# Presentation: 161842

## U.S. ATLAS Computing and Physics

**Jim Shank**
- Boston University
- DOE/NSF Review of LHC Computing
- Germantown
- 8 July, 2004

## Overview

- ATLAS Events since the January Review
- ATLAS Milestones
- Manpower issues in international ATLAS core sw
- US ATLAS Computing and Physics budget profile
- Scope Control/Project tracking/Reporting
- Research Program Management Plan
- M&O/Computing budget split
- Base Program Issues
- Tier 2 Center Issues
- LCG Issues
- Grid Interoperability, Open Science Grid
- Recommendations from last year

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Events since Jan. 2004 Review

- New Budget Guidance
- ATLAS Data Challenge 2 Started
- ~ 2 months late
- ATLAS Combined Test Beam Started
- Progress on the Open Science Grid
- Series of grid steering group meetings
- Full OSG meeting in Boston 9-10 Sept., 2004.
- Grid 3 still our workhorse for DC2
- ATLAS DB management overhaul
- Torre Wenaus/Richard Hawking co-leaders of broad ATLAS DB effort
- Physics Analysis (see I. Hinchliffe/S. Rajagopalan talks)
- Physics Analysis Tools, Distributed Analysis (ARDA), Analysis Support Group

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## ATLAS Computing Timeline

- From D. Barberis LHCC Review 29 June, 2004

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## 10 Sept. 2003		POOL integration (Release 7) 
					Done 11 Sept. 2003
31 Dec. 2003		Geant4 validation for DC2 complete 
					Done 17 Jan. 2004
27 Feb. 2004		Software Release 8 (ready for DC2/1)
					Done 31 Mar. 2004
1 April 2004		DC2 Phase 1 starts
					Done 24 June 2004
1 May 2004		Ready for combined test beam
					Done 1 May 2004
1 June 2004		DC2 Phase 2 starts
					Delayed to 16 Aug. 2004
31 July 2004		DC2 Phase 2 ends
					Delayed to 15 Sept. 2004

- 					Done 11 Sept. 2003
- 31 Dec. 2003		Geant4 validation for DC2 complete
- 					Done 17 Jan. 2004
- 27 Feb. 2004		Software Release 8 (ready for DC2/1)
- 					Done 31 Mar. 2004
- 1 April 2004		DC2 Phase 1 starts
- 					Done 24 June 2004
- 1 May 2004		Ready for combined test beam
- 					Done 1 May 2004
- 1 June 2004		DC2 Phase 2 starts
- 					Delayed to 16 Aug. 2004
- 31 July 2004		DC2 Phase 2 ends
- 					Delayed to 15 Sept. 2004

**ATLAS High-Level Milestones (1)**

- From D. Barberis LHCC Review 29 June, 2004

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## 30 Nov. 2004		Computing Model paper
					On track (depends on DC2 results)
31 Dec. 2004???	Computing MOU
					Work in progress 
30 June 2005		Computing TDR
					On track (editing committee appointed)
30 Sept. 2005		Software & infrastructure fully functional 			for the start of DC3
31 Mar. 2006		End of DC3. Computing model fully 			exercised for “real” and simulated data 
30 June 2006		Physics Readiness Report
2 October 2006	Ready for Cosmic Ray Run

- 					On track (depends on DC2 results)
- 31 Dec. 2004???	Computing MOU
- 					Work in progress
- 30 June 2005		Computing TDR
- 					On track (editing committee appointed)
- 30 Sept. 2005		Software & infrastructure fully functional 			for the start of DC3
- 31 Mar. 2006		End of DC3. Computing model fully 			exercised for “real” and simulated data
- 30 June 2006		Physics Readiness Report
- 2 October 2006	Ready for Cosmic Ray Run

**ATLAS High-Level Milestones (2)**

- From D. Barberis LHCC Review 29 June, 2004

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Core Software Manpower (2)

- Several pledges of additional manpower from Germany (BMBF (1) and MPI (0.5)), France IN2P3 (0.5), Italy (2), Israel (1), UK (3)
- What materialized:
- Database contribution from Israel (1 FTE at CERN since Jan’04)
- Database contribution from Mainz (~1 FTE since Mar’04)
- Infrastructure (code mgt) from UK (~0.5 FTE since May’04)
- Infrastructure (librarian) from CERN (1 FTE since Jun’04)
- Infrastructure (release coord.) from Taiwan (0.3 FTE starting Jul’04)
- But in the meantime we lost 2 experienced FTEs from Infrastructure
- Still missing:
- work on database integration between different systems (TC, online, offline) (approx. 2-3 FTEs)
- more infrastructure support for remote developers and users (~4 FTEs)

- From D. Barberis LHCC Review 29 June, 2004

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

**Research Program Funding Profile**** (shown at the Jan. 2004 Review at FNAL)**

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Research Program Funding Profile (shown at the Jan. 2004 Review at FNAL)

*Full talks from Jan. Review at: *_[http://agenda.](http://agenda.cern.ch/age?a036695)__[cern](http://agenda.cern.ch/age?a036695)__[.](http://agenda.cern.ch/age?a036695)__[ch](http://agenda.cern.ch/age?a036695)__[/age?a036695](http://agenda.cern.ch/age?a036695)_

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Latest guidance

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Computing/Phys. Budget Profile

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## The Research Program Priorities FY04

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## U.S. ATLAS Research Program is Evolving

**One integrated management plan is being developed for Physics and Computing, M&O, and Upgrade R&D with Mike Tuts.  The Collaboration needs to interact next.**

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Research Program Organization 

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## 7.1 Prioritization of Different Parts of the Research Program

- (New text in the latest Draft)
- Acting on the basis of the DOE plus NSF yearly funding guidance, the Research Program Manager sets target budgets for each Level 2 component of the Research Program including M&O, Physics and Computing, and Upgrade R&D.  Priority may need to be placed more on one of these areas depending on the level of the guidance and the needs of the experiment.  Prioritization established by the RPM will be done in consultation with the Executive Committee.

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Financial Reporting is being Done

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Slide 17

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Slide 18

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Slide 19

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Project Management

- With the WBS scrubbed...
- MS Project scheduling established...
- Priorities established...
- we know how to answer questions like “What would you do if the funding in FY05 is increased by 20%?”

- ...and unfortunately  “What would you do if the FY05 budget is 15% below expectations?”

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## FY05 SW Priorities

- Support for existing FY04 personnel under Project Funds
-  13.8 FTE, $ 2723 k (in FY04$)
- Support move of personnel from PPDG to Project funds
- Increment University based Effort
- Increment ANL Effort on Data Management
- Increment LBNL Effort on Framework
- Athena Framework Grid Integration    (~ 3.4M FY04$)
-  0.5 FTE for core sw support (existing personnel)
- 3 FTEs at Universities (Detector Descr., Grid Integr., sub-system DB support,  general support for US physicists, etc.
-  Total about 4M FY04$.

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Base Program Erosion is Hurting the LHC Physics Program

- ...at Universities and Labs
- Main source of funding for:
- Sub-system reconstruction software
- Physics analysis software and actual analysis
- Re-direction from Tevatron/SLAC will not happen in time
- Beginning to see some, but...
- Most Tevatron physicists still want to reap the benefits of their long ordeal
- Still a couple of years away before moving to LHC
- This comes late for LHC turn on
- Post-docs/Students needed now

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## T2 Selection Process

- Important to move on this soon, T2’s must be in place in 2005. Fully operational by 2006.
- We will have a review committee to select sites based on proposals submitted by 30 Sept. 2004.
- Call for proposals in draft form now, will go out next week.
- Select at least 3 sites  (Oct 2004), maybe 4
- Rest (1 or 2?) next year.
- Requirements:
- Local infrastructure with a track record
- Including ATLAS track record
- Breadth of program beyond LHC  Open Science Grid
- E&O

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Grids: LCG/OSG

- Still trying to improve the US/LCG interactions
- More meetings to form the Grid Deployment Area Steering Group
- Seems to be going forward (buy-in from many groups)
- Service Challenges
- Exercise key areas like reliable data transfer, job submission/grid exerciser, security incident response.
- OSG
- We have had a series of meetings to better define the OSG and map out how we incorporate  the existing US grid projects into an OSG.
- Workshop planned 9-10 Sept, in Boston (probably at Radcliffe)

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Computing Model for LHC

- Current model for ATLAS
- 1st pass reconstruction at CERN
- ESD’s and a fraction of raw data at Tier 1’s
- 250 Hz+2.5 MB raw data rate
- Review in progress for LHC computing baseline – outcome expected in Sept (04)
- B. Gibbard US LHC representative
- Report to C-RRB in October meeting

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## FY05 and beyond

- Major management task for next few months
- Assigning priorities, establish profile.
- “target” ramp up to 7795 k$ helps
- But, many things ramping up in FY05:
- Tier 1
- Tier 2’s !
- Software
**Ramp things we can not afford in FY04**
**Further ramps in University based effort (analysis tools, DB, e.g.)**
- Production
**More DC’s ******** more FTE’s for production**
- Makes FY05 look like a tough year also.

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Response to Recommendations in the Jan 2004 DOE/NSF Report(1) -- Facilities

- Pursue interoperability
- We play key role in the ATLAS production system which is the premiere example of grid interoperability: LCG/Nordugrid/Grid3
- Continue active role in evolution of Grid2003 (OSG)
- We are very active in keeping Grid3 going
- We are participating in  many meetings to define the OSG
- We will host the next big OSG meeting 9-10 Sept.
- Tier 1 staffing/Hardware should be given priority
- We started the hiring ramp early
- T1 has priority now
- US ATLAS should work with BNL on networking
- J. Huth: Series of meetings with BNL management (T. Schlagel, B. Scott, B. Gibbard,...) Working on a possible 10 Gbs dark fiber connection.

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Response to Recommendations  in the Jan 2004 DOE/NSF Report(2) -- Software

- Funding: establish priorities so we can react to funding shortfalls
- Support 2 platforms
- Mac support being added now
- Existing QA plan should be fully executed
- Need to schedule code reviews
- Resolve the DB coordination issue
- Donenew managers
- Need to add user support
- Analysis Support Group
- HLT/Offline common management
- Progress being made
- ARDA
- D. Adams is playing a leading role in shaping ARDA and ATLAS Distributed Analyis in general.

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Response to Recommendations  in the Jan 2004 DOE/NSF Report(3)--Project Management

- Funding agencies meet the profile
- New guidance does that
- We need strong Base Program support too!
- Research Operations Management Plan
- Needs more S&C
- In progress
- Strengthen Communications with CERN
- New roles in ATLAS org. chart.
- More meetings with LCG
- Control Scope
- Always a concern. Solution is seen in getting other countries to contribute.
- Base Program Needs to be increased

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## Conclusions

- Management tools in place to track progress, set priorities, control scope
- Budget pressure still hurts
- SW scope smaller than we think appropriate
- Facilities ramping too slow!
- Hampering our ability to play a leading role
- T2 ramp is also late
- University support lacking
- Will damage us when physics analysis with real data starts.
- Leading the Grid effort
- US ATLAS drove the upgrade of Grid3+ through the grid3dev project
- (VDT 1.1.14 based) grid3v2.1, a major upgrade
- DC2 production starting now
- Phase 2 of DC2 will involve distributed analysis

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## DC2 Running on Grid3 (1)

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown

## DC2 Running on Grid3 (2)

- J. Shank       DOE/NSF Review             8 July, 2004      Germantown