1 / 16

Report from Working Group C-2

Report from Working Group C-2. Michael Wright Pete Beckman Reagan Moore Jorge Moré Jim Myers Michael O’Keefe Gary Roediger Vicky White Christine Yang. We learned a lot!.

lynn
Download Presentation

Report from Working Group C-2

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Report from Working Group C-2 • Michael Wright • Pete Beckman • Reagan Moore • Jorge Moré • Jim Myers • Michael O’Keefe • Gary Roediger • Vicky White • Christine Yang

  2. We learned a lot! • Whether or not we have produced anything of value to the rest of the group, we each have a much better understanding for ourselves of how the components of the DOE2000 program fit together and how they have many common needs.

  3. Recurring Theme in Discussions • To collaborate (or interoperate) we need information. Our biggest barrier is the difficulty of finding all the relevant information we need in order to use a tool or to work together ourselves.

  4. Integration, Integration, Integration • Integration is going to require that we make metadata generated by the various tools generally available in a common manner outside of / between tools.

  5. Use Cases • Validate large data sets using information on software tools and signed test datasets in libraries • Alert users of a dataset of a new “limitation” based on new discoveries about software used in processing it • Graphically link several tools to create/analyze/visualize/record data • Route data for signatures, validation, and automatically route from notebook to library

  6. Similar needs exist for component software development • What are capabilities of a component in terms of platform, expected error, scaling, memory, performance characteristics • What are effects of code modifications on above capabilities • This is much more than just a version control system

  7. Information Workflow (metadata categories) • Data Workflow • CCA, CPSEs • Software Workflow • Software development • Data Validation • Records/Legal Workflow • Notebooks • Digital Libraries • Collaboration Workflow • session setup • business workflow • Scientific Workflow • processing history • CPSEs

  8. Metadata Middleware • Metadata definition • attributes • relationships (e.g. collections) • notifications • Metadata extraction • Metadata translation • Metadata discovery (e.g. agents) • Metadata Engine/Repository • Metadata driven tools • (new tools, integration of existing tools) • (Graphical) Workflow definition tools

  9. Recommended actions • Formalize development of metadata middleware in a new group/metagroup • Metadata definition projects for data, software, records, … • Verify that groups are working together

  10. Support • Not everything should be deployed and supported, but • Research ->Prototype • Review Prototype • If yes, fund pilot deployment • Review pilot • If yes, fund deployment/support • Assumed - feedback to researchers at each stage of development

  11. Other needs we identified, some current, some new • Common Component Architecture • Automatic differentiation tools • tools for computing derivatives, sensitivity, … • Visualization framework • need data descriptors • Algorithm development • Preconditioning interfaces • Equation solver interface

  12. Collaboration Issues from Point of View of a Potential User • Collaborative visualization • Keeping track of data sets • later annotations to data sets as people use them for research • Unencumbered software • Videoconferencing deployment should be integrated into tools • Tool deployment • Indexing/directory service to locate metadata/data • persistence of data -> how to handle?

  13. Important topics for impact on user community • Facilitate deployment • install, support, licensing, platforms • interfaces to other tools • Security • enable access • legal aspects (notebooks) • need something stable and supportable • single security context

  14. Q: What can support SSI?A: Lots of things! • The tools needed for DOE2000 are useful for SSI but need to be enhanced to provide: • development / hardening • deployment / support • higher performance versions • processing speed • large scale data sets • MICS SSI/CSET • Research Hardened Tools

  15. DOE 2000 can supply to SSI: • Tools for • building more sophisticated applications • components, not monolithic • data management, information handling • abstractions • security infrastructure • where does data live • Visualization framework

  16. Interaction with other agencies • See last two slides from Group M-2! • Quote from Group A-1: • “Interagency cooperation works best from the bottom up rather than the top down.”

More Related