AFT in LCG Era

1. AFTin LCG Era Vincenzo Innocente CERN/EP AFT & LCG

2. CCS Physics Applications in CMS • Everything physicists directly see: • COBRA • IGUANA • DDD • OSCAR • FAMOS • XDAQ • SCRAM AFT & LCG

3. Data Browser Generic analysis Tools GRID Distributed Data Store & Computing Infrastructure Analysis job wizards Objy tools ORCA COBRA OSCAR FAMOS Detector/Event Display CMS tools Federation wizards Architecture Overview Coherent set of basic tools and mechanisms Consistent User Interface AFT & LCG

4. Framework(s) • Why two frameworks (COBRA and IGUANA)? • Integration of the 2 reptiles has been postponed • Avoid impact on DAQ-TDR • For instance: Current Iguana plug-in mechanism requires changes in SCRAM • No agreement in November on Analysis environment • Wait for new persistency framework and LCG software • Integration is planned for next major release • This will include also the transition to LCG software AFT & LCG

5. Which future for CMS Framework(s) • COBRA implementation, design and foundations hit by: • Objectivity fate in HEP • GRID claims for responsibility • Unclear future in CMS of Python, Lizard, SWIG • Obsolescence of many basic components • Many issues reopened: • Loose or tight integration with LCG persistency • Sharing of responsibility with GRID • MetaData: how, where, who • Which UI, which GUI • Scripting: yes, no, at which level • C++ interpreter OR compiled and dynamically-loaded code • Integration with build system and running environment AFT & LCG

6. Detector Description • DDD is ready to mark a major milestone with a full round-trip within Geant4 • Full persistency mechanism for G4 geometry • Soon integration test with ORCA to replace G3 geometry model • CMS Prototype essentially finished: • Not CMS specific • Supports several geometry models • Not bound to XML • Rely on external geometry modellers (currently G3 or G4) • RTAG and then common product! AFT & LCG

7. Simulation • Simulation infrastructures not (yet?) a real CCS task • OSCAR priorities have privileged G4 validation to framework integration • Line of though in CMS that simulation does not require a common framework with reconstruction (G4 API and UI suffice) • Direct consequences: • Simulation use-cases relevant for COBRA not exercised yet • CMS does not have a validated architecture for simulation software • A clear CMS position is now required at least in the context of LCG. AFT & LCG

8. CCS role in LCG era • Basic Software components will be provided by LCG as • Supported External software (mainly public domain) • In house developed components • Part of a larger effort (HEP or wider) • Specific to LHC • The main role of CMS CCS • Directly contribute to LCG projects • Develop specific CMS software to integrate, interface, extend the components provided by LCG • Two lines of though: • Provide a coherent and consistent framework • Expose “native” API and UI even if conflicting AFT & LCG

9. LCG Simulation, Reconstruction & Analysis Software System Physics modules Specific Framework Event Filter Reconstruction Algorithms Physics Analysis Data Monitoring Generic Application Framework Calibration Objects Configuration Objects Event Objects adapters and extensions Basic Services C++ standard library Extension toolkit ODBMS Geant3/4 CLHEP Paw Replacement AFT & LCG

10. Software Baseline CMS plan is to baseline CCS software end 2003 Before choosing among components we have to choose an Architecture • What to expose to physicists • How we build and run software application • How physics modules communicate with each other • How we use external software • If we use a unique approach to all this What use we make of external software and how we collaborate with(in) LCG will much depend on these choices AFT & LCG