--------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ---------------------------
  ![](media/image1.emf){width="0.875in"   **Fermilab**                     
  height="0.8194444444444444in"}                                           

  --------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ---------------------------

**MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING**

**Between the**

**MINOS Experiment and the Computing Division**

April 2004

[INTRODUCTION 3](#introduction)

[I. PERSONNEL AND INSTITUTIONS 3](#i.-personnel-and-institutions)

[II. Fermilab Computing Division 3](#ii.-fermilab-computing-division)

[III. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4](#iii.-special-considerations)

[IV. SIGNATURES 5](#iv.-signatures)

[V. NETWORKING SUPPORT 6](#v.-networking-support)

[VI. OFFLINE COMPUTING 7](#vi.-offline-computing)

[OVERVIEW 7](#overview)

[MINOS 5 YEAR RUN PLAN 8](#minos-5-year-run-plan)

[EVENT RECONSTRUCTION AND STORAGE 10](#event-reconstruction-and-storage)

[MONTE CARLO GENERATION AND STORAGE
14](#monte-carlo-generation-and-storage)

[DATA HANDLING AND STORAGE 17](#data-handling-and-storage)

[OFFLINE ANALYSIS 19](#offline-analysis)

[DATABASE 21](#database)

[SUMMARY 22](#summary)

#  {#section .unnumbered}

# 

# INTRODUCTION

This is a memorandum of understanding between the Fermi National
Accelerator Laboratory Computing Division and the experimenters of MINOS
(E-875). The memorandum is intended solely for the purpose of providing
a budget estimate and a work allocation for Fermilab, the funding
agencies and the participating institutions. It reflects an arrangement
that currently is satisfactory to the parties; however, it is recognized
and anticipated that changing circumstances of the evolving research
program will necessitate revisions. The parties agree to negotiate
amendments to this memorandum that will reflect such required
adjustments.

# I. PERSONNEL AND INSTITUTIONS

Co-spokesperson: S. Wojcicki

Co-spokesperson: D. Michael

Deputy Spokesperson: D. Ayres

MINOS Project Manager: G. Rameika

Relevant MINOS System Managers:

Offline Computing J. Urheim, Indiana

Front-End Electronics J. Thron, Argonne

(Institutions: Harvard, Oxford, Argonne, Fermilab)

Trigger and DAQ System G. Pearce, RAL

(Institutions: RAL)

Database P. Border, Minnesota

(Institutions: Minnesota, IHEP-Protvino)

Detector Control System M. Marshak, Minnesota

(Institutions: Wisconsin, Minnesota)

PREP Electronics E. Buckley-Geer

(Institutions: Texas A&M, Fermilab)

Computing at Soudan Lab: D. Saranen, J. Meier

(Institutions: Soudan Mine/Minnesota)

# II. Fermilab Computing Division 

1.  The Computing Division liaison is E. Buckley-Geer.

2.  The off-line analysis plan in Section VI contains the experiment\'s
    present understanding of its offline needs for data storage, event
    reconstruction, data analysis and Monte Carlo generation. The
    Computing Division cannot guarantee, at this time, that these
    resources can be made available. The Computing Division, guided by
    priorities set by management, will attempt to allocate on a
    quarterly basis, the available resources. The present request and
    amendments will be used in attempting to plan the laboratory\'s
    computing acquisition strategies.

3.  A plan for NuMI Beam Monitoring DAQ system is currently being
    developed. MINOS will submit an amendment as Appendix VIII, as the
    design and plans are being finalized.

4.  Cost Accounting FY04 and beyond: The Fermilab Computing will
    maintain tasks specific to the MINOS experiment, and all MINOS
    associated expenditures will be charged to those tasks.

# III. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

1.  For the purpose of estimating budgets, specific products and vendors
    may be mentioned within this memorandum. At the time of purchasing,
    the Fermilab procurement policies shall apply. This may result in
    the purchase of different products and/or from different vendors.

2.  The experiment co-spokespersons will undertake to ensure that no
    PREP and computing equipment will be transferred from the experiment
    to another use except with the approval of and through the mechanism
    provided by the Computing Division management. He/she also
    undertakes to ensure that no modifications of PREP equipment take
    place without the knowledge and consent of the Computing Division
    management.

3.  Each institution will be responsible for maintaining and repairing
    both the electronics and the computing hardware supplied by them for
    the experiment. Any items for which the experiment requests that
    Fermilab performs maintenance and repair should appear explicitly in
    this agreement.

4.  At the completion of the experiment: The co-spokespersons are
    responsible for the return of all PREP, equipment, Computing
    equipment and non-PREP data acquisition electronics. If the return
    is not completed after a period of one year after the end of running
    the co-spokespersons will be required to furnish, in writing, an
    explanation for any non-return.

# IV. SIGNATURES

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

V. White, Head of Fermilab Computing Division

# 

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

S. Wojcicki, MINOS Co-spokesperson

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

G. Rameika, MINOS Project Manager

# V. NETWORKING SUPPORT 

The Far detector LAN at Soudan and the Near detector LAN at Fermilab
have been configured and installed by the Fermilab network group.

The strategy for the Soudan LAN support is to incorporate the operation
and management into the Fermilab campus network support effort. The
Fermilab policy that defines the campus network as a restricted central
service (<http://www.fnal.gov/cd/main/cpolicy.pdf>) will be extended to
include the local network at Soudan. From a practical perspective this
will mean:

1.  The topology of the Soudan network will be specified by the Fermilab
    network group and modifications or changes made only in consultation
    with or at the direction of that group.

2.  All active network devices (switches, routers, hubs with manageable
    components) will be procured and installed under the direction of
    the Fermilab network group and will be managed remotely by that
    group.

3.  Basic network services (DNS, DHCP) will be provided on servers that
    will be supplied, installed and remotely managed by the Fermilab
    network group.

4.  Any maintenance on the LAN and its components should be scheduled in
    consultation with the experiment.

5.  During data-taking with beam there should be 24/7 coverage for
    resolution of problems at both Fermilab and Soudan.

6.  A liaison from the Fermilab network group should be provided at all
    times.

7.  Sufficient spares should be kept at Soudan so that delays are not
    incurred in resolving problems due to unavailability of spares.

> The remote management of the Soudan LAN is predicated on having a
> simple, easily manageable architecture. This necessitates centralized
> network connections and a minimum number of active network devices.
> Unintelligent microhubs may be used to provide extra network
> connections in situations where all the local network jacks are in
> use. All active network devices, including unintelligent microhubs,
> will be of a type, make and model specified or approved by the
> Fermilab network group.
>
> [Network Configuration]{.underline}

At Soudan the network domain is minos-soudan.org (198.124). There are
four pools of addresses

  -------------- --------------------------------------------------------
  DHCP pool      191.124.212.0 with addresses from 1-199 and 202-253

  SERVER LAN     198-124-213.0 with addresses from 1-29

  DCS LAN        198.124.213.64 with addresses from 65-125

  DAQ LAN        198.124.213.128 with addresses from 129-253
  -------------- --------------------------------------------------------

The Near Detector LAN will be subnet 131.225.192. There will be three
pools of addresses

  -------------- --------------------------------------------------------
  DHCP pool      131.225.192.192 with addresses from 193-221

  DCS LAN        131.225.192.0 with addresses from 1-125

  DAQ LAN        131.225.192.128 with addresses from 129-189
  -------------- --------------------------------------------------------

The DCS and DAQ LANs permit access to each other and reflexive replies
to traffic that originated from within those LANs. Login access to these
LANs is allowed through a fully strengthened \"gateway\" connected to
the SERVER LAN at Soudan and to the general site network at Fermilab. To
support the kerberized access there is a satellite KDC installed at
Soudan. This machine will be administered remotely by members of the
Fermilab Computer Security team.

The LAN at the near detector will have fiber connected directly to the
front-end electronics racks with media converters to avoid any
possibility of ground loops.

We do not expect to have any special requirements for networking in FCC
beyond what is generally available.

[NTP server]{.underline}

We will run our own NTP server.

Our strategy is to synchronize computers to the PPS (pulse per second)
signal derived from the local GPS at each site. However, for monitoring
purposes, we will pretend-synchronize to both a trusted timeserver on
the web and to the other MINOS detector (near from far and far from
near). Our modified NTP servers will not use this information to set the
clock, but will make the offsets available to be written to the data
stream This should allow us, if something unexpected happens in the data
to be able to figure out what happened. It is therefore vital in that we
are able to send NTP packets in both directions between Fermilab and
Soudan and also that we can send packets to external time servers (but
we will not be accepting unsolicited requests for time to be served, and
will see any attempts). We will need to address the issue of NTP packets
being sent to Soudan from Fermilab once we are closer to data taking at
the Near detector.

# VI. OFFLINE COMPUTING

## OVERVIEW

This section deals with the offline computing needs for the MINOS
experiment. The offline needs can be broken into the following areas:

-   Data Handling and Storage

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Offline Data Processing

-   Monte Carlo Generation

-   Offline Analysis

-   Software

-   Personnel resources

This document will address the resources required in each of the
preceding areas. These resources include number of tapes, amount of CPU,
disk space and number of people.

We would like as much as possible to integrate our computing resources
into the existing FNALU/AFS/FARM architecture to reduce the support
load. We expect to use SAM for data handling. We would like to deploy
our analysis CPU as batch nodes within FNALU and continue to use the
FNALU Linux machines for interactive development. We will continue to
use AFS disk for user data and non-SAM. We would expect that our FARM
needs would be met by augmenting the existing general purpose farm.

## MINOS 5 YEAR RUN PLAN

The experiment has presented a plan to the laboratory management for the
number of protons on target per year (pot/year) we would like to
receive. Based on this plan the experiment has a strawman run plan for
the amount of low, medium and high energy beam that we would like. This
is summarized in Table 1.

  -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------------
                 Protons on                                   
                 target per                                   
                 year x 10^20^                                

  Year           Low Energy     Medium Energy  High Energy    Total

  2005           1.9            0.4            0.2            2.5

  2006           4.0            0              0              4.0

  2007           3.5            1.0            0.5            5.0

  2008           5.6            0.6            0.3            6.5

  2009           7.5            0              0              7.5
  -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- --------------

Table 1 MINOS 5 year run plan

This information is used to determine the data rate in the near
detector, which is shown in Table 2. For the years 2005-2007 we assume
that there is one spill every 1.9 seconds. For 2008-2009 we assume that
there is one spill every second due to a reduction in the Main Injector
cycle time but fewer protons per pulse.

  ------------ ------------ -------------------- -------- -------- --------
                                                 Events            
                                                 per               
                                                 spill             

  Year         POT x 10^20^ Protons per pulse x  Low      Medium   High
                            10^13^                                 

  2005         2.5          2.5                  25       63       125

  2006         4            4                    40       100      200

  2007         5            5                    50       125      250

  2008         6.5          3.25                 33       81       162

  2009         7.5          3.75                 38       94       188
  ------------ ------------ -------------------- -------- -------- --------

Table 2 Expected number of events per spill for the MINOS run plan

The beam neutrino rate in the far detector has been neglected, as it is
tiny compared to all other numbers. The rate from the far detector is
dominated by 0.55 Hz of cosmic ray interactions, which will be used both
for calibration and for cosmic ray and atmospheric neutrino physics
studies. The far detector also has about 6.5 Hz of noise triggers, which
are small events and contribute to the raw data size but are eliminated
after reconstruction. There are also pedestal runs, light injection etc
which are listed in the "Other" category. The neutrino interaction rate
for the near detector from Table 2 will vary depending on the actual
beam being run but for the low energy beam will be from 12-25 Hz. About
40% of the events are produced in the calorimeter section and the
remaining 60% in the spectrometer section, which is only read out every
5 planes and has 4-way multiplexing. The near detector DAQ system is
capable of recording the full 250 Hz of cosmic rays seen by the near
detector but it is expected that we will record only a fraction of these
calibration purposes, we have assumed 11 Hz, and this is reflected in
the numbers in Table 3 and 4. The far detector assumes 310^7^ seconds in
one year (cosmic rays are always there) and the near detector assumes an
effective year of 210^7^ seconds for beam and 310^7^ seconds for the
cosmic rays. For simplicity we assume that 1Kbyte 1000 bytes.

+-----------+----------------+----------------+----------+-----------+
| Sample    | Rate/second    | Events/year    | Raw      | Data      |
|           |                |                | Event    |           |
|           | (Hz)           |                |          | Volume    |
|           |                |                | Size     |           |
|           |                |                | (Kbytes) | /year     |
|           |                |                |          | (GB)      |
+-----------+----------------+----------------+----------+-----------+
| Cosmic    | 0.55           | 1.6510^7^      | 1.1      | 18        |
|           |                |                |          |           |
| ray       |                |                |          |           |
+-----------+----------------+----------------+----------+-----------+
| Noise     | 6.5            | 1.95 10^8^     | 0.2      | 39        |
+-----------+----------------+----------------+----------+-----------+
| Other     |                |                |          | 312       |
+-----------+----------------+----------------+----------+-----------+
| Total     |                |                |          | 369       |
+-----------+----------------+----------------+----------+-----------+

Table 3 Event rates and raw data volumes for the Far detector

+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                       |           | Ev   |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | ents |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | per  |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | year |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | (10  |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | ^8^) |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Sample                | Event     | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
|                       | Size      |      |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           |      |      |      |      |      |
|                       | (Kbytes)  |      |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ν (calorimeter        | 0.6       | 1.56 | 1.6  | 3.4  | 3.44 | 3.0  |
| section)              |           |      |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ν (spectrometer       | 0.03      | 2.34 | 2.4  | 5.1  | 5.2  | 4.5  |
| section)              |           |      |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Cosmic Rays           | 0.6       | 3.3  | 3.3  | 3.3  | 3.3  | 3.3  |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Total                 |           | 7.2  | 7.3  | 11.8 | 11.9 | 10.8 |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+

Table 4 Event rates for the Near detector

+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
|                       |           | Raw  |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | Data |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | Vo   |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | lume |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | per  |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | year |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           | (GB) |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Sample                | Event     | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
|                       | Size      |      |      |      |      |      |
|                       |           |      |      |      |      |      |
|                       | (Kbytes)  |      |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ν (calorimeter        | 0.6       | 94   | 96   | 204  | 206  | 180  |
| section)              |           |      |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| ν (spectrometer       | 0.03      | 7    | 7    | 15   | 15   | 14   |
| section)              |           |      |      |      |      |      |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Cosmic Rays           | 0.6       | 198  | 198  | 198  | 198  | 198  |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+
| Total                 |           | 299  | 301  | 417  | 419  | 392  |
+-----------------------+-----------+------+------+------+------+------+

Table 5 Raw Data volumes for the Near detector

## EVENT RECONSTRUCTION AND STORAGE

The event reconstruction for both the Near and Far detectors will be
done at Fermilab. A summary of the processing needs is given in Table 6
for steady state, which will keep up with the data taking, and in Table
7 for reprocessing. These numbers are based on the performance of the
existing MINOS C++ reconstruction code. The Far detector numbers are
taken from real data, the Near from Monte Carlo. The processing time per
event will be given in GHz-seconds per event and the CPU requirements
will be given in GHz. We have assumed that in the years 2004-2006 we
will do 2 complete reprocessing passes of the data per year that will be
completed in 3 months each. In 2007 and 2009 we assume 1 pass taking 6
months. The reprocessing numbers include processing for all the data
taken up until that time. We assume a farm efficiency of 70%. In the
Near detector, due to the single-ended readout and the optical
multiplexing, it is essentially impossible to reconstruct tracks that
have their vertex in the spectrometer so we will ignore these events
from the point of reconstruction -- however they still occupy storage
space. We have also separated out the event rates for the target region
only which corresponds to the events that will be used for the
comparison between the near and far detector. This is a much smaller
number of events, the target region corresponds to about 0.4% of the
calorimeter section. This is the critical beam data for the neutrino
oscillation measurement.

  -------------------- --------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------
                                       GHz                                
                                       per                                
                                       year                               

                       GHz-sec/event   2004   2005   2006   2007   2008   2009

  ν (calorimeter       10.7                   80     82     173    175    153
  section)                                                                

  Cosmic Rays (Near)   10/7                   168    168    168    168    168

  Cosmic Rays (Far)    16.3            13     13     13     13     13     13

  Total                                13     261    263    354    356    334
  -------------------- --------------- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------

Table 6 Steady state event reconstruction needs for Near and Far
detectors

+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|            | G  |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | Hz |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | p  |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | er |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | re |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | co |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | ns |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | tr |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | uc |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | ti |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | on |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | pa |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            | ss |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
|            | 20 |    | 2005 |      | 2006  |       | 2007  | 2009  |
|            | 04 |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Pass       | 1  | 2  | 1    | 2    | 1     | 2     | 1     | 1     |
| Number     |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| (c         |    |    | 53   | 238  | 372   | 563   | 495   | 1170  |
| alorimeter |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
| section)   |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Cosmic     |    |    | 112  | 504  | 785   | 1180  | 841   | 1510  |
| Rays       |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
| (Near)     |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Cosmic     | 1  | 1  | 162  | 192  | 213   | 243   | 141   | 192   |
| Rays       | 11 | 28 |      |      |       |       |       |       |
|            |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
| (Far)      |    |    |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+
| Total      | 1  | 1  | 327  | 934  | 1370  | 1986  | 1477  | 2872  |
|            | 11 | 28 |      |      |       |       |       |       |
+------------+----+----+------+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+

Table 7 Reprocessing needs for Near and Far detectors

  -------------- ------- ----- ------ ----- ----------- ----------- -----------
                 CPU                                                
                 (GHz)                                              

                 2005          2006         2007        2008        2009

  Steady state   0.29          29           62          63          55

  Pass Number    1       2     1      2     1                       1

  Reprocessing   0.2     0.9   1.3    2     4                       10.5
  -------------- ------- ----- ------ ----- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 8 Steady state processing and reprocessing for the Near detector
target region

The raw data is fairly compressed but it expands after event
reconstruction when we add the de-multiplexed hits, tracking information
and calibration. The current expansion rate is a factor of 44. We need
to study this to see if it can be reduced but we have used this number
in the planning that follows. Tables 9 and 10 show the expected
reconstructed data volumes for the near and far detectors. We currently
write a file of Candidates, an Ntuple and a compressed Ntuple. These are
included in the calculations. We have used the same event size for
cosmic ray events. We have also assumed that full 11 Hz of cosmic rays
are from the calorimeter section. Table 11 shows the data volume for the
target region only.

+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 |          |       | R   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | eco |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | nst |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ruc |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ted |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | D   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ata |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | Vol |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ume |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | per |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | y   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ear |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | (   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | GB) |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| Sample          | Data     | Event | 2   | 2   | 2   | 2   | 2009 |
|                 | type     | Size  | 005 | 006 | 007 | 008 |      |
|                 |          |       |     |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          | (Kb   |     |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          | ytes) |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| ν (calorimeter  | C        | 29    | 4   | 4   | 9   | 9   | 8700 |
| section)        | andidate |       | 520 | 640 | 860 | 980 |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 5.8   | 905 | 928 | 1   | 2   | 1740 |
|                 |          |       |     |     | 970 | 000 |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Comp.    | 0.8   | 125 | 128 | 272 | 275 | 240  |
|                 | Ntuple   |       |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| ν (spectrometer | C        | 1.4   | 328 | 336 | 714 | 722 | 630  |
| section)        | andidate |       |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 0.3   | 70  | 72  | 153 | 155 | 135  |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Comp.    | 0.04  | 9   | 10  | 20  | 20  | 18   |
|                 | Ntuple   |       |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| Cosmic Rays     | C        | 29    | 9   | 9   | 9   | 9   | 9570 |
|                 | andidate |       | 570 | 570 | 570 | 570 |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 5.8   | 1   | 1   | 1   | 1   | 1910 |
|                 |          |       | 910 | 910 | 910 | 910 |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Comp.    | 0.8   | 264 | 264 | 264 | 264 | 264  |
|                 | Ntuple   |       |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| Total           |          |       | 17  | 17  | 24  | 24  | 2    |
|                 |          |       | 700 | 900 | 700 | 900 | 3200 |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+

Table 9 Reconstructed data volumes for the Near detector

  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
  Sample            Data Type         Event Size        Reconstructed
                                      (Kbytes)          Data volume per
                                                        year (GB)

  Cosmic Rays       Candidate         44                726

                    Ntuple            9                 149

                    Comp. Ntuple      1.3               22

  Total                                                 896
  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------

Table 10 Reconstructed data volumes for the Far detector

+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 |          |       | R   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | eco |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | nst |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ruc |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ted |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | D   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ata |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | Vol |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ume |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | per |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | y   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | ear |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | (   |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          |       | GB) |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| Sample          | Data     | Event | 2   | 2   | 2   | 2   | 2009 |
|                 | type     | Size  | 005 | 006 | 007 | 008 |      |
|                 |          |       |     |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          | (Kb   |     |     |     |     |      |
|                 |          | ytes) |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| ν (target       | C        | 29    | 16  | 17  | 36  | 36  | 31   |
| region)         | andidate |       |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 5.8   | 3.3 | 3.3 | 7.1 | 7.2 | 6.3  |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
|                 | Comp.    | 0.8   | 0.4 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 1.9 | 0.9  |
|                 | Ntuple   |       |     |     |     |     |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+
| Total           |          |       | 1   | 2   | 4   | 4   | 38.2 |
|                 |          |       | 9.7 | 0.8 | 4.1 | 5.1 |      |
+-----------------+----------+-------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+

Table 11 Reconstructed data volumes for the Near detector target region.

In Tables 12, 13 and 14 we show the additional data volumes generated by
the reprocessed data.

+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 |          | R  |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ep |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ro |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ce |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ss |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ed |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | Da |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ta |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | Vo |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | lu |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | me |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          |    |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | p  |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | er |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ye |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | ar |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | (G |    |     |     |        |        |
|                 |          | B) |    |     |     |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
| Sample          |          | 20 |    | 2   |     | 2007   | 2009   |
|                 |          | 05 |    | 006 |     |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Pass     | 1  | 2  | 1   | 2   | 1      | 1      |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
| ν (calorimeter  | C        | 7  | 33 | 5   | 8   | 14100  | 33400  |
| section)        | andidate | 56 | 90 | 300 | 000 |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 1  | 6  | 1   | 1   | 2820   | 6670   |
|                 |          | 51 | 79 | 060 | 600 |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Comp.    | 21 | 94 | 146 | 221 | 389    | 920    |
|                 | Ntuple   |    |    |     |     |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
| ν (spectrometer | C        | 55 | 2  | 384 | 580 | 1020   | 2420   |
| section)        | andidate |    | 46 |     |     |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 35 | 53 | 106 | 124 | 219    | 518    |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Comp.    | 5  | 7  | 14  | 17  | 29     | 69     |
|                 | Ntuple   |    |    |     |     |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
| Cosmic Rays     | C        | 16 | 71 | 11  | 16  | 23900  | 43100  |
|                 | andidate | 03 | 80 | 200 | 700 |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 3  | 14 | 2   | 3   | 4790   | 8610   |
|                 |          | 20 | 40 | 230 | 350 |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+
|                 | Comp.    | 44 | 1  | 308 | 462 | 660    | 1190   |
|                 | Ntuple   |    | 98 |     |     |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+----+----+-----+-----+--------+--------+

Table 12 Reprocessed data volumes for the Near detector

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 16%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="8"><p>Reconstructed Data Volume</p>
<p>per year (GB)</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Sample</td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2">2004</td>
<td colspan="2">2005</td>
<td colspan="2">2006</td>
<td>2007</td>
<td>2009</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td>Pass</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Cosmic Rays</td>
<td>Candidate</td>
<td>1570</td>
<td>2000</td>
<td>2300</td>
<td>2720</td>
<td>3030</td>
<td>3450</td>
<td>3990</td>
<td>5450</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td>Ntuple</td>
<td>322</td>
<td>408</td>
<td>470</td>
<td>557</td>
<td>619</td>
<td>705</td>
<td>817</td>
<td>1110</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td>Comp. Ntuple</td>
<td>47</td>
<td>59</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>80</td>
<td>89</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>118</td>
<td>161</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Table 13 Reprocessed data volumes for the Far detector

+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+
|                   |           | R   |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | eco |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | nst |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | ruc |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | ted |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | D   |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | ata |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | Vol |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | ume |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           |     |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | per |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | y   |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | ear |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | (   |     |     |     |      |      |
|                   |           | GB) |     |     |     |      |      |
+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+
| Sample            |           | 2   |     | 2   |     | 2007 | 2009 |
|                   |           | 005 |     | 006 |     |      |      |
+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+
|                   | Pass      | 1   | 2   | 1   | 2   | 1    | 1    |
+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+
| ν (target region) | Candidate | 3   | 12  | 2   | 29  | 51   | 120  |
+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+
|                   | Ntuple    | 0.5 | 2   | 4   | 6   | 10   | 24   |
+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+
|                   | Comp.     | 0   | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 1    | 3    |
|                   | Ntuple    | .08 |     |     |     |      |      |
+-------------------+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----+------+------+

Table 14 Reprocessed data volumes for the Near detector target region

## MONTE CARLO GENERATION AND STORAGE

There are two types of Monte Carlo required for MINOS, simulation of
neutrino interactions in the detector for oscillation
measurements/conventional neutrino physics and simulation of the
neutrino beam to understand features of the beam such as beam profiles,
flux etc. In both cases the requirements are not precisely known so the
numbers here are based on assumptions. We assume here that we will
generate the samples at Fermilab but the possibility may also exist to
generate them at collaborating institutions and transfer them to
Fermilab for storage.

[Physics Monte Carlo]{.underline}

For studies of cosmic ray and atmospheric neutrino events in the Far
detector we assume a factor of 10 more Monte Carlo than data, namely
1.65 10^8^ events. For the Near detector we have made a similar
assumption but only considered the events produced in the calorimeter
section. The execution time for the simulation is dominated by the event
reconstruction time. The event size is larger due to storage of the
"truth" information" for the event. The needs per year are summarized in
Table 15.

  --------------------------------- ------ ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ------ ----- ------ ------ -----
                                    Year                                                              

                                    2004   2005               2006         2007         2008   2009   

  **Far detector Cosmic Rays**                                                                        

  Events (10^8^)                    1.65   1.65               1.65         1.65         1.65   1.65   

  Raw Data (TB) (27 Kbytes/event)   4.5    4.5                4.5          4.5          4.5    4.5    

  Candidates (TB) (70 Kbytes/event) 12     12                 12           12           12     12     

  Ntuple (TB) (15 Kbytes/event)     2.5    2.5                2.5          2.5          2.5    2.5    

  Comp. Ntuple (TB) (2              0.3    0.3                0.3          0.3          0.3    0.3    
  Kbytes/event)                                                                                       

  CPU time/event (GHz-sec)          18     18                 18           18           18     18     

  CPU for 2 months (GHz)            816    816                816          816          816    816    

  **Far detector Beam**                                                                               

  Events (10^6^)                    2             2     2            2            2                   2

  Raw Data (GB) (27 Kbytes/event)   54            54    54           54           54                  54

  Candidates (GB) (70 Kbytes/event) 140           140   140          140          140                 140

  Ntuple (GB) (15 Kbytes/event)     30            30    30           30           30                  30

  Comp. Ntuple (GB) (2              4             4     4            4            4                   4
  Kbytes/event)                                                                                       

  CPU time/event (GHz-sec)          30            30    30           30           30                  30

  CPU for 1 month (GHz)             33            33    33           33           33                  33

  **Near detector Beam**                                                                              

  Events (10^9^)                           1.56               1.6          3.4          3.44   3.0    

  Raw Data (TB) (10 Kbytes/event)          16                 16           34           34     30     

  Candidates (TB) (39 Kbytes/event)        61                 62           133          134    117    

  Ntuple (TB) (8 Kbytes/event)             12.5               12.8         27           27     24     

  Comp. Ntuple (TB) (1                     0.16               0.16         0.34         0.34   0.3    
  Kbytes/event)                                                                                       

  CPU time/event (GHz-sec)                 14                 14           14           14     14     

  CPU for 6 months (GHz)                   2010               2060         4390         4440   3870   

  **Near detector Beam -- target                                                                      
  region only**                                                                                       

  Events (10^6^)                           5.6                5.8          12           12     11     

  Raw Data (GB) (10 Kbytes/event)          56                 58           122          124    108    

  Candidates (GB) (39 Kbytes/event)        219                225          477          483    421    

  Ntuple (GB) (8 Kbytes/event)             45                 46           98           99     86     

  Comp. Ntuple (GB) (1                     5.6                5.8          12           12     11     
  Kbytes/event)                                                                                       

  CPU time/event (GHz-sec)                 14                 14           14           14     14     

  CPU for 2 months (GHz)                   22                 22           47           48     42     
  --------------------------------- ------ ------ ----- ----- ------ ----- ------ ----- ------ ------ -----

Table 15 Physics Monte Carlo needs per year

This data will also need to be stored in the STKEN tape library. We plan
to store all the target region data on disk and some fraction of the
remainder.

We expect to reprocess the Monte Carlo data with the same frequency as
the data. These requirements are shown in Table 16 for CPU and Table 17
for data volumes. The target region only is shown in Table 18 and 19.

  ------------- ---------------- ----- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------
                GHz per                                                        
                reconstruction                                                 
                pass                                                           

                2004                   2005            2006            2007    2009

  Pass Number   1                2     1       2       1       2       1       1

  Near Beam MC                         1000    4500    7030    10600   18700   44200

  Far Cosmic MC 136              612   952     143     1770    2240    2860    4490

  Far Beam MC   6                25    39      58      71      91      115     181

  Total         142              637   1991    4701    8871    12931   21675   48871
  ------------- ---------------- ----- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------

Table 16 CPU for reprocessing for the Far and Near Monte Carlo

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 18%" />
<col style="width: 15%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="8"><p>Reconstructed Data Volume</p>
<p>per year (TB)</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Sample</td>
<td></td>
<td colspan="2">2004</td>
<td colspan="2">2005</td>
<td colspan="2">2006</td>
<td>2007</td>
<td>2009</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td>Pass</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Far Cosmic MC</td>
<td>Candidate</td>
<td>1.9</td>
<td>8.7</td>
<td>14</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>32</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>64</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td>Ntuple</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>1.9</td>
<td>2.9</td>
<td>4.3</td>
<td>5.4</td>
<td>6.8</td>
<td>8.7</td>
<td>14</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td>Comp. Ntuple</td>
<td>0.05</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.6</td>
<td>0.7</td>
<td>0.9</td>
<td>1.2</td>
<td>1.8</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Far Beam MC</td>
<td>Candidate</td>
<td>0.02</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.2</td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>0.4</td>
<td>0.5</td>
<td>0.8</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td>Ntuple</td>
<td>0.002</td>
<td>0.02</td>
<td>0.04</td>
<td>0.05</td>
<td>0.07</td>
<td>0.08</td>
<td>0.1</td>
<td>0.17</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td>Comp. Ntuple</td>
<td>0.0007</td>
<td>0.003</td>
<td>0.005</td>
<td>0.007</td>
<td>0.009</td>
<td>0.01</td>
<td>0.01</td>
<td>0.02</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Near Beam MC</td>
<td>Candidate</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>10</td>
<td>46</td>
<td>71</td>
<td>108</td>
<td>190</td>
<td>449</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td></td>
<td>Ntuple</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>2</td>
<td>9</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>21</td>
<td>39</td>
<td>92</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td></td>
<td>Comp. Ntuple</td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>0.3</td>
<td>1.2</td>
<td>1.8</td>
<td>2.7</td>
<td>4.9</td>
<td>11.5</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

Table 17 Reprocessed data volumes for the Far and Near Monte Carlo

  --------------- ---------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
                  GHz per                                                  
                  reconstruction                                           
                  pass                                                     

                  2005                       2006                2007      2009

  Pass Number     1                2         1         2         1         1

  Target region   3.9              17        27        41        72        171
  --------------- ---------------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------

Table 18 CPU for reprocessing for the Near detector target Monte Carlo

+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+
|                 |          | R   |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | eco |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | nst |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | ruc |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | ted |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | D   |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | ata |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | Vol |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | ume |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          |     |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | per |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | y   |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | ear |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | (   |     |    |    |        |        |
|                 |          | GB) |     |    |    |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+
| Sample          |          | 2   |     | 20 |    | 2007   | 2009   |
|                 |          | 005 |     | 06 |    |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+
|                 | Pass     | 1   | 2   | 1  | 2  | 1      | 1      |
+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+
| Near Target MC  | C        | 37  | 164 | 2  | 3  | 682    | 1610   |
|                 | andidate |     |     | 57 | 88 |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+
|                 | Ntuple   | 7.5 | 34  | 53 | 80 | 140    | 331    |
+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+
|                 | Comp.    | 0.9 | 4   | 7  | 10 | 18     | 41     |
|                 | Ntuple   |     |     |    |    |        |        |
+-----------------+----------+-----+-----+----+----+--------+--------+

Table 19 Reprocessed data volumes for the Near Target Monte Carlo

[Beam Monte Carlo]{.underline}

Currently a single run takes about 2.410^5^ GHz-seconds to obtain
sufficient statistics. The data volume produced per run is about 240
Mbytes. It is expected that a factor of 10 times longer runs will be
needed for the physics analysis and that a few hundred of these runs
will be required. We currently assume that the runs are generated over
the course of a year. The needs are summarized in Table 20.

  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
  GHz-sec/run                         2.410^6^

  Runs/year                           200

  GHz/year                            15

  Storage/year                        480 GB
  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------

Table 20 Beam Monte Carlo needs per year

## DATA HANDLING AND STORAGE

In calculating the total amount of data that must be stored we assume
that recycling of storage occupied by older reprocessing passes will be
carried out.

Table 21 summarizes the total data and Monte Carlo volumes per year
including reprocessing and allowing for recycling.

  ------------------- ------------ -------- -------- ------- ------- -------- -------
                                   Volume                                     
                                   per year                                   
                                   (TB)                                       

                                   2004     2005     2006    2007    2008     2009

  Far detector        Candidate    2.8      3.6      4.3     1.8     0.7      1.8
  Cosmics                                                                     

                      Ntuple       0.6      0.7      0.9     0.4     0.15     0.4

                      Comp. Ntuple 0.08     0.1      0.1     0.5     0.2      0.5

  Near detector       Candidate             18       28      14      10       24
  Cosmics                                                                     

                      Ntuple                4        6       3       2        5

                      Comp. Ntuple          0.5      0.8     0.4     0.3      0.7

  Near detector beam  Candidate             9        14      16      11       25

                      Ntuple                2        3       3       2        5

                      Comp. Ntuple          0.3      0.4     0.4     0.3      0.7

  Near detector       Candidate             0.03     0.05    0.05    0.04     0.09
  target                                                                      

                      Ntuple                0.006    0.01    0.01    0.007    0.02

                      Comp. Ntuple          0.0008   0.001   0.001   0.0009   0.002

  Far detector Cosmic Candidate    22       34       45      29      12       29
  MC                                                                          

                      Ntuple       5        7        10      6       2        6

                      Comp. Ntuple 0.6      1        1       0.8     0.3      0.8

  Far detector beam   Candidate             0.3      0.4     0.2     0.1      0.4
  MC                                                                          

                      Ntuple                0.06     0.09    0.05    0.03     0.08

                      Comp. Ntuple          0.008    0.01    0.006   0.004    0.01

  Near detector beam  Candidate             117      181     199     134      317
  MC                                                                          

                      Ntuple                24       37      41      28       65

                      Comp. Ntuple          3        5       5       3        8

  Near detector       Candidate             0.4      0.7     0.7     0.5      1
  target MC                                                                   

                      Ntuple                0.09     0.1     0.1     0.1      0.2

                      Comp. Ntuple          0.01     0.02    0.02    0.01     0.03

  Total                            31       225      338     317     207      490
  ------------------- ------------ -------- -------- ------- ------- -------- -------

Table 21 Integrated data and Monte Carlo volumes per year

All data will be stored in the STKEN tape robot. The ntuple-level data
for the Far detector cosmics and Near detector beam will be stored
permanently on disk, about 3-4 TB per year. All the data for the Far
detector beam Monte Carlo and the Near detector target beam Monte Carlo
will also be kept on disk as it is small, about 1 TB per year. We would
plan for DCache disk to stage about 20% of the remaining data at any one
time, between 60-100 TB per year.

The default mode of operation is to record data on disk locally at the
detectors and transfer it over the network to Fermilab/FCC (Feynman
Computing Center) into DCache for archiving to tape. We will probably
also desire to make several copies of the raw data as the volume is
small and tapes are large, meaning a tape failure could result in
significant data loss. We are using Enstore to do the tape archiving.

## OFFLINE ANALYSIS

We plan to perform physics analysis of the data at Fermilab as well as
at other MINOS collaborating institutions. This area of the needs is the
most uncertain. We have made some assumptions that we outline here. We
assume that there will be of order 30 users doing analysis on a central
MINOS facility located at FNAL. Most analyses will proceed from the
Ntuples. We assume that most users are using the Ntuples produced on the
farm but that a few, of order five might need to produce their own
Ntuples from the Candidate files.

######## Ntuple analysis

We assume 30 users and each makes 6 passes per year through the Ntuples
to create a custom ntuple. It typically takes 0.0004 GHz-seconds/event
to produce an Ntuple record using the standard production Ntuples as
input. We assume that a user should be able to produce a custom Ntuple
from the Far detector data in one day and from the Monte Carlo in one
week. We assume that one pass always includes all the data from previous
years. For the Near detector we assume that users take 1 month to create
a compressed Ntuple from the data and the Monte Carlo. For the data we
include making Ntuple from the Calorimeter section only.

  ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
             CPU in                                                
             GHz                                                   

  Year       2004      2005       2006       2007       2008       2009

  Data       14        28         41         55         69         83

  Monte      19        39         59         79         98         118
  Carlo                                                            
  ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

Table 22 Analysis CPU for the Far detector, Ntuple processing.

  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
              CPU in GHz                                      

  Year        2005        2006        2007        2008        2009

  Data        19          38          78          119         155

  Monte Carlo 45          91          189         288         374
  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 23 Analysis CPU for the Near detector, Ntuple processing.

######## Candidate analysis

We assume 5 users each making 2 passes per year through the Candidate
data to create Ntuples. It takes 0.4 GHz-seconds/event to create an
Ntuple. We assume for both detectors that this task is accomplished in 1
month for the data and 3 months for the Monte Carlo.

  ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
             CPU in                                                
             GHz                                                   

  Year       2004      2005       2006       2007       2008       2009

  Data       26        53         79         106        132        158

  Monte      88        176        264        352        440        528
  Carlo                                                            
  ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

Table 24 Analysis CPU for the Far detector, Ntuple creation from
Candidates.

  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
              CPU in GHz                                      

  Year        2005        2006        2007        2008        2009

  Data        250         506         1050        1600        2080

  Monte Carlo 1080        2190        4550        6930        9010
  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 25 Analysis CPU for the Near detector, Ntuple creation from
Candidates.

  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
              CPU in GHz                                      

  Year        2005        2006        2007        2008        2009

  Data        4           4           8           8           7

  Monte Carlo 9           9           20          20          17
  ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------

Table 25 Analysis CPU for the Near detector target region, Ntuple
creation from Candidates.

In Table 26 we summarize the storage required for user Ntuples. We have
assumed that on average 1.5 passes will be stored.

  ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
             Data                                                  
             storage                                               
             (TB)                                                  

  Year       2004      2005       2006       2007       2008       2009

  Far                                                              

  Data       0.3       0.6        0.9        1.2        1.6        1.9

  Monte      4.0       8          12         16         20         24
  Carlo                                                            

  Near                                                             

  Data                 2          5          10         15         20

  Monte                26         52         108        165        215
  Carlo                                                            

  Near                                                             
  Target                                                           

  Data                 0.008      0.008      0.02       0.02       0.02

  Monte                0.09       0.10       0.2        0.2        0.2
  Carlo                                                            
  ---------- --------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------

Table 26 Storage required for user generated Ntuples.

Tape storage would be provided for all the user Ntuples. We would expect
to be able to store all the data Ntuples for users on disk and some
fraction of the Monte Carlo, probably about 20%.

## DATABASE

The database warehouse will be kept in Oracle and will reside on a SUN
Linux system. We will also need a development machine. We plan to have
Linux MySQL servers at Soudan and as replicas for the offline analysis
and the production farm. They will also be used at collaborating
institutions. We will require access to some fraction of the Oracle
client licenses, the number will be minimized by the use of the MySQL
replicas. The size of the database is expected to be about 500 GB over 5
years

## SUMMARY

  ------------------------ ------ ------ ------- ------- -------- ---------
  Year                     2004   2005   2006    2007    2008     2009

  Tape (TB)                36     290    400     460     400      750

  Disk (Ntuples) (TB)      6      4      4       4       3        6

  Disk (User Ntuples) (TB) 0.3    3      6       11      17       21

  Disk (DCache) (TB)       6      42     66      63      40       96

  Disk (User Ntuples --    0.8    7      13      25      37       48
  DCache) (TB)                                                    

  CPU, Reco steady state   13     260    260     350     360      330
  (GHz)                                                           

  CPU, Reco reproc (GHz)   140    930    2000    1500             2900

  CPU, MC (GHz)            850    2900   2900    5200    5300     4700

  CPU, MC reproc (GHz)     3500   6000   13000   22000            49000

  CPU, analysis (GHz)      148    1440   2800    5400    8000     10400

  CPU Speed (GHz)          3.6    4.8    6       7.2     9.6      12

  Duals, Reco steady state 2      27     22      25      19       14

  Duals, Reco reproc       20     97     165     103              120

  Duals, MC                118    300    243     363     275      197

  Duals MC reproc          482    623    1080    1500             2037

  Duals, analysis          20     150    230     375     420      435
  ------------------------ ------ ------ ------- ------- -------- ---------

Table 27 MINOS needs for tape, disk and CPU for 6 years of data taking.

Table XX shows the costs associated with the needs in Table IXX. The
following assumptions have been made. A dual CPU farm node costs \$2200
independent of CPU speed. A 4 TB file server currently costs \$14,400.
We will assume that the cost remains roughly the same but the capacity
increases by a factor of 1.6 each year. We assume that in 2004 the tape
cartridge size is 200 GB and costs \$75. In 2005 and beyond we assume
that the capacity is 400 GB and costs the same.

  --------------------- --------- --------- --------- ---------- --------- ---------
  Year                  2004      2005      2006      2007       2008      2009

  Tape                  13400     55200     77300     86700      77400     143000

  Disk (Ntuples)        22000     9400      6000      3600       1600      1800

  Disk (DCache)         22000     96000     93000     57000      24000     29000

  Disk (User Ntuples)   1110      6800      7900      10000      10000     6400

  Disk (User Ntuples -- 2800      16000     18000     22000      22000     14000
  DCache)                                                                  

  Duals Reco steady     3900      60000     48000     54000      41000     31000
  state                                                                    

  Duals Reco reproc     43000     214000    363000    226000               264000

  Duals MC              260000    660000    534000    534000     606000    433000

  Duals MC reproc       1060000   1400000   2400000   33000000             4500000

  Duals, analysis       45000     330000    500000    830000     930000    960000

  Total                 1470000   2800000   4000000   5100000    1700000   6400000
  --------------------- --------- --------- --------- ---------- --------- ---------

Table 28 MINOS costs in \$ for 6 years of data taking