milestones-and-deliverables-2)

[Forthcoming Milestones and Deliverables
24](#forthcoming-milestones-and-deliverables-2)

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

[Overview 25](#overview)

[WBS 2.3.4.1 Infrastructure 25](#wbs-2.3.4.1-infrastructure)

[WBS 2.3.4.2 Workflow Services 26](#wbs-2.3.4.2-workflow-services)

[WBS 2.3.4.3 Data Services 27](#wbs-2.3.4.3-data-services)

[WBS 2.3.4.4 Monitoring Services 28](#wbs-2.3.4.4-monitoring-services)

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

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

[WBS 2.3.5 Grid Production 31](#wbs-2.3.5-grid-production)

[Overview 31](#overview-1)

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

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

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

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

[5. Financial Report: April-June 2003 (Computing Program Office, BNL)
33](#financial-report-april-june-2003-computing-program-office-bnl)

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

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

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

#   {#section .unnumbered}

# 

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

The main software activities in this quarter were the push to get a
persistency service working in Athena and many developments in the Grid
Tools and Services (GTS) area in preparation for our Pre-DC2 production
exercise. The Athena persistency work was in the context of the LCG POOL
and SEAL projects, which will be used by the ATLAS framework software
for persistency. The Pre-DC2 exercise will prepare the US grid
facilities for the real Data Challenge 2 (DC2) in April 2004. The
highlights of Pre-DC2 will be shown at the SuperComputing 2003 meeting
in November, 2003. The aim is to have a fully interoperating grid
demonstration. This will involve grid facilities from US CMS, LIGO,
SDSS, among others, all interoperating in the sense that any
organization can transparently use facilities from any other
organization.

The new US WBS structure, fully in place last quarter, is now allowing
us to guide and track the project towards our major milestones (the
Pre-DC2 exercise and DC2, e.g.). The LCG POOL release has been delayed
largely due to compatibility issues between the ATLAS software build
system and the LCG system. This is becoming a critical path item for our
ATLAS DC2 and we are pushing where we can to put more (non-US) effort
into this to make sure it is on track. The schedule for the GTS products
needed for Pre-DC2 is tight, but is still on track.

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

Release 6.0.0 included the code necessary for the Athens physics
workshop including the new GenAnalsysisTools package that contains code
to assist users in navigation through the MonteCarlo Truth for G3. (WBS
2.1.1.19). A new random number service was introduced to allow the
control and duplication of the random number  states of the event
generators. (WBS 2.1.1.7)  Code was migrated to the new gcc compiler
following release 6.0.0. In preparation for DC2 a new version of Pythia
(6.217) was made available in atlas release 6.2.0. Both it and the old
version will be retained until testing and validation is complete in the
fall of 2003. (WBS 2.1.1.3). A new version of Tauola and Photos was made
available in atlas release 6.4.0; This version is fully compliant with
Herwig and Pythia (WBS 2.1.1.10 and 2.1.1.11).  The LHAPDF structure
function package was brought into the releases (6.1.0) and integrated
with Herwig for testing. This package is expected to replace the old
pdflib package that is no longer being maintained. Validation of LHAPDF
is underway. The particle properties service from HepMC has been
replaced with a new Athena service using the CLHEP HepPDT package
(release 6.3.0).

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

Details of the U.S. ATLAS software contributions during the third
quarter of FY03 are described below. The U.S. continues to play a
leading role in the ATLAS computing and participating in the LHC
Computing and Grid (LCG) project, which is intended to 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-2 .unnumbered}

David Quarrie is the ATLAS Software Project Coordinator and reports to
Dario Barberis (ATLAS Computing Coordinator) in ATLAS. David's
responsibilities include coordination of software activities in
infrastructure support, core software components, Simulation and
Reconstruction software. David sits in several committees including the
ATLAS Computing Oversight Board, the Computing Management Board and
chairs the ATLAS Software Project Management Board. His current term
expires February 2005.

David Malon (ANL) is the ATLAS database coordinator and reports to David
Quarrie in ATLAS. His current term expires on September 2003. He is in
charge of the overall planning and architecture of the ATLAS database
management system.

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

###  {#section-3 .unnumbered}

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

The main focus of Core activities has been the port of the Athena/Gaudi
framework and related services to the new compiler: gcc 3.2. This has
driven both Gaudi release 12 and the Atlas release cycle 6 (releases
6.1.0 to 6.3.0). The port was dictated by the LCG decision of not
providing gcc 2.95 builds of SEAL and POOL software (that we need for
our coming persistency milestones) and, to a lesser extent, by the
desire to use a faster and more standard-compliant compiler. The port
turned out to be more challenging than expected due to the way Gaudi
loads dynamic libraries (it keeps all symbols local to avoid some known
name clashes in external libraries). This unfortunately makes the RTTI
scheme used by gcc 3 unreliable. A temporary workaround has been found
for Gaudi release 12 while we work towards removing the name clashes (P.
Calafiura).

Many of the new features in Gaudi release 12 were provided by U.S. Atlas
developers:

-   Major re-write of GaudiPython. Changes introduced to convert the
    package to new version of Boost.Python 2.0. Added the capability of
    setting/getting properties of Algorithms and Services before they
    are created by the Application Manager\
    (W. Lavrijsen)

-   Added ability to read H1D, H2D, H1DVar histograms from ROOT files.
    (C. Leggett)

-   Added ability to read CWNT from ROOT files. (C. Leggett)

-   Integrated changes from the Atlas trigger group to support
    event-level multi-threading (P. Calafiura)

LCG SEAL plugin manager has been released as part of SEAL release 0.2
(M. Marino)

The Pileup framework has been tested using multiple detectors (Pixel and
LAr) and multiple persistency services (Zebra and Root). Several logical
errors have been fixed, and the modularity and usability of the pileup
framework improved. (P. Calafiura)

The python-based Athena Startup Kit AthASK has been developed to became
not only a tour for end-users, but also for developers and librarians,
automating tedious jobs such us cmt requirement file updates, changing
release and platform for builds. (W. Lavrijsen)

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

StoreGate Service, the client EDM access API, has been extended to allow
forcing the read of a given data object at the beginning of an event (by
default the object is only read from disk when a client algorithm
accesses it). This improved a lot the modularity of the Pileup code. (P.
Calafiura)

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

The major third-quarter activities of the detector description effort
were to deploy the existing geometry kernel in the context of a single
detector subsystem and to have it declared to simulation. The muon
subsystem was originally chosen and fully described in terms of the
geometry kernel. At the same time, work was started on other subsystems:
notably the pixels, silicon tracker, and transition radiation detector
of the inner detector. A converter allowing the system to be declared to
the simulation engine (Geant 4) was prototyped using the SCT system.
This done, work on developing the description of the entire detector in
terms of the geometry kernel began. This work includes synching the
readout geometry to the raw geometry, which is the most difficult task
actually because a large amount of existing code is written to existing
readout geometry interfaces. We are proceeding to complete the task of
describing the entire Atlas detector --in several versions designed to
match existing versioned code\--and aim to close this loop by December
in order to be ready for DC2 next year.

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

No U.S. ATLAS involvement during this quarter

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

A new tool, PyRoot, has been integrated in SEAL developers' release 0.2.
This allows accessing Root objects from python and vice versa. This is
an important step towards the long-term goal to access Atlas data
objects from the python prompt and to analyze them using the Root tools
(W. Lavrijsen).

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

No U.S. ATLAS involvement this quarter.

## WBS 2.2.3 Data Management (David Malon) {#wbs-2.2.3-data-management-david-malon .unnumbered}

###  {#section-4 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-5 .unnumbered}

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

The U.S. leads the ATLAS offline database servers and services working
group, and continues to be responsible for support of the ATLAS MySQL
database prototyping server, as well as for configuration and management
of MySQL services for the LHC-wide persistence project, LCG POOL. In the
current reporting period, this work further involved porting of an
additional C++/MySQL interface package, mysql++, to a new compiler, and
addition of a web server interface to conditions databases.

Database support for Data Challenge 1 and trigger TDR production was an
important focus during this reporting period, with many short-term but
urgent support activities undertaken to ensure the success of the
effort. Prominent among these was the successful deployment of solutions
that allowed access to database-resident data from grid compute elements
behind firewalls, a feature that the data challenge organizers had said
would not be needed when data challenge plans were developed.

Replication support for the ATLAS Tag Collector database was developed
and deployed jointly by the U.S. and Grenoble groups.

### 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}

The major U.S. focus was development of an AthenaPOOL conversion service
prototype to support persistence for ATLAS applications using the
LHC-wide common persistence project (LCG POOL) software. Because the
build environments, environment variables and switches, and library and
component loading are all handled differently by ATLAS offline software
and POOL, there have been many short-term but difficult technical
obstacles to overcome, but a prototype service was nonetheless delivered
by the U.S. group by the end of the reporting period. The LCG components
continue to evolve, so it is likely that this work will have to be
redone, perhaps several times, before integration can be declared
complete.

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

Use of the U.S.-developed prototype AthenaPOOL conversion service was
demonstrated in this period, with a new AthenaPOOL event selector
service, and elementary examples to write and read simple "events"
to/from POOL.

Requirements were specified and some preliminary design work done to
specify what an ATLAS event store based upon POOL components must
support in order to enable integration with distributed analysis tools
such as those under development by the PPDG-funded DIAL effort.

A straw man model for Tier 0 reconstruction, and a corresponding Data
Challenge 2 event store model, was developed by a U.S.-led team. This
model will be presented at the next ATLAS data challenge meeting in
July.

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

The U.S. continues to be responsible for development and maintenance of
the ATLAS primary numbers database and the underlying technology, NOVA.
Substantial content additions, including liquid argon calorimeter
sagging parameters and tile calorimeter data in support of test beam,
were made. NOVA libraries were upgraded to support the muon system's
hierarchical organization of parameters. At the request of the ATLAS
detector description group, a design for material services support in
NOVA was begun.

Prototype support for externalizing references to NOVA-resident data,
required for use of NOVA via the ATLAS interval-of-validity service, was
also delivered.

On the infrastructure side, a major focus was incorporation of primary
numbers database updates into the nightly software build process, and
automatic generation of headers and converters as part of the build
process. Porting to a new operating system version and compiler was
another component of the infrastructure work.

### WBS 2.2.3.5 Collections, catalogs, and metadata (Eckmann) {#wbs-2.2.3.5-collections-catalogs-and-metadata-eckmann .unnumbered}

A new member of the U.S. ATLAS computing project, Kristo Karr, has taken
over the work of Steve Eckmann, who has left the project.

The LCG POOL collections work package, for which the U.S. is principally
responsible, was successfully deployed in a series of releases leading
up to a production POOL release (1.1.0) at the end of this reporting
period.

The principal development focus was not new functionality, but rather
unification of approaches across work packages, integration of SEAL
components, unit tests conformant to the LCG testing framework,
integration tests, and documentation

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

###  {#section-6 .unnumbered}

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

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.

D. Costanzo (LBL) worked on the simulation of the pixels in GEANT4 and
worked on code maintenance. He also developed the C++ digitization
package which will be used both the pixels and SCT. Costanzo also
started work on the detector description of the pixel geometry using the
GeoModel system and worked on the readout geometry description. Costanzo
is the ATLAS-wide digitization coordinator.

F. Luehring (IU) maintained the TRT GEANT3 simulation. He also
coordinated work on the GEANT4 TRT simulation. Luehring is the TRT
software coordinator.

W. Seligman (Nevis) worked on the LAr GEANT4 simulation, in particular
on the use of GeoModel within the LAr GEANT4 simulation. Seligman also
worked on introducing sagging parameters into the simulation of the LAr
barrel. Seligman modified the LAr simulation so that it is compliant
with the gcc-3.2 compiler. M. Leltchouk tested the LAr GEANT4 simulation
code and coordinated simulation of the LAr end-cap. Leltchouk also
worked on a database to allow the standalone running of the LAr GEANT4
code without using external databases. Leltchouk serves as the LAr
simulation coordinator.

P. Loch (AZ) worked on implementing the G4 simulated hits for the
Forward Calorimeter.

E. Barberio (SMU) worked on a fast parameterization of the
electromagnetic showers in the LAr calorimeter. This work will allow a
substantial reduction (factor of 10-100) in the time it takes to
simulate showers in the LAr GEANT4 simulation.

F. Merrit (UC) extended the code to produce Tile Trigger Towers for
Level-1 simulation during the second quarter.

S. Goldfarb (Michigan) worked on the GeoModel description of the muon
system and it's use in simulation. Goldfarb is responsible for the
coordination of much of the core software of the Muon Spectrometer,
including the development and integration of the Detector Description,
Event Data Model (EDM), the Identifier scheme, and maintenance of the
associated persistence classes and schema.

M. Shupe (Arizona) is the major responsible for simulation of the
radiation backgrounds in the ATLAS cavern. He is a member of the
Radiation Task Force and is worked on writing the final report of the
task force. Much of the code for simulating the ATLAS radiation
backgrounds was writing by Shupe.

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

No work this quarter on pixel, TRT, or combined inner detector subsystem
specific reconstruction. D. Costanzo (LBL) is coordinator for the pixel
activity in this area. F. Luehring (IU) is the coordinator for the TRT
activity in this area.

P. Loch (Arizona) is the coordinator for the LAr subsystem specific
reconstruction. Loch worked on the first implementation of a software
object navigation system, which allows retrieval of specific
constituents from complex composite (possibly generic) reconstruction
objects like jets in a very client-friendly way. The original design for
this software package was developed in collaboration with S. Rajagopalan
and H. Ma (both BNL). This is now in use for the Jet Reconstruction.
Loch is currently generalizing it to provide the generic architecture
for navigating any composite object in ATLAS.

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. S. Rajagopalan also serves as a member of the ATLAS
Reconstruction Task Force.

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.

F. Merritt (UC) supervised the complete development of the Event Data
Model (EDM) and algorithms for tracing the Tile electronics signal
through the various stages of the reconstruction process. F. Merritt and
A. Gupta (UC) worked on the tile calorimeter subsystem specific
reconstruction. Merritt worked with an undergrad (Adam Aurisano) on
optimal filtering (extracting the in-time signal in the presence of
pile-up background).

J. Shank (BU) served as the overall Muon Software coordinator. He has
resigned this post to take on responsibilities as the US ATLAS Computing
Coordinator.

K. Assamagan(BNL) is involved in the software for the Muon sub-system.
He has provided data converters to pack and unpack Muon data, software
for identification of Muon readout channels. He is currently working on
Muon Digitization software making.

S. Goldfarb (Michigan) edited the ATLAS note entitled ATL-SOFT-2003-007
\"Track reconstruction in the ATLAS Muon Spectrometer with MOORE\".
Goldfarb has now been elected as the overall Muon software coordinator
replacing Shank.

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

Frank Paige has been involved in the calibration of the Jet
Reconstruction. He has implemented the first version of an H1 based
calibration approach in ATLAS which distinguishes EM showers from
Hadronic showers at the cell level. This method has been shown to be
more effective than the traditional sampling based calibration for jets.
Paige is working on optimizing this calibration.

F. Merrit and A. Gupta (Chicago), P. Loch (Arizona) and S. Rajagopalan
(BNL) attended a series of meetings in Barcelona and at CERN on
developing the combined (EM and hadronic calorimeter) energy calibration
algorithm for hadrons. This work is part of the ATLAS Jet/E~T~/E~Miss~
group effort.

A. Gupta is the package coordinator for JetRec, and has written much of
the basic code for jet-finding. He has also worked on jet energy
resolution with M. Oreglia and an undergraduate at U.C. who wrote his
senior thesis on this during the second quarter.

F. Merritt and A. Gupta have been involved in a series of meetings and
workshops through the JetEtMiss group to address specific
recommendations of the reconstruction task force (RTF), and to develop a
calibration plan for hadronic energy. The plan combines information from
the LAr and tile calorimeters. P. Loch (Arizona) was also heavily
involved in these discussions.

C. Brock and B, Gonzalez-Pineiro (MSU) made substantial contributions to
the Physics TDR in studies of "Single Top". Gonzalez-Pineiro and M.
Abolins also worked on Monte Carlo studies of production and detection
of tau\'s in the ATLAS calorimeter.

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

L. Karhif (Harvard) used the Distributed Interactive Analysis Framework
(DIAL), developed by D. Adams at BNL to do Muon analysis in a
distributed environment.

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

F. Merrit and A. Gupta (Chicago) extended the code to produce
TileTriggerTowers for level-1 simulation.

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

R. Hauser (MSU) has been actively involved in producing the software
used for Data Flow from the Read Out System (ROS) to Level 2 and the
Event Filter. This software was used for all performance measurements
documented in the High Level Trigger Technical Design Report.

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

M. Leltchouk and W. Seligman discussed the structure for the GEANT4
testbeam code in the ATLAS CVS repository and then created the package
LArCalorimeter/LArG4TB. LarG4TB incorporated E. Barberio\'s (SMU) fast
shower parameterization and GeoModel into the LAr GEANT4 testbeam code.

In April, the Arizona group started the coding of the monitoring and
reconstruction software for the Forward Calorimeter testbeam, which took
place from mid-June to mid-July 2003. P. Loch provided the
reconstruction codes for the calorimeter and other detectors in the beam
line within ATHENA, while J. Rutherfoord, A. Savine, and M. Shupe
produced a standalone monitoring program that included an event display
and quick histogramming abilities.

S. Goldfarb (Michigan) worked on a pilot project for the Atlas Database
Group, in coordination with the LCG, to take conditions data from the
Muon H8 test beam, to store that data in POOL (An LCG provided
persistency service), and to register the data with the Interval of
Validity (IOV) Service (a MYSQL database carrying relevant metadata
information).

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

The ATLAS nightly build facilities at CERN and BNL were monitored and
improved. The new compiler, gcc-3.2, was tested with special branch of
nightly builds. This allowed pre-identifying compiler associated
software problems and a subsequent smooth migration to the new version
of the compiler.

Alex Undrus (U.S. ATLAS software librarian) actively served in ATLAS
software infrastructure and testing (SIT) team. He worked on software
release management, quality assurance and testing. The nightly control
system tool, NICOS, developed for ATLAS nightly builds was applied for
builds of LHC Computing Grid (LCG) Project at CERN. Integration of POOL,
one of LCG projects, and NICOS has been achieved and POOL nightly builds
were regular and successful by the end of the second quarter.

In cooperation with the U.S. ATLAS Computing Facility (ACF) staff, the
upgrade of operating system to Red Hat 7.3 in the Tier I Linux Farm
nodes was successfully performed in April, 2003.

The ATLAS software, released every three weeks, was promptly installed
at the BNL Tier I Center, usually in one to three days after CERN
installation. The BNL software support page is updated in a timely way.
In addition, LCG software was installed and regularly updated. External
LCG and other software are also regularly kept up to date at the Tier 1
Facility.

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)

Overview

During the third quarter of FY '03, the main activity under the facility
project was the continuing execution of ATLAS Data Challenge 1. Most of
the effort at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 facilities was focused on supporting
the successful execution of this Data Challenge. In parallel, efforts
were begun to prepare for the next phase of operations leading up to
ATLAS Data Challenge 2 in FY '04.

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

###  {#section-7 .unnumbered}

During the third quarter of FY '03, Tier 1 facility staffing was
maintained at the level of 4.5 FTE on project. The focus of Tier 1
activity during the third quarter was the continuing production of
simulated data as part of Data Challenge 1 Phase 2 production and the
beginning of the analysis effort on that data.

### 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 third 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.

### 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 used heavily during the quarter for ATLAS Data
Challenge activities, and most of the effort in this WBS area was
dedicated to maintaining and optimizing the environment (particularly
batch queues) needed to support this effort. The emphasis was on stable,
high-reliability operation.

.

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

###  {#section-8 .unnumbered}

During the quarter, both the disk and tape storage systems were heavily
used to handle the large volume of data produced by ATLAS Data Challenge
1, Phase 2. The storage systems performed extremely well and were a key
factor in the success of the Data Challenge. The primary 10 TB disk
cache was reconfigured as required to enable efficient Grid operation
via MAGDA.

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

###  {#section-9 .unnumbered}

The major effort in this area during the quarter was to support the Data
Challenge, which relied heavily on Grid protocols and services. This
included frequent updates of the local Grid configuration to accommodate
the demands of the Data Challenge.

During the third quarter, the LCG Pilot was successfully deployed at the
Tier 1 center.

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

###  {#section-10 .unnumbered}

This item focuses primarily on Facility support and monitoring. During
the quarter, this effort was focused on the demands of ATLAS Data
Challenge.

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

During the quarter, the Tier 1 facility played the central role in the
execution of ATLAS Data Challenge 1 which is an important project
milestone.

The first "Pilot" release of the LCG (LHC Computing Grid) was
successfully deployed at the Tier 1 center during the third quarter.

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

The first full release of the LCG is expected early in the fourth
quarter and this release will be deployed at the Tier 1 center as soon
as possible.

The next major facility hardware upgrade is planned to begin in early FY
'04 in preparation for ATLAS DC 2.

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}

### WBS 2.3.2.1 IU/UC Tier 2 {#wbs-2.3.2.1-iuuc-tier-2 .unnumbered}

The Indiana University Tier 2 facility is in the process of technology
evaluation and planning for a major upgrade of their current Pentium II
based facilities. Indiana's new Tier 2 facility will be purchased and
managed in collaboration with the NSF funded AVIDD research center. The
AVIDD facility has 192 dual-CPU nodes with 2.4 GHz Xeon CPUs an 2 GB of
ram per dual node. Fiber channel SCSI disks are used for storage and
Myrinet is used internally to connect disks and CPUs. Connectivity to
the outside world is 1 Gb/sec for all nodes. The Tier 2 center will
purchase an additional 1.5 TB of fiber channel disks in exchange for
preemptive scheduling on 64 of the CPUs and non-preemptive use of the
remaining facility.

### WBS 2.3.2.2 BU Tier 2 {#wbs-2.3.2.2-bu-tier-2 .unnumbered}

The 64 node Pentium III Tier 2 facility at Boston University was used
extensively for DC1 production during this quarter. Both Boston and
Chicago have begun technology investigation and planning for major
upgrades timed to be ready for the next major production push: DC2,
expected to begin in early 2004.

##  {#section-11 .unnumbered}

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

There were no major milestones for WBS 2.3.2 during the third quarter.

##  {#section-12 .unnumbered}

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

The major milestone: IU Fabric upgrade scheduled for 7/1/2003 is
expected to be completed within a few weeks.

## 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 was twofold:
participation in the DoE Science Networking Roadmap Workshop in June
(see this URL for the draft report:
<http://gate.hep.anl.gov/lprice/Roadmap/index.html> ) and a new activity
as Chair of the Internet2 End-to-End(E2E) Technical Advisory Group
(TAG). The roadmap effort is significant because it outlines the needed
network capacities, capabilities and services thru 2008 (overlapping LHC
turn-on). 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 Q2, continues.

Looking ahead to Q4, work is underway to define and develop some network
monitoring, diagnosis and tuning packages as Pacman caches. Through the
efforts of the HENP I2 working group(Caltech and Michigan) a Java
web-applet is being developed to allow network performance measurement
data to be easily acquired along with relevant host information for use
in diagnosing network problems. The intent is to integrate this with the
Internet2 E2E work. In addition, some existing software utilities are
being examined for possible deployment to the US ATLAS grid testbed to
help support network measurement and diagnosis in our grid environment.
The updated milestone for this is September 30, 2003.

## Summary of Major Milestones and Deliverables {#summary-of-major-milestones-and-deliverables-2 .unnumbered}

There were no major milestones for WBS 2.3.3 during the third quarter.

## Forthcoming Milestones and Deliverables {#forthcoming-milestones-and-deliverables-2 .unnumbered}

There is one minor milestone for WBS 2.3.3 scheduled for completion
during the fourth quarter: "Tool testing for network monitoring and
diagnoses" scheduled for completion by September 30. This task should be
completed on schedule.

The projected October 31 major milestone: "Alpha version host network
diagnostics deployed" is expected to be completed on or close to
schedule.

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

###  {#section-13 .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}

Anticipating new needs in upcoming iVDGL Grid and LCG grids, planning,
design work and rapid prototyping has begun at Boston University for a
major new release of Pacman. Important new features of this design
include multi-location, multi-site and multi-user installations, 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.

Work has begun (mainly by Christian Arnault and Simon George) on an
automatic mechanism for producing Pacman caches from a CMT broadcast
command. This would allow Atlas releases to be freely combined with
Pacman installed software providing a useful mechanism both for grid and
non-grid users.

#### VO Management {#vo-management .unnumbered}

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

A formal paper describing the Grid User Management System was submitted
for the proceedings of the CHEP'03 conference. Some development work
continued on this project in support of the relatively limited user
community.

#### 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}

My work during this quarter provided Atlas with PPDG hands-on
cross-disciplinary support in the areas of data management and
production grid systems. It also supported cross-collaboration with
other grid efforts; specifically Grid3/2003. Specific achievements in
the past quarter were:

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.

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

Magda development has been frozen pending more information about RLS
interoperability.

#### 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.

### 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}

#### 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. These in
support of PreDC2 activities.

####  {#section-14 .unnumbered}

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

Version 0.3.2 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/

#### 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.

###  {#section-15 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-16 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-17 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-18 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-19 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-20 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-21 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-22 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-23 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-24 .unnumbered}

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

###  {#section-25 .unnumbered}

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

This level three WBS item was added during the recent reorganization of
the facilities WBS. Since data challenge production has become an
important computing activity in ATLAS, we were motivated to organize the
U.S. activities and deliverables into a single structure, collecting
together items from many level 2 tasks.

WBS 2.3.5 for grid production was developed from the bottoms up, based
on our experience of participating in data challenge production for the
past year, while also noting the need for less organized production
activities in the near future in support of distributed data analyses.

During this quarter, the U.S. ATLAS facilities continued to play a major
role in the first ATLAS Data Challenge (DC1) production. Large samples
of events were processed for pile-up and reconstruction using ATLSIM.
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.

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

This task, acceptance and testing of software developed for grid based
production, will be the primary interface between the GTS (WBS 2.3.4)
and the Grid Production (WBS 2.3.5) tasks.

A new release of the Chimera based reconstruction was tested by the UC
and ANL groups. This software will be used for DC1 grid based
reconstruction.

### 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 in support of DC1
production. The UC team produced Pacman packages of ATLAS software for
versions 6.0.3 and 6.0.5.

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

Improvements were made to MAGDA and GRAT based on the production
experience on the Grid Testbed. Better error detection and correction
algorithms were implemented.

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

1.  Completed production of the 6000 file 25-GeV jet high luminosity
    pile-up sample for the High Level Trigger (HLT) TDR. This major
    production task was mostly done in the previous quarter. In the
    third quarter, we finished a few hundred remaining partitions,
    performed QC and validation of the generated files, and regenerated
    a few hundred failed jobs. The lack of an automatic data management
    tool was once again felt keenly! Many incorrect size replicas were
    found and had to be cleaned up by hand. All replicas of the 12,000
    generated files (numbering almost 30,000) were checked and
    validated.

2.  Started reconstruction of the 6000 file sample. About 400 of these
    jobs were completed at BNL using the ATLAS Tier 1 farm system. We
    are successfully processing only 200-300 jobs per week, which will
    make it impossible to complete the 6000 file sample in 2-3 weeks, in
    time for the HLT TDR. We are discussing the possibility of
    distributing the sample to other ATLAS sites.

3.  Completed the pile-up generation of the 1000 file low luminosity
    Higgs sample (dataset 2328).

4.  Continued other lower priority production requests.

5.  During this quarter, we continued to heavily use the BNL Tier 1
    farm, and the prototype Tier 2 sites at BU and IU. LBNL continued to
    play a major role through pdsf. Other sites at UTA, OU and SMU were
    also used. The Grid Testbed provided the infrastructure for grid
    based production. The 10TB disk space was configured as 10 disk
    vaults, heavily used and accessed through MAGDA.

#  Financial Report: April-June 2003 (Computing Program Office, BNL)

**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
the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2003, in the amount of \$8,357,000.

NSF funding through the third quarter of Fiscal Year 2003 totals
2,550,000.

###  {#section-26 .unnumbered}

### 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-27 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-28 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-29 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-30 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-31 .unnumbered}

###  {#section-32 .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-33 .unnumbered}

### Table 3. Summary of Allocations of Funding by Institutions {#table-3.-summary-of-allocations-of-funding-by-institutions .unnumbered}

![](media/image6.wmf){width="5.997916666666667in"
height="2.370833333333333in"}