U.S. ATLAS Computing Project: Budget Profiles, Milestones Jim Shank Boston University Physics and Computing Advisory Panel Review LBNL Nov., 2002

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 2 The last 2 days… Workshop to prepare the 2003 NSF ITR proposalWorkshop to prepare the 2003 NSF ITR proposal Large ITR: $15M over 5 years Joint ATLAS/CMS + Computing Sciences The Workshop was charged with identifying a critical area of computing needed for LHC that was not being funded by exsting programsThe Workshop was charged with identifying a critical area of computing needed for LHC that was not being funded by exsting programs Participants from a wide spectrum LCG project EDG project Trillium (GriPhyN, iVDGL, PPDG) CMS/ATLAS communities Some other physics experiments… 2 Working groups:2 Working groups: The BIG Picture group The ITR group

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 3 Categories of missing pieces Transition to production level grids (middleware support, error recovery, robustness, 24x7, monitoring and system usage optimization, strategy and policy for resource allocation, authentication and authorization, simulation of grid operations, tools for optimizing distributed systems)Transition to production level grids (middleware support, error recovery, robustness, 24x7, monitoring and system usage optimization, strategy and policy for resource allocation, authentication and authorization, simulation of grid operations, tools for optimizing distributed systems) Globally Enabled Analysis Communities (WG2)Globally Enabled Analysis Communities (WG2) Enabling Global Collaboration (a medium ITR?)Enabling Global Collaboration (a medium ITR?) Slide from WG1 Summary (I. Gaines)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 4 Who Fills in Missing Pieces Experiments (from existing budgets) (but remember gap between bare bones funding level and originally proposed leadership funding level)Experiments (from existing budgets) (but remember gap between bare bones funding level and originally proposed leadership funding level) LCG (from existing funding)LCG (from existing funding) Current grid projects (both connected to HEP and more general projects)Current grid projects (both connected to HEP and more general projects) Near future grid projectsNear future grid projects This large ITR: Globally Enabled Analysis CommunitiesThis large ITR: Globally Enabled Analysis Communities Additional medium ITR (?): Enabling Global CollaborationAdditional medium ITR (?): Enabling Global Collaboration Slide from WG1 Summary (I. Gaines)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 5 Globally Empowered Analysis Communities: think globally, act locally User Grid Interactions (Mike, Bolek, Craig, Shaowen)User Grid Interactions (Mike, Bolek, Craig, Shaowen) data browsing tools User Interfaces Visualisation Tools Education outreach Interactive tools Developing automation (Higher level services, AI) Dynamic Resource Control (Sridahara, Kaushik, John)Dynamic Resource Control (Sridahara, Kaushik, John) Resource scheduling job scheduling environment control resource auditing, priority and priv. Data Provenance and workflow (Mike, Rick, David Adams)Data Provenance and workflow (Mike, Rick, David Adams) Community sharing and collaboration metadata management and tools (Greg and Jaideep, David Malon)metadata management and tools (Greg and Jaideep, David Malon) specification of data sets spec. of user analysis queries (metadata browser) Equivalence Data Management (Ian, Torre)Data Management (Ian, Torre) storage and data management data management optimisations (Obj. level) Slide from WG2 Summary (R. Cavanaugh)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 6 Template for summarising the different Topics Make a strong connection to the use casesMake a strong connection to the use cases how it is different from existing projectshow it is different from existing projects why it is new and revolutionary Status of TopicStatus of Topic Description of abilitiesDescription of abilities Generalisation beyond HEPGeneralisation beyond HEP How it ties into TitleHow it ties into Title Slide from WG2 Summary (R. Cavanaugh)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 7 Still need... $15M spread over 5 years$15M spread over 5 years scope needs to be consistent with this Need deliverables Need designated editors for textNeed designated editors for text Rob Ed., Ruth assists Need list of participantsNeed list of participants Slide from WG2 Summary (R. Cavanaugh)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 8 Project Core SW FTE

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 9 ATLAS Subsystem/Task Matrix Offline Coordinator ReconstructionSimulationDatabaseChair N. McCubbin D. Rousseau A. Dell’Acqua D. Malon Inner Detector D. Barberis D. Rousseau F. Luehring S. Bentvelsen / D. Calvet Liquid Argon J. Collot S. Rajagopalan M. Leltchouk H. Ma Tile Calorimeter A. Solodkov F. Merritt V.Tsulaya T. LeCompte MuonJ.Shank J.F. Laporte A. Rimoldi S. Goldfarb LVL 2 Trigger/ Trigger DAQ S. George S. Tapprogge M. Weilers A. Amorim / F. Touchard Event Filter V. Vercesi F. Touchard Computing Steering Group members/attendees: 4 of 19 from US (Malon, Quarrie, Shank, Wenaus) Physics Coordinator: F.Gianotti Chief Architect: D.Quarrie

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 10 Budget Profile Overview What has happened since last reviewWhat has happened since last review The Bare-Bones profile from last summer The construction project stretch-outThe construction project stretch-out The NSF M&O/Computing proposalThe NSF M&O/Computing proposal New profile estimateNew profile estimate

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 11 Bare Bones Budget from June 2002

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 12 Recent BCP (approved recently)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 13 NSF M&O/Computing proposal budget Submitted Oct. 02

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 14 Nov 2002 Profile Estimate

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 15 Nov02 Profile Estimate Breakout

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 16 Profile comparison

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 17 Software Project Developments Recent software progress has been driven by the ATLAS data challenges.Recent software progress has been driven by the ATLAS data challenges. This will be mentioned in many other talks at this review Some details of the ongoing and soon to be ongoing DC’sSome details of the ongoing and soon to be ongoing DC’s The US ATLAS TestbedThe US ATLAS Testbed Review of ATLAS MilestonesReview of ATLAS Milestones

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 18 ATLAS DC1 Phase 1 : July-August 2002 (A. Putzer) 1.Australia 2.Austria 3.Canada 4.CERN 5.Czech Republic 6.France 7.Germany 8.Israel 9.Italy 10.Japan 11.Nordic 12.Russia 13.Spain 14.Taiwan 15.UK 16.USA

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 19 ATLAS DC1 Phase 2 : October-November 2002 Pile-Up Production (High and Low Luminosity)Pile-Up Production (High and Low Luminosity) About the same CPU neeed as for phase 1 70 Tbyte files Additional countries/institutes will joinAdditional countries/institutes will join Large scale Grid test foreseen end NovemberLarge scale Grid test foreseen end November As many sites involved as possible Stability test : ~ 1-2 weeks Test of the Worldwide Computing Model Next Steps (2003)Next Steps (2003) Reconstruction (scheduled activities) Analysis (`chaotic access‘: most demanding)

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 20 ATLAS DC2 : October March 2004 Use Geant4Use Geant4 Perform large scale physics analysisPerform large scale physics analysis Use LCG common softwareUse LCG common software Use widely Grid middlewareUse widely Grid middleware Further test of the computing modelFurther test of the computing model ~ same amount of data as for DC1~ same amount of data as for DC1 ATLAS DC3 : End Begin times more data than for DC25 times more data than for DC2 ATLAS DC4 : End Begin times more data than for DC32 times more data than for DC3

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 21 Summary Major Milestones Green: Done Gray: Original date Blue: Current date

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 22 Major Milestones One DC per year until startup

Nov 2002 Jim Shank, PCAP Review LBNL 23 Summary Great progress/success with the Data Challenges.Great progress/success with the Data Challenges. US ATLAS Testbed has become MUCH more functionalUS ATLAS Testbed has become MUCH more functional Driven by DC and the SuperComputing 2002 demonstrations taking place next week Interactions with CERNInteractions with CERN ATLAS interaction with LCG needs strengthening although US is quite active. International ATLAS responding positively to our pressure: SIT