1

Developing Countries Access to Scientific Knowledge

Round Table – Trieste, Italy23-24 Oct 2003

Ian Willers

CERN, Switzerland

2

Structure of talk

• Brief introduction to CERN

• CERN’s relationship with different countries

• The experiments

• The computing challenge

• Special example of Pakistan and the CMS experiment

• Conclusion

3

OBSERVERS:•UNESCO•EU•Israel•TurkeySPECIAL OBSERVERS (for LHC):•USA•Japan•Russia

Twenty Member States of CERN

4

International Collaboration for LHC construction

Gross NMS contributionsUS: 200 M$Russia: 100 MCHFJapan: 170 MCHFCanada: 30 MCHFIndia: 25 M$

Cost sharing for LHC (BCHF):MS, Material: 2.1MS, Personnel: 1.1 (approx.)Host States: 0.2

NMS (net): 0.6 (≈15%)

4.0

5

Aerial view

6

From LEP to the LHC

7

LHC Experiments

ATLAS, CMS:- Higgs boson(s)- SUSY particles- …??ALICE:Quark Gluon PlasmaLHC-B:- CP violation in B

8

CMS Magnet Yoke

9

Some examples

The LHC dipole n. 360 from Novosibirsk

CMS feet from Pakistan

LHC corrector magnet from India

10

Access to CERN

• It may be tempting to make “ access to large facilities ” dependent on “membership”, but particle physicists has been able to follow a different approach

• Experiments running on our facilities tend to be based on very large (50-2000 person) collaborations

• This allows people from economically weaker countries to join with those from stronger regions

• So we tend not to look at the passport of the people making proposals

• But (in general) we expect people who have not funded the lab infrastructure to contribute more than their “fair share” to the cost of the experiment

• But the contribution can take many forms, such as assembly effort, software, … look for the “win-win”

11

The LHC Computing Challenge

• New Levels of Data Acquisition

• New Levels Of Event Complexity

• Enormous Quantities of Data

• Access Worldwide

12

Tier 0 at CERN

Estimated CPU Capacity required at CERN

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

199

8

199

9

200

0

200

1

200

2

200

3

200

4

200

5

200

6

200

7

200

8

200

9

201

0

Jan 2000:3.5K SI95

Other experiments

LHCLHC

K SI95

Moore’s law – some measure of the capacity technology advances provide for a constant number of processors or investment

13

Five Emerging Models of Networked Computing From

The Grid• Distributed Computing

– || synchronous processing

• High-Throughput Computing– || asynchronous processing

• On-Demand Computing– || dynamic resources

• Data-Intensive Computing– || databases

• Collaborative Computing– || scientists

14

CERN's Network in the World

267 institutes in Europe, 4603 users208 institutes elsewhere, 1632 userssome points = several institutes

15

Monitoring tools

16

LHC Computing Grid prototype service 2003-5

Tier 0

• CERN

Tier 1 Centres

• Brookhaven National Lab

• CNAF Bologna

• Fermilab

• FZK Karlsruhe

• IN2P3 Lyon

• Rutherford Appleton Lab (UK)

• University of Tokyo

• CERN

Other Centres• Academica Sinica (Taipei)• Barcelona• Caltech• GSI Darmstadt• Italian Tier 2s(Torino, Milano, Legnaro)• Manno (Switzerland)• Moscow State University• NCP, NUST, Pinstech, Islamabad (soon)• NIKHEF Amsterdam• Ohio Supercomputing Centre• Sweden (NorduGrid)• Tata Institute (India)• Triumf (Canada)• UCSD• UK Tier 2s• University of Florida– Gainesville • University of Prague• ……

17

18

Benefits – see talk by Arshad Ali

19

High Level Involvementscientist works hard

builds up relationship

RectorVisitsCERN

MinisterSigns

agreement

President givesblessing

20

Success in Particle Physics CollaborationSome Important Features

• The Scientific Goals are of the highest importance

• The Research requires technological advances ….. of value to all

• The foundations lie in a network of competent institutes worldwide

• The facilities are open to everyone but the results must be published

21

Summary

• Coming together is a beginning

• Keeping together is progress

• Working together is success

• CERN demonstrates successful worldwide international collaboration is possible

• We intend to keep it that way