Progress Report TIC Working Group E Evolutionary System Architecture Walter Arabasz & David Oppenheimer November 19, 2004

Working Group Members... Walter Arabasz, Chair (Univ. of Utah, NIC & TIC) Walter Arabasz, Chair (Univ. of Utah, NIC & TIC) Glenn Biasi (Univ of Nevada, Reno & NIC) Glenn Biasi (Univ of Nevada, Reno & NIC) Ray Buland (USGS Golden & NEIC) Ray Buland (USGS Golden & NEIC) Art Lerner-Lam (Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory & IRIS) Art Lerner-Lam (Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory & IRIS) Phil Maechling (Univ. of Southern California & SCEC) Phil Maechling (Univ. of Southern California & SCEC) Tom Murray (USGS Anchorage & AVO) Tom Murray (USGS Anchorage & AVO) David Oppenheimer (USGS Menlo Park, NIC & CISN) David Oppenheimer (USGS Menlo Park, NIC & CISN) Rick Schult (Air Force Research Lab, Hanscomb AFB) Rick Schult (Air Force Research Lab, Hanscomb AFB) Tony Shakal (California Geological Survey/Strong-Motion Instrumentation Program & CISN) Tony Shakal (California Geological Survey/Strong-Motion Instrumentation Program & CISN) Mitch Withers (Univ of Memphis & NIC) Mitch Withers (Univ of Memphis & NIC)

Charge Charge Define an evolutionary path for transforming existing elements of ANSS into a functional nationwide system—with emphasis on steps that can be taken in the near term (1-3 yrs), based on realistic ANSS funding projections Define an evolutionary path for transforming existing elements of ANSS into a functional nationwide system—with emphasis on steps that can be taken in the near term (1-3 yrs), based on realistic ANSS funding projections Clarify key system performance goals [relevant to system design] and characterize “where we are now” Clarify key system performance goals [relevant to system design] and characterize “where we are now” Account for geopolitical realities as well as abstract ideals in designing an ANSS system architecture Account for geopolitical realities as well as abstract ideals in designing an ANSS system architecture

Some Key Issues ANSS not fully funded; OFR02-92 vision unrealistic ANSS not fully funded; OFR02-92 vision unrealistic Status quo unacceptable — patchwork, not a system Status quo unacceptable — patchwork, not a system New vision needed with evolutionary steps New vision needed with evolutionary steps

Some Guiding Principles Adoption of guidance from NIST’s Baldrige National Quality Program — a systems approach to Performance Excellence Adoption of guidance from NIST’s Baldrige National Quality Program — a systems approach to Performance Excellence Desired Outcome — effective system with standardized products; operated with a high degree of professionalism by dedicated well-trained staff Desired Outcome — effective system with standardized products; operated with a high degree of professionalism by dedicated well-trained staff EQ reporting depends on a three-legged stool of (1) sensors, (2) processing, and (3) scientific knowledge; ANSS architecture must explicitly address these elements EQ reporting depends on a three-legged stool of (1) sensors, (2) processing, and (3) scientific knowledge; ANSS architecture must explicitly address these elements

Baldrige National Quality Program — 7 Criteria Leadership Leadership Strategic Planning Strategic Planning Customer (and Market) Focus Customer (and Market) Focus Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Human Resource Focus Human Resource Focus Process Management Process Management Organizational Performance Results Organizational Performance Results (Assessment,self-improvement and/or Planning tools)

Road Map for Partnership How do we reconcile state/local ownership, investment in, and ongoing support of significant infrastructure for seismic monitoring with the prescriptions of ANSS decision makers?

We need to persuade network operators (and their sponsors) to move ahead toward a better- designed nationwide system that offers a win-win deal for both individual networks and the system.

What we’ve done to date Clarified key system performance goals Clarified key system performance goals Characterized “where we are now” Characterized “where we are now” Canvassed views on “centralization” Canvassed views on “centralization” Developed consensus on system architecture Developed consensus on system architecture Explored evolutionary steps Explored evolutionary steps

Some problems with status quo Standardization of algorithms lacking Need for reconciliation of multiple reports of earthquakes No centralized waveform archiving No standardized error estimates Inadequate metadata Uneven exchange of waveform data between networks

Problems (continued) No on-site 7X24 response Limited access to data by research community in RT Software and system complexity is daunting Code not “open source” Duplication of software development RSN’s located in high seismic areas

WEBEQalert EOC OES FEMA, NOAA… Archive Stations IPS RSNsNEIC Info outlet Data processing Concentrator OFR Nomenclature WEB EQalert waveforms products Integrated Processing Service

So, what’s different? ≥ 7 RPCs NEIC is backup RPCs exchange data

Features of an Integrated Processing Service Standardized product algorithms Facilitates more rapid and cost-effective response because of dedicated 7X24 All products go into a central DBMS Continuous waveform archive Distribution of concentrated RT waveforms to R&D groups Single connection for Earthscope USArray and PBO data streams All ANSS partners have access to this DBMS Regional networks backup IPS

WG-E Recommendations IPS concept Undertake evolutionary steps –Do an evaluation – is this realistic? how expensive? Identify unproven technologies –Write system specifications for standardized processing –Undertake a pilot project; do no harm –Connect regions –Parallel operation, evaluation, and testing –Distribute standardized software to RSNs

Recommendations continued Develop ANSS commitment to transparent process for software development Identify and pursue joint funding of software development to enable USArray/PBO/ANSS waveform integration Develop a good process for ANSS development (framework, best practices, principles, feedback) based on Baldrige approach Identify dedicated manager and provide budget (~$300K/yr) for software development