Interaction between SWG and SGS-OUs Fabio Pasian & Marc Sauvage (EC SGS Project Office)
15
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12 Euclid Consortium Interaction between SWG and SGS-OUs Fabio Pasian & Marc Sauvage (EC SGS Project Office) The presented document is Proprietary information of the Euclid Consortium. This document shall be used and disclosed by the receiving Party and its related entities (e.g. contractors and subcontractors) only for the purposes of fulfilling the receiving Party's responsibilities under the Euclid Project and that identified and marked technical data shall not be disclosed or retransferred to any other entity without prior written permission of the document preparer .
description
Interaction between SWG and SGS-OUs Fabio Pasian & Marc Sauvage (EC SGS Project Office). - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of Interaction between SWG and SGS-OUs Fabio Pasian & Marc Sauvage (EC SGS Project Office)
Euclid Science CapabilitiesFabio Pasian & Marc Sauvage
(EC SGS Project Office)
The presented document is Proprietary information of the Euclid Consortium. This document shall be used and disclosed by the receiving Party and its related entities (e.g. contractors and subcontractors) only for the purposes of fulfilling the receiving Party's responsibilities under the Euclid Project and that identified and marked technical data shall not be disclosed or retransferred to any other entity without prior written permission of the document preparer.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
Euclid
Consortium
Rationale
The SWG and the SGS will constantly interact throughout the mission phases.
During the development of the SGS, the SWGs set requirements on the algorithmic objectives and defines the validation testing of the pipeline module.
During operations, the SGS systems produce the data products that form the basis of the SWG work.
The science objectives of Euclid are quite ambitious, and require a complex data processing system.
The interface between the SGS and the SWGs must be clearly defined to avoid biasing the SGS products, or overlap and/or duplication of work between the SGS and the SWGs.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
DD phase - Detailed design and production of the code
OM phase - Operations and maintenance
CV
SUR
AT plan
SVVP - Software Verification and Validation Plan
AT Plan - Acceptance Test
URD - User Requirements Document
SSD - Software Specification Document
SUM - Software User Manual
STD - Software Transfer Document
SWG Development
SR/AD
DD
UR
The ICD originates from discussions between OU-LE3 and the SWGs.
Draft 0.5, distributed to the OU+SDC leads, and SWG coords was iterated inside the SGS PO.
Comments are expected and welcome.
It's short (only 7 pages of meaningful text)!
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
The SGS PO (manager, scientist, system team lead + support team).
The OU leads.
The SDC managers.
The Science Working Groups coordinators
The leads of the two primary cosmology probes SWGs (4 persons).
2 rotating representatives for leads of the legacy, theory and simulation SWGs.
These two representative bodies are in charge of taking care of the interface issues. See the EC Management Plan for names (wiki).
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
A key concept: avoid confirmation bias
How? try to maintain cosmology "independence" and/or "blindness" in the SGS pipeline.
SGS codes should refrain from relying on cosmology assumptions ("independence"), and their validation should not be done against a given cosmology ("blindness").
Requests to depart from that, (e.g. use or produce absolute quantities) should be made known to the Organization Group, to be discussed with the SWG coords, and use the reference cosmology maintained by the SWG coords.
This is/will be a highly debated item in discussions between the SGS and the SWG.
Is it enough to avoid a confirmation bias? likely not.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
General principle for SGS data processing pipeline development:
SWG formulates requirement for the production of data with specified properties, as well as tests that have to be run to validate that part of the SGS pipeline.
OU researches algorithms that fulfill the requirement, and once the SWG has accepted that the algorithm is an acceptable candidate, passes to the SDC-Dev the algorithm description and a test "plan" for verification and validation.
OU algorithms suggestions can only be refused by SWG because they do not meet the requirement.
Each SGS WP should be connected, directly or through other WPs to a requirement on the SGS.
"Free-floating" SGS WP could be a worry and should be tracked down.
However. WPs are management tools.
Management WPs, or finer-grained
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
No coding standards at OU level
OUs are not required to produce code at all (algorithms, prototypes + test data)
Coding standards/uniformity required at SDC level
codes need to be scalable, maintainable, moveable.
codes will adhere to some form of GPL, but intellectual "property" should be maintained by applying to the codes rules similar to publications (policy to be set).
Request by SWG to use the SDC to run their codes should be handled by the SGS organization group.
The primary mission of the SDCs is to develop and run the SGS pipeline.
SWG SAID is a good read for SGS to anticipate these demands.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
Data access
Question: is it always harmless to use Euclid data to develop SGS modules?
Data access should stay compatible with the primary missions of the SGS.
Some issues remain to be cleared out, e.g. regarding simulated data produced by the SGS.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
Euclid
Consortium
Conclusions
Currently, the SWGs-SGS ICD is a living document. Feedback is needed.
SWGs-SGS interrelations are important, key to the success of the mission.
ICDs are built to define the interfaces between groups.
Interrelations ≠ Interfaces
IMPORTANT: let’s not build useless/harmful fences between (virtual) groups!
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
(EC SGS Project Office)
The presented document is Proprietary information of the Euclid Consortium. This document shall be used and disclosed by the receiving Party and its related entities (e.g. contractors and subcontractors) only for the purposes of fulfilling the receiving Party's responsibilities under the Euclid Project and that identified and marked technical data shall not be disclosed or retransferred to any other entity without prior written permission of the document preparer.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
Euclid
Consortium
Rationale
The SWG and the SGS will constantly interact throughout the mission phases.
During the development of the SGS, the SWGs set requirements on the algorithmic objectives and defines the validation testing of the pipeline module.
During operations, the SGS systems produce the data products that form the basis of the SWG work.
The science objectives of Euclid are quite ambitious, and require a complex data processing system.
The interface between the SGS and the SWGs must be clearly defined to avoid biasing the SGS products, or overlap and/or duplication of work between the SGS and the SWGs.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
DD phase - Detailed design and production of the code
OM phase - Operations and maintenance
CV
SUR
AT plan
SVVP - Software Verification and Validation Plan
AT Plan - Acceptance Test
URD - User Requirements Document
SSD - Software Specification Document
SUM - Software User Manual
STD - Software Transfer Document
SWG Development
SR/AD
DD
UR
The ICD originates from discussions between OU-LE3 and the SWGs.
Draft 0.5, distributed to the OU+SDC leads, and SWG coords was iterated inside the SGS PO.
Comments are expected and welcome.
It's short (only 7 pages of meaningful text)!
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
The SGS PO (manager, scientist, system team lead + support team).
The OU leads.
The SDC managers.
The Science Working Groups coordinators
The leads of the two primary cosmology probes SWGs (4 persons).
2 rotating representatives for leads of the legacy, theory and simulation SWGs.
These two representative bodies are in charge of taking care of the interface issues. See the EC Management Plan for names (wiki).
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
A key concept: avoid confirmation bias
How? try to maintain cosmology "independence" and/or "blindness" in the SGS pipeline.
SGS codes should refrain from relying on cosmology assumptions ("independence"), and their validation should not be done against a given cosmology ("blindness").
Requests to depart from that, (e.g. use or produce absolute quantities) should be made known to the Organization Group, to be discussed with the SWG coords, and use the reference cosmology maintained by the SWG coords.
This is/will be a highly debated item in discussions between the SGS and the SWG.
Is it enough to avoid a confirmation bias? likely not.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
General principle for SGS data processing pipeline development:
SWG formulates requirement for the production of data with specified properties, as well as tests that have to be run to validate that part of the SGS pipeline.
OU researches algorithms that fulfill the requirement, and once the SWG has accepted that the algorithm is an acceptable candidate, passes to the SDC-Dev the algorithm description and a test "plan" for verification and validation.
OU algorithms suggestions can only be refused by SWG because they do not meet the requirement.
Each SGS WP should be connected, directly or through other WPs to a requirement on the SGS.
"Free-floating" SGS WP could be a worry and should be tracked down.
However. WPs are management tools.
Management WPs, or finer-grained
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
No coding standards at OU level
OUs are not required to produce code at all (algorithms, prototypes + test data)
Coding standards/uniformity required at SDC level
codes need to be scalable, maintainable, moveable.
codes will adhere to some form of GPL, but intellectual "property" should be maintained by applying to the codes rules similar to publications (policy to be set).
Request by SWG to use the SDC to run their codes should be handled by the SGS organization group.
The primary mission of the SDCs is to develop and run the SGS pipeline.
SWG SAID is a good read for SGS to anticipate these demands.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
Data access
Question: is it always harmless to use Euclid data to develop SGS modules?
Data access should stay compatible with the primary missions of the SGS.
Some issues remain to be cleared out, e.g. regarding simulated data produced by the SGS.
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
Euclid
Consortium
Conclusions
Currently, the SWGs-SGS ICD is a living document. Feedback is needed.
SWGs-SGS interrelations are important, key to the success of the mission.
ICDs are built to define the interfaces between groups.
Interrelations ≠ Interfaces
IMPORTANT: let’s not build useless/harmful fences between (virtual) groups!
OU-LE3/GC-SWG 22.03.12
