# Presentation: 380251

## US CMS Software and Computing 

Milestones and Funding Profiles 

Matthias Kasemann
Fermilab

FNAL Oversight Panel 
October 24, 2000

** **
**Milestones and Funding Profiles **
**Matthias Kasemann**
**Fermilab**
**FNAL Oversight Panel **
**October 24, 2000**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## CMS planning at LHCC review October 2000

**CMS planning at LHCC review October 2000**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

##  US CMS S&C schedule adapted to LHC

**Constraints for updated S&C schedule:**
**Working CMS detector by mid-2005**
**LHC pilot run in Fall 2005, few weeks of luminosity running**
**Complete detector and start LHC running in Spring 2006**** **
**Lessons learned from other experiments:**
**Pilot running: for detector as well as for ****computing and analysis****	****Fall 2005**
**Finish facilities before physics data****	****early FY06**
**CMS Software schedule not changed**
** ****Adapt schedule: delay start of implementation of facilities****	****by 12 months (03->04)**
**9 month delay in startup of LHC luminosity running**
**3 month: US FY05 ends in 9/2005**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## US CMS S&C funding profile

** ****Received draft funding profile from DOE: 5/30/2000**
** ****Assume NSF funding profile after discussion**
**This is a BIG step for S&C projects:**
** ****guidance to allow detailed and solid planning**
** ****We want to continue to work with funding agencies to make S&C for CMS a success**
** ****profit for science from investment into LHC program**

**US CMS S&C funding profile**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## CAS Project: Scope + Funding

**CAS Project: Scope + Funding**

**US CMS CAS personnel contributions to CMS Core software:**
**determined by canonical scaling from CMS top-level resource-loaded WBS for Software**
**Add ~25% for additional US-specific software support**
**Proposal for CAS personnel contingency:**
**add a fixed percentage to base cost as management reserve e.g.**
**10% for FY 2001 and 2002**
**25% for FY 2003 and beyond**
**All this is unchanged due to the updated schedule.**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## US CMS S&C profile: January 00 version

- now

**USCMS S&C expected: ****40%-25%  of UF people contribution from FNAL, **_**not shown here**_

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Schedule for US-CMS S&C Project

** ****In order to match the proposed funding profile from DOE/NSF more closely as well as the LHC schedule, we have stretched out the CMS Software and Computing Project Schedule.**
** ****User facilities:**
** ****Now – end FY2003:****	****R&D phase**
** ****FY2004-FY2006:****	****Implementation Phase**
** ****FY2007 and onwards:****	****Operations Phase**
** ****This required a new hardware cost estimate and resource loaded WBS.**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## UF: Updated schedule

**Modified:**
**Stretch hardware installation on UF and Tier2**
**Reevaluate UF facility manpower needs**
**Very similar results**
**Tier 1 and Tier 2 center scope are:**
**proposed by MONARC, **
**defined by CMS Computing Model **
**Reviewed by CERN Hoffmann Review**
**Hardware requirements need to remain flexible to respond to**
**advances in technology**
**in storage: capacity, cost, => ****disk vs. tape, store ****vs. recalculate**
**in networking: bandwidth, latency, ****=> ****local vs. remote data storage and access, replication**
**in computing: speed, cost, => ****servers vs. commodity ****type computing**
**results of review and planning process at CERN**
**results of Grid R&D, availability of integrated ‘middleware’ software**
**=> Serious planning requires contingency here!**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Hardware Costing For UF w/o T2

**Hardware costing for User Facilities, excluding Tier 2**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Hardware Costing For UF

**Hardware costing for User Facilities, INCLUDING Tier 2 **
**from GriPhyN**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## User Facility Personnel Costs

**	****	**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Total User Facility Costs

**	****	**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Total S&C Project cost

**Total S&C Project cost**

**Management reserve: 10% on manpower**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## DOE funding vs. UF(Tier 1) + 2/3 CAS

**Management reserve: 10% on manpower**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## 		
		2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007

1.1 Tier 1 Regional Center				13	17	20	18
1.2 System and User Support	1.3	2.25	3	3	5	4.5	4.5
1.3 Operations and Infrastructure	1	1.25	1.25	3	5	4.5	4.5
1.4 Tier 2 RCs	2.5	3.5	4	5	6.5	7.5	7.5	
1.5 Networking	0.5	1	2	2.5	3	3	3
1.6 Computing and Software R&D 	3	4	4.5	1.4	0.6	0.6	0.6
1.7 Construction Phase	2	2	2	0.25 		Computing
1.8 Support of FNAL 	0.4	1.4	1	2.6	2.25	2	2based Computing

User Facilities (total)	10	15	18	30	37	43	41
(Without T2 Personnel)	7.5	11.5	14	25	30	36	34

Full time staff working on User Facilities tasks: (technicians, support staff, computing professionals)

**	****	****2001****	****2002****	****2003****	****2004****	****2005****	****2006****	****2007**
**1.1 Tier 1 Regional Center****	****	****	****	****13****	****17****	****20****	****18**
**1.2 System and User Support****	****1.3****	****2.25****	****3****	****3****	****5****	****4.5****	****4.5**
**1.3 Operations and Infrastructure****	****1****	****1.25****	****1.25****	****3****	****5****	****4.5****	****4.5**
**1.4 Tier 2 RCs****	****2.5****	****3.5****	****4****	****5****	****6.5****	****7.5****	****7.5****	**
**1.5 Networking****	****0.5****	****1****	****2****	****2.5****	****3****	****3****	****3**
**1.6 Computing and ****Software R&D ****	****3****	****4****	****4.5****	****1.4****	****0.6****	****0.6****	****0.6**
**1.7 Construction Phase****	****2****	****2****	****2****	****0.25 ****	****	****Computing**
**1.8 Support of FNAL**** ****	****0.4****	****1.4****	****1****	****2.6****	****2.25****	****2****	****2****based Computing**
**User Facilities (total)****	****10****	****15****	****18****	****30****	****37****	****43****	****41**
**(Without T2 Personnel)****	****7.5****	****11.5****	****14****	****25****	****30****	****36****	****34**
**Full time staff working on User Facilities tasks: (technicians, support staff, computing professionals)**

**From “Bottoms Up” Approach**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## NSF funding vs. UF(Tier 2) + 1/3 CAS

**Tier 2 center cost:**
** ****start of Prototype centers spread over FY01-04**
** ****final implementation stretched over 2-3 years (FY04-06)**
** ****dominated by potential networking cost**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Funding - Request

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Evaluation of Profiles

** ****The US CMS S&C project  is managed and coordinated by the L1 PM, who carries budget authority**
**Funding shared differently for the two subprojects:**
**Tier1 center funded by DOE**
**Tier2 centers expected to be funded by NSF**
**CAS traditionally funded 2/3 DOE + 1/3 NSF**
** ****NSF part: under-funded by ~$1M/year**
**Tier 2 center cost dominated by networking cost**
**Uncertainty in networking cost for Tier 2 sites**
**Site Networking connectivity must be argument in selection process**
**Leveraging from University sites must contribute to cost of Tier2 centers**
** ****DOE part: **
**Dominated by Tier 1 personnel cost**
**Leveraging from FNAL infrastructure?**
**Part of WBS 1.3: Operations & Infrastructure**
**Part of WBS 1.5: Networking: LAN, WAN, monitoring, security**
**Part of WBS 1.8: Desktop systems, Support, Remote Control Room**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Conclusion (1)

**The project needs to have a project office with:**
**Two project engineers supporting the L1 PM **
**coordinating the activities at all levels**
**Overseeing purchases**
**Establishing MoU’s, SOW’s **
**Preparing for Reviews**
**Tracking budget**
**Tracking the project progress**
**Not yet added to the previous numbers**
**Need to have management reserve / contingency for manpower ****(10% proposed, shown in the graphs)**
**The back loaded funding profile creates big problems now, additional help needed. **
** ****It is essential that we keep flexibility to use funds where needed most; only in this way are we able to take advantage of matching funds.**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000

## Summary

** ****Profiles heavily back-loaded towards 2005**
** ****Result:**
**Funding does not allow to finish R&D and implementation for 2006**
**Very hard to reach milestones: **
**Deliverables for Core Application Software**
**Contributions of US share to **
**Mock Data Challenges, **
**production exercises for trigger and physics studies**
**Test beam analyses for detector optimization**
**Preliminary analysis:  implementation ready by 2007**
**Severe impact for US based CMS data analysis: **
**Will not be able to fully contribute to CMS analysis**
** ****Will compromise readiness of CMS and US CMS for Physics**
**Disadvantage can only slowly be corrected because of operational needs**

**Summary**

- Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C          Matthias Kasemann

- October 24, 2000