ATLAS Research systems proposal Fairouz Malek and Gabriela
ATLAS Research systems proposal Fairouz Malek and Gabriela L. L Pinhão On behalf of the Glance Team Friday 24 April 2020 1
Introduction Current situation: - Phase 0 became the analysis workflow, which is not really needed for PUB notes and some CONF notes and Papers; - PUB notes and some CONF notes and Papers always skip Phase 0; - The inheritance between Phase 0 and its related Papers, CONF and PUB notes is confusing; - We call “The Analysis systems” but some documents doesn’t even have the need of an analysis (Ex: PUB notes). Proposal: Create a more robust infrastructure to current and future systems. 2
Proposal The ATLAS Research systems: The ATLAS set of systems to support research workflows. A general entity called RESEARCH would allow the creation of research outputs: ANALYSIS, PAPER, CONF note, PUB note, PLOT, PROC. . . 3
Proposal How it would work? - Phase 0: basic data definition, Gitlab integration and output selection; - All Phase 0 info would be common to any of its outputs and inherited by them; - The analysis workflow would be separated from Phase 0; - Each output would define additional properties related to their own context through their workflows; - Each output can have more than one possible workflow. 4
Proposal Benefits: - Phase 0 has a clear role; - Independent outputs (ex: Analysis and PUB note); - Possibility of more than one output (when needed, ex: Analysis and Paper); - The structure would reflect the natural inheritance in the ATLAS workflow; - Namings would be more clear to users. 5
The big picture in details PDF link 6
Urgent questions to complete the picture Today, let’s discuss only the most urgent questions: - If the new structure is approved, do research Phase 0 contain all/sufficient data to be inherited by the outputs? Obs: Analysis team and contact editors. Some steps in the analysis workflow need to be better discussed: What is discussed in this meeting? What is being approved? This draft is already the Paper draft? Or it’s the analysis draft? Will it become the first Paper draft in the same CDS entry? What is discussed in this meeting? What is being approved? 7
Naming convention - Naming convention: Should we change? How do we solve backward compatibility? Nowadays: Glance: Analysis/Phase 0: ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN Paper: GGGG-YYYY-NN CONF note: CONF-GGGG-YYYY-NN PUB note: PUB-GGGG-YYYY-NN Plot: PLOT-GGGG-YYYY-NN + RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN Proposal: Glance: ATLAS Research: RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN Analysis: ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN Paper: PAP-GGGG-YYYY-NN CONF note: CONF-GGGG-YYYY-NN PUB note: PUB-GGGG-YYYY-NN Plot: PLOT-GGGG-YYYY-NN Git. Lab: Group: ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN Internal note repository : ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN-INTN Paper repository : ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN-PAPER CONF note repository: ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN-CONF PUB note repository: ANA-GGGG-YYYY-NN-PUB Git. Lab: Group: RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN Internal note repository : RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN-INTN Paper repository : RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN-PAPER CONF note repository: RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN-CONF PUB note repository: RSCH-GGGG-YYYY-NN-PUB
- Slides: 8