1. 1 Developing Countries Access to Scientific Knowledge Ian Willers CERN, Switzerland

2. 2 Structure of talk Brief introduction to CERN CERN’s relationship with different countries The experiments The computing challenge Special example of Pakistan and the CMS experiment Conclusion

3. 3 OBSERVERS: UNESCO EU Israel Turkey SPECIAL OBSERVERS (for LHC): USA Japan Russia Twenty Member States of CERN

4. 4 International Collaboration for LHC construction Gross NMS contributions US:200M$ Russia:100MCHF Japan:170MCHF Canada: 30MCHF India: 25M$ Cost sharing for LHC (BCHF): MS, Material:2.1 MS, Personnel:1.1 (approx.) Host States:0.2 NMS (net):0.6 (≈15%) 4.0

5. 5 Aerial view

6. 6 From LEP to the LHC

7. 7 LHC Experiments ATLAS, CMS: - Higgs boson(s) - SUSY particles - …?? ALICE: Quark Gluon Plasma LHC-B: - CP violation in B

8. 8 CMS Magnet Yoke

9. 9 Some examples The LHC dipole n. 360 from Novosibirsk CMS feet from Pakistan LHC corrector magnet from India

10. 10 Access to CERN It may be tempting to make “ access to large facilities ” dependent on “membership”, but particle physicists has been able to follow a different approach Experiments running on our facilities tend to be based on very large (50-2000 person) collaborations This allows people from economically weaker countries to join with those from stronger regions So we tend not to look at the passport of the people making proposals But (in general) we expect people who have not funded the lab infrastructure to contribute more than their “fair share” to the cost of the experiment But the contribution can take many forms, such as assembly effort, software, … look for the “win-win”

11. 11 The LHC Computing Challenge New Levels of Data Acquisition New Levels Of Event Complexity Enormous Quantities of Data Access Worldwide

12. 12 Tier 0 at CERN Estimated CPU Capacity required at CERN 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 1998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010 Jan 2000: 3.5K SI95 Other experiments LHC K SI95 Moore’s law – some measure of the capacity technology advances provide for a constant number of processors or investment

13. 13 Five Emerging Models of Networked Computing From The Grid Distributed Computing –|| synchronous processing High-Throughput Computing –|| asynchronous processing On-Demand Computing –|| dynamic resources Data-Intensive Computing –|| databases Collaborative Computing –|| scientists

14. 14 CERN's Network in the World 267 institutes in Europe, 4603 users 208 institutes elsewhere, 1632 users some points = several institutes

15. 15 Monitoring tools

16. 16 LHC Computing Grid prototype service 2003-5 Tier 0 CERN Tier 1 Centres Brookhaven National Lab CNAF Bologna Fermilab FZK Karlsruhe IN2P3 Lyon Rutherford Appleton Lab (UK) University of Tokyo CERN Other Centres Academica Sinica (Taipei) Barcelona Caltech GSI Darmstadt Italian Tier 2s(Torino, Milano, Legnaro) Manno (Switzerland) Moscow State University NCP, NUST, Pinstech, Islamabad (soon) NIKHEF Amsterdam Ohio Supercomputing Centre Sweden (NorduGrid) Tata Institute (India) Triumf (Canada) UCSD UK Tier 2s University of Florida– Gainesville University of Prague ……

17. 17

18. 18 Benefits – see talk by Arshad Ali

19. 19 High Level Involvement scientist works hard builds up relationship Rector Visits CERN Minister Signs agreement President gives blessing

20. 20 Success in Particle Physics Collaboration Some Important Features The Scientific Goals are of the highest importance The Research requires technological advances ….. of value to all The foundations lie in a network of competent institutes worldwide The facilities are open to everyone but the results must be published

21. 21 Summary Coming together is a beginning Keeping together is progress Working together is success CERN demonstrates successful worldwide international collaboration is possible We intend to keep it that way