1. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review1 Standing Committee on Upgrade Installation to Physics Commissioning  Charge: u Convened by spokespersons April 20, 2004 u Develop an integrated experiment-wide plan for the installation and full commissioning of the upgrade elements, breakdown by major systems u A “living document” to be updated as the situation evolves and more information is available  Membership: u Gerber(co-chair), Smith(co-chair) Barberis, Hirosky, Kajfasz, Buescher, Cooper, Grünendahl, Hays, Jesik, Johns, Moore, Quinn, Shabalina, von Toerne, Watts, Yasuda  Two notes: u This is “off-project” but an important and very seriously considered aspect of the overall effort. u SC-IPC reports necessarily lags project updates.

2. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review2 Full Charge Charge to the Standing Committee on Upgrade Installation-to-Physics Commissioning In order to continue to exploit and maximize the physics potential of the experiment throughout Run II, the upgrade trigger, DAQ/online, and silicon sub-projects must be installed and commissioned in a manner that to the greatest extent possible minimizes the total downtime of the experiment. The installation and technical commissioning of the hardware represents a portion of that process; full commissioning of the elements further downstream (physics commissioning) will also be required in order to resume the acquisition of physics-quality data. A collaborative effort that effectively bridges the usual hardware/software boundaries is essential in order to optimally coordinate this process. To that end, we have assembled a Standing Committee that is being asked to generate a detailed plan describing the evolution of the various activities. This plan will include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following areas: · Installation and technical commissioning of the hardware; · Calibration databases, both online and offline; · Updates to data unpacking & formatting; · Development of Level 3 filtering algorithms; · Updates to clustering and track finding, both online and offline; · Development of Monte Carlo and TRIGSIM. We have asked the Committee to come up with a plan that includes a breakdown and timelines for each of the major efforts, the resources required (including manpower type – physicist, engineer, technician, etc.), and the sequence in which the various pieces need to be developed. Given the complexity of this set of processes, we have assembled a broad group of experts to develop this plan. The Committee therefore includes personnel from the upgrade project, as well as those more closely affiliated with areas beyond the upgrade and hardware efforts. We imagine that the work associated with this effort will go on until the upgrade elements are commissioned, but that the studies will be done in more focused periods, not as a constant effort. It is understood that the Committee will work closely with the Algorithms Coordinator, the Technical Coordinator, and the Run IIb Project Manager, taking direction and guidance from them in developing the plan. The spokespersons, in conjunction with the aforementioned managers of the experiment, will be asking others in the collaboration to assist the Committee with any studies that are needed, and to generally lend their input and expertise as the plan is developed. We have also asked the co-chairs to provide periodic oral reports on their progress in various forums, including collaboration meetings and the All DZero Meeting. A written report describing the findings of the Committee will be updated and submitted to the spokespersons approximately every three to four months, and will be used to evaluate the optimal approach to, and timing for, the installation of the upgrade elements. We have requested a first update be presented at the June 2004 workshop in Fresno. This is a most challenging task, and we very much appreciate that this group has agreed to serve the experiment in this capacity. We have every hope and expectation that the timely establishment of this Committee, and the more integrated approach to installation and commissioning that their efforts represent, will enable us to most fully optimize the physics reach of the experiment during the coming run.

3. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review3 Guidance to Working Group Leaders  Assumptions u Upgrades installed during single Tevatron shutdown u Testing & re-certification occurs after final installation of each component  Develop Timeline/Effort Schedule for Install  Technical Commission  Physics Commission u Goal: ensure detector exceeds pre-shutdown capability u Effort accountancy: knowledgeable experts, either on committee or consulted. These were primarily project members  well integrated with project. u Use Spalding 8/04 BD schedule to estimate luminosity costs  Itemize necessary infrastructure jobs needed beforehand u Silicon, trigger hardware u Associated software  Account for dependencies on or links with other upgrade elements

4. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review4 Contents of First Report 1. Introduction & Charge 2. Working Groups: 1: L2CalTrig (Johns) 2: L1CalTrak & CTT (Grünendahl) 3: L2Beta & STT (Hirosky) 4: TrigSim (Hays) 5: Layer Zero (Quinn) 6: AFE II – not yet 7: Online – not needed 3. Executive Summary 4. Detailed Reports of the Working Groups 5. References 6. Spokes Charge to the SC-IPC 7. Descriptions of the Upgrades

5. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review5 First Report  SC-IPC first report to collaboration Oct 12, 2004 u Detailed information on tasks and associated effort u Fully-loaded MS Project Plan for each subproject correlated to report u No “show-stoppers” u Dedicated effort needed (Upgrade project managers checked report for accuracy, duplication & omissions)  Specific recommendations: u Task Leader for trigger effort u Personnel for layer zero software u Personnel for L1Cal commissioning

6. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review6 Management Response/Plans  Accepted all three recommendations: u Appointed Nikos Varelas Trigger Coordinator Sept 17, 2004 with even broader charge u Alexei Melnitchouk, assigned to L0 software u With Varelas’ help assembled a four person L1CAL commissioning team, announced Feb 1, 2005  Overview of management plans u Second report requested: s List project and off-project personnel available for tasks s Received last week u Next, rationalize with latest project updates u Use information at March collaboration meeting to match groups and individuals with tasks.

7. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review7 Executive Summary  This is consistent with FIRST installation schedule  Completion of tasks: 21 weeks  Luminosity Cost: 122 pb -1  Effort: u Required: 388 physicist-weeks over ~4 month u Identified: 261 physicist-weeks.

8. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review8 Timeline Consistent w/ First Installation Schedule Second Report Input! On average require six additional physicists during this periodOn average require six additional physicists during this period Will require updatingWill require updating

9. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review9 Comments on Timeline  Reminders: u Hardware “Dates of Completion” taken as input parameters to schedule the or “t-naught” u Three distinct phases: installation, technical commissioning, & physics commissioning  Layer Zero, L1Cal Trig, L1CTT installed in single Tevatron shutdown  Layer Zero commissioning generates no luminosity cost  L1CalTrig installed in time-shadow of Layer Zero

10. February 3, 2005DZero Run IIb Director's Review10 Conclusions  Management mindful of the need for rapid commissioning u SC-IPC has been very successful preparation u Accumulating and updating information on tasks, schedule, and manpower. u Effort has been assigned to most urgent needs.  Next update will rationalize SC-IPC with schedule updates.  Collaboration reconfiguring itself for rapid commissioning of upgrades