Astronomy Networking Needs 5 December 2001 Jim Kennedy Gemini Observatory Important Contributions by Dick Crutcher, NCSA, UIUC Tom Troyland, UKY Arun Venkataraman, NAIC Steve Grandi, NOAO Grand Challenges in e-Science

Research Objectives Understand the Universe –Its Origins –Current State –Its “Destination” Origins of Life in the Universe Connecting Relativity and QCD, (GUTs/TOEs) And Other Modest Goals

Research Tools and Venues Multi “Color” Observations, Pictures & Spectra –Radio –IR –Visible –UV –X-Rays –Cosmic Rays Earth-Based –Less expensive and maintainable, often remote Space-Based –Removes atmospheric effects, even more remote

Data Types and Analysis Pictures - 8K x 8K, 16K x 16K, and larger Wavelength Spectra - like above Temporal Spectra - from time series Raw Data Calibration and “Reduction” Image Enhancement and Reconstruction Aperture Synthesis – Passive and Radar Fourier and Spherical-Harmonic Transforms Other Sophisticated Analysis Techniques

Typical Issues Multi-Site, Multinational Coordination Geographically Diverse Communities Analysis of Large Data Sets Harsh and Remote Environments Economical Operations Effective Communication with the Public

Typical Network Approaches Videoconferencing (H.323), Telecollaboration Remote Observing, Sea Level or Remote Site Automated Observing Sequences Data Delivery to Scientists and Archives Remote Analysis of Data, Grid Processing Network-based Education and Outreach

Four Examples Gemini Observatory: Hawaii, Arizona, Chilean Andes –Seven-nation Partnership –Two 8m, IR optimized Telescopes, at 14,000 and 9,000 ft Arecibo Observatory: Puerto Rico & New York –1,000 ft Radio Telescope NOAO: Arizona, New Mexico, Chilean Andes –US National Facility –Visible and IR nighttime and solar facilities ALMA: Chile and elsewhere –Large multinational Partnership –64-Antenna Radio Array at 16,400 ft in Chilean Andes

Gemini SouthArecibo Kitt Peak ALMA

Caveats Each of these facilities has a great deal in common regarding their application needs, although the balance between them varies. The numbers that follow may be too conservative since. In several cases they assume some supercomputer-level on-site processing, rather than external centers or Grid processing. This assumption could prove incorrect.

Each Gemini Telescope Video/Audio (low latency) Real-Time Remote Observing (low latency) Real-Time Reduction (quick look) Data Delivery to Observers Data Archives (CADC) Remote Analysis Outreach (low latency) Bandwidth Requirements TodayAverage: 6 Mbps Peak: 25 Mbps 2005Average: 18 Mbps Peak: 50 Mbps

Gemini’s Primary Research Links (Logical Topography) Gemini North Gemini South CADC Archive

Arecibo (NAIC) Video/Audio (low latency) Real-Time Remote Observing (low latency) Real-Time Analysis (e.g. pulsars and radar) Data Delivery to Observers Data Archives Remote Analysis (near-real-time and batch ) Outreach (low latency) Bandwidth Requirements TodayAverage: 10 Mbps Peak: 45 Mbps SoonAverage: 20 Mbps Peak: 200 Mbps

NOAO: KPNO, CTIO, NSO ( Each Site) Video/Audio (low latency) Real-Time Remote Observing (low latency) Data Delivery to Observers (several scopes) Data Delivery to Internet (10-min turn) Data Archives (NVO) Remote Analysis Outreach (low latency) Bandwidth Requirements TodayAverage: 10 Mbps Peak: 35 Mbps SoonAverage: 25 Mbps Peak: 60 Mbps

ALMA Video/Audio (low latency) Real-Time Remote Observing (low latency) Real-Time Time Series Reduction (on site?) Data Delivery to Observers (all are remote) Data Archives (NVO) Remote Analysis (supercomputer/Grid) Outreach (low latency) Bandwidth Requirements 2006Average: 32 Mbps Peak: 130 Mbps

Future Needs The rapid growth rate of instrument technology and sophisticated data analysis makes future bandwidth and QoS requirements difficult to predict with accuracy. We risk to underestimate them on more than a four- or five-year time scale.

End