# Presentation: 922438

## U.S. ATLAS Computing

**Overview**
**Status of ATLAS computing**
**U.S. ATLAS**
**Project Management Organization**
**Status of efforts**
**Core software**
**Subsystems**
**Facilities**
**Schedule**
**FY 00 funding request**
**Summary**

## Scale of Computing Effort

**Rough scaling of factors of 5 to 1E+3 in relevant parameters from Tevatron Experiments**
**Manpower x5**
**CPU/event x1E+3 (event complexity)**
**Data volume x10 to x1E+2 (channel count)**
**Distribution of data x10**
**U.S. effort comparable to scale of Tevatron experiment.**
**Effort $15M/year **

**Scales from experience**

## Goals for the next year

**Project organization**
**Management**
**Identify areas of responsibility**
**Integration of efforts into ATLAS**
**Inception/development of software**
**U.S. support facilities**
**Planning/development of infrastructure**
**Prepare for reviews**

## International ATLAS

**New Computing Coordinator**
**Norman McCubbin (RAL)**
**Available full time November**
**Approval vote - ATLAS CB June 10th**
**Responsibility: Core software**
**New Physics Coordinator**
**Fabiola Gianotti (CERN)**
**Approval vote - ATLAS CB June 10th**
**Detector specific sim/reconstruction**
**Organized within subsystems**

## Architecture Taskforce

**Software partitioned into work packages**
**Katsuya Amako, KEK**
**Laurent Chevalier, CEA**
**Andrea Dell’Acqua, CERN**
**Fabiola Gianotti, CERN**
**Steve Haywood, RAL  (Chair)**
**Jurgen Knobloch, CERN**
**Norman McCubbin, RAL**
**David Quarrie, LBL**
**R.D. Schaffer, LAL**
**Marjorie Shapiro, LBNL**
**Valerio Vercesi, Pavia**

## Architecture T.F. Status 

**Three meetings so far**
**Directions:**
**Language: C++ (allow for migration to other e.g. JAVA)**
**Examine GAUDI (LHCb) architecture**
**Adoption of “use cases”**
**Goals for October**
**Outline of architecture design**
**Appointment of Chief Architect**
**Commission work on prototyping of parts of design**
**Create use-cases, requirement document**
**Define packages and relations (package diagram)**

**Stages in Software Management**

## Quality Control

**Recommend software performance specifications, review process**
**Makoto Asai, Hiroshima**
**Dario Barberis, Genoa**
**Martine Bosman, Barcelona**
**Bob Jones, CERN**
**Jean-Francois LaPorte, CEA**
**Helge Meinhard, CERN**
**Maya Stavrianakou, CERN**

## Action on other Groups

**National Board**
**Supported platforms**
**Regional centers**
**Training**
**Network of national contacts for training**
**C++, OO programming**
**GEANT 4**
**ATLAS Specific**

## ATLAS/CERN Schedule ‘00

**Sept. ‘99**
**Start of Cashmore/Hoffman review**
**Oct. ‘99**
**Report of architecture T.F.**
**Commissioning of prototyping code**
**Jan ‘00 **
**Start preparations for bilateral agreements**
**Fall ‘00**
**Report of Cashmore/Hoffman review**
**MOU preparations**

## U.S. Participation

**Frank Paige - Co- convenor of SUSY working group**
**David Malon -  Co-leader of database group**
**Craig Tull - Architecture Group  **
**Ian Hinchliffe - Leader of Event Generator group**
**David Quarrie, Marjorie Shapiro - Architecture Task Force**
**John Parsons - Co-convenor of Top working group**
**Misha Leltchouk - L Ar simulation coordinator**
**Michael Shupe - Convenor of Background working group**
**Fred Luehring - TRT software coordinator**
**Steve Goldfarb - Muon Database Coordinator**
**Tom LeCompte - Tilecal Database Coordinator**
**Krzys Sliwa - Chair of ATLAS World-wide computing group**
**Frank Merritt - Training contact, Tilecal Reconstruction coord.**
**Bruce Gibbard - Regional center contact**
**John Huth- National Board contact**

## U.S. ATLAS Computing

**NSF, DOE:  LHC computing activities are now “projectized”**
**Implications for U.S. ATLAS:**
**Direct reporting lines through Project Manager (Bill Willis) and BNL Directorate (Tom Kirk)**
**Appointment of Associate Project Manager for Computing and Physics (John Huth)**
**Implications for Agencies:**
**Must clarify reporting lines, operations **

## Proposed Management

## Management Structure

**Reflects flow of deliverables to, from ATLAS**
**Appointments (2 year renewable terms)**
**Physics: Ian Hinchliffe (LBNL)**
**Facilities: Bruce Gibbard (BNL) + deputy**
**Issues**
**Software manager**
**Availability within U.S. ATLAS - hire?**
**Flatter structure for the time being?**
**Bring on soon****?  Most desirable!**

## Management Plan

**Associate Project Manager**
**Member of E.C. **
**Develop and execute project plan**
**Establish and maintain project organization+Tracking**
**Develop annual budget requests**
**Liason to ATLAS Computing Management**
**Appoint L2 managers**
**Review and approve MOU’s to CERN and Institutes**
**Exercise change control authority**
**Establish advisory committees where appropriate**
**Provide reports and organize reviews**

## Implications for APM

**APM is a time consuming job.**
**Actions for John Huth:**
**Relief from MDT electronics coordinator (Jay Chapman, U. Michigan)**
**Relief from U.S. ATLAS Inst. Bd. Chair (Jim Siegrist, LBNL)**
**Teaching relief - spring terms ‘00 and ‘01**
**Granted by Harvard University**

## Level 2 Managers

**Appointed by APM, concurrance of Exec. Comm.**
**Members of E.C. (+ APM, + deputy)**
**Two year renewable terms**
**Generic responsibilities**
**Develop definition of milestones and deliverables**
**Define, with APM, organizational substructure of level 2**
**Develop, with APM, annual budget proposals**
**Identify resource imbalances within subprojects and recommend adjustments**
**Deliver scope of subproject on time within budget**
**Maintain cost and schedule**
**Provide reports to APM, PM**
**Liason with counterparts at CERN**

## Specific Responsibilities

**Physics Manager **
**Generators, physics objects, benchmark studies, mock data challenge**
**Software **
**Core**
**Detector specific sim/recon**
**Training**
**Facilities**
**Tier 1,2, networking, support**

## Project Engineer

**Same roles as project engineer’s for construction project**
**Tracking**
**Reviews, oversight**
**Reporting**
**Technical input**

## Proposed Names

**Physics: Ian Hinchliffe (LBNL)**
**Contacted, accepted**
**Policy question: physicists on project**
**Software: search underway **
**Facilities: Bruce Gibbard (+deputy)**
**Deputy: Jim Shank**

## Facilities Manager

**Bruce Gibbard (BNL)**
**Proposal to add U.S. ATLAS Deputy**
**U.S. ATLAS and RHIC Deputies**
**General agreement with Bruce, Tom Kirk**
**Begin to fill in other areas**
**Networking**
**Tier 1**
**Remote sites**
**Support**

## Detector Contacts

**L Ar - Srini Rajagopalan (BNL)**
**Tilecal - Frank Merritt (U.Chicago)**
**ID- Laurent Vacavant (LBNL)**
**Muon - Bing Zhou (U. Michigan)**
**TRT - Keith Baker (Hampton)**
**Trigger/DAQ -Andy Lankford (UCI)**

## Planning Activities

**Writing/preparation assignments for review - next week**
**L2 managers where appropriate (ie. Facilities, physics)**
**Core**
**Sim/recon**
**Training**
**Management (PMP for computing)**
**MRE/IT “team”**
**Review in October**

## WBS Structure

**Should be flexible while project definition is underway (level 3+beyond)**
**Level 2’s should be fixed now**
**Commensurate with management structure**
**Adopt lead number “2” **

## High Levels of WBS

**Draft WBS**
**2.1 Physics**
**Generators, benchmarks, mock data challenges, physics objects**
**2.2 Software**
**2.2.1 Core**
**Control/Framework,database, event model, analysis tools**
**2.2.2 Detector specific simulation and recon.**
**2.2.3 Collaborative tools**
**2.2.3 Training**
**2.3 Facilities**
**Regional center, remote sites, networking, support**

## Near Term Activities/Issues 

**U.S. ATLAS Web-site**
**Weekly video conferences**
**Support role of BNL**
**Gathering FY 00 requests**
**Advisory group appointment**
**Writing assignments for proposal **
**NSF MRE/IT proposal - Tier 2 centers**
**Discussions of deliverables with ATLAS**
**Interactions with agencies**
**JOG, Computing review**

##  Software 

**Core Software**
**Control/Framework (Tull)**
**Database, Tilecal Pilot Project (Malon)**
**Event Model (Rajagopalan)**
**Detector-specific sim/reconstruction**
**Representatives from subsystems chosen**
** ****Training (Merritt)**
**Establishment of OO courses (BNL, U. Chicago)**

## General Requirements

**Software must last over lifetime of experiment, yet track language changes**
**Well defined interface layers**
**Maintainability, engineering critical**
**Number of users, use of software professionals**
**Adaptability to distributed environments**
**Learn from experiments working on OO (BaBar, D0, CDF, STAR)**

## Database

**David Malon (ANL)**
**Tilecal pilot project **
**Tilecal testbeam data in object database**
**Testbed for ATLAS technologies and strategies**
**Early feedback to developers**
**Generalized to other subsystems**
**Database core software**
** ****Transient and persistent object mapping**
**Definition of database/control interface**
**Specifications**
**Examine alternatives to Objectivity**

## Tilecal Model

## Database Schedule

## Database Milestones

**Jan ‘00 ****	**
**Survey of mapping strategies**
**Feb. ‘00**
**Infrastructure for developers deployed**
**April ‘00**
**Validation of strategies in testbed**
**July ‘00**
**Database management infrastructure defined**
**Oct ‘00**
**Infrastructure for distributed access deployed**
**Jan ‘01**
**Scalability test**
**Oct ‘01**
**Beta release**

## Control/Framework

**Craig Tull (LBNL) **
**Working on user requirements document (w/ Hinchliffe, Shapiro, Vacavent)**
**Market survey of framework systems**
**Object component model**
**AC++**
**Compatibility with ATLAS architecture**
**Resource loaded work plan exists**
**Work with A.T.F. for design requirements**
**Already have tested prototype designs**

## Framework Milestones

## Framework Schedule

## One Framework Model

## Event Model

**Type of objects that are stored **
**Client’s view of the event**
**Physical organization of the event**
**Client’s interface to the event**
**Mechanism to navigate between objects**
**Transient to Persistent Object mapping**

## Event Model Milestones

**Nov. 99****	**
**Review of models in other exp’s****	**
**Requirements documents**
**Dec. 99**
**Resource loaded schedule**
**Mar. 00**
**Baseline design**
**June 00**
**Alpha release**
**Aug. 00**
**Review experience**
**FY 01**
**Beta release**

## Framework Options

## Some Detector Activities

**TRT/ID **
**Put full TRT simulation into GEANT4**
**L-Ar **
**Coil, cryos in GEANT4 (Nevis)**
**Accordian structure in GEANT4 (BNL)**
**Tilecal**
**Pilot project**

## Some Detector Activities

**Muon**
**Study of noise in Higgs-> 4 muon **
**Combined performance of ID+muon system (A reconstruction)**
**CSC into simulation**
**Trigger/DAQ**
**Comparison of switching architectures**
**Background studies**
**Optimization of shielding (100 MeV muon background)**

## Training

**New paradigm of OO programming**
**Training courses (F. Merritt)**
**Course offered at BNL (near future)**
**Course offered at Chicago**
**Successful programs seen at other experiments (CDF, D0, BaBar)**
**Ongoing need for training throughout course of experiment **
**Documentation**
**ATLAS-specific**

## Software Development

**Asymptotic level - est. 10 software professionals**
**Peak load (circa 2003) est. 16 S.P.’s**
**Extrapolations based on existing experiments and proposed areas of responsibility, fractional of U.S. participation**
**Choice of technology can influence actual needs strongly (e.g. BaBar, STAR in database)**

## Planned Training

**All by Object Mentor (BaBar, others)**
**Organized by Frank Merritt**
**Courses approximately 1 week long**
**Aug. 9 - BNL - OO Design - 13 people**
**Sept. 20 - U.C. - OO Design - 15 people**
**Oct. 18 - ANL or BNL - Advanced OO - 10 people**
**Nov. 8 - FNAL - GEANT 4 - 14 people**

## Facilities

**BNL ramping up support facility**
**Taps into RHIC Computing Facility**
**Major issue of Tier 1/2 facilities**
**Scale of “Tier 2’s” **
**Size for support staff, infrastructure**
**Computing model for U.S. (e.g. grids)**
**Being addressed in NSF MRE/IT proposal**
**In the process of developing  policy on usage, support of platforms at institutions**

## Facilities

**Tier 1 (Regional Center)**
**BNL**
**Leverages RCF**
**ATLAS specific needs, however.**
**Primary support function for U.S.****	**
**Code release, support**
**Major processing, event store**
**Personnel scale estimate:**
**Roughly linear ramp from 2 FTE’s (now) to 22 or more (depending on computing model)**

## MONARC

** ****Models of Networked Architecture at Regional Centers (ATLAS+CMS)**
**Alexander Nazarenko, Tufts hire**
**Tasks:**
**Validate simulation models**
**Perform first simulations of LHC architectures**
**After Dec. ‘99, focus on planning for regional centers**
**Model validation - end of September**
**Understanding of U.S. computing facilities**

## NSF MRE/IT Proposal

**Tier 2 centers**
**Approx. 5 total**
**256 node systems**
**100 TB tape system**
**Low maintenance**
**Linked by computing grid**
**Computing professionals **
**Dual role - user/developers**

## Review Process

**Send proposals to Advisory Group (Aug. 4th)**
**Charge: **
**Identify areas of overlap/commonality**
**Suggest simplifications/savings**
**Coherency with ATLAS effort**
**Prioritize**
**Meet with Agencies to establish scale for FY 00, initial request  (Now)**
**Confer with Advisory group on feedback**
**Prepare, review documentation for Dec. review  (mid-late Sept.)**

## Priorities

**Critical personnel **
**People who would otherwise be lost, fulfilling a critical role**
**Core software effort **
**Prerequisite to inclusion of sim/recon software**
**Yet, cannot commit to major ramp (no MOU’s)**
**Support of U.S. efforts (facilities)**
**Critical studies**
**Transition to OO**

## Priorities

**Coherency in development of plan**
**Matching of facilities scope to usage**
**E.g. database effort, simulations**
**Contiguous/overlapping areas**
**E.g. event model, database, control/framework**

## FY 00 Needs

**Starting Oct. 1st - will need more than simple continuation of present level**
**Support functions at BNL**
**Deputy Facilities Manager**
**Core support - database**
**Estimate roughly 4 FTE increment**
**Remaining needs made part of review process for Dec.**
**Still give estimates for needs beyond December -> now**

## Facilities

**Support for U.S. users a necessary precondition for effective U.S. participation (like training)**
**Use of RCF leverages existing facilities**
**Requesting 3 FTE’s Oct. 1 (deputy+support)**
**$50K of equipment Oct. 1 (500 SpecInt95)**
**$500K (CPU, disk, mass storage) - after review**

## Training

**Necessary precondition to effective U.S. participation.**
**Must be done now (trained group of physicists)**
**Substantial pay-back (experience in industry)**
**NSF request of $75K to subsidize courses ($1k/student + setup)**

## Leveraging Funds

**Groups that have applied for internal funds**
**BNL: Already support, 2 FTE’s for FY 00 (core software)**
**LBNL: Request for support on control/framework**
**U.Chicago: Advance support for training, request for software professional to start**

## FTE Request

## Schedule

**July **
**Propose management structure to E.C., PM**
**Collaboration meeting**
**Tier 1/2 scoping**
**Plans for FY 00 reviewed**
**MRE “White paper”**
**August**
**Present FY 00 plans to agencies**
**Outline and writing assignments for proposal (Dec.)**

## Schedule 

**September**
**First drafts of proposal**
**Management PMP**
**Software: Core and recon/sim**
**Facilities**
**Training, collaborative tools**
**October**
**Revise proposal, review**
**November**
**  ****Meeting to prepare for Dec. review**

## Schedule

**December (January?)**
**Agency review**
**January**
**Revise funding plan for FY 00**
**Begin work on bilateral agreements**
**Ongoing - and beyond January**
**Prototyping code**
**Progress toward baselining**
**Filling in management slots**
**Bilateral agreements**

## Summary 

**Project organization**
**Management**
**Identify areas of responsibility**
**Integration of efforts into ATLAS**
**Inception/development of software**
**U.S. support facilities**
**Planning/development of infrastructure**
**Prepare for reviews**

## Summary

**Major points:**
**Oct. 1st FY 00 needs are more than ongoing (4 FTE)**
**Hardware to augment RCF**
**Training physicists in OO design**
**Continue to fill in management structure**