tdp calibration and processing group (cpg): activities and...
TRANSCRIPT
TDP calibration and processing group (CPG): activities and status
Athol Kemball (for CPG)University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
US SKA Nov 08
Primary CPG goal
Provide a quantitative cost and feasibility model for calibration and processing elements of the US TDP LNSD SKA design.
Contribute to a construction-ready Phase 1 SKA design and proposal.
US SKA Nov 08
SKA design & development phase (2007-2011)
SKA science requirements
SKA technical specifications, e.g. sensitivity, survey speed, time, spectral, and angular
resolution, etc.
SKA reference design, e.g.
receptor, array configuration, receptor and
receivers, signal transport and
correlation, cal & processing, data
management
Antenna design elements e.g.
receptor, receivers,
antenna etc..
Calibration and processing
design elements e.g. calibration and imaging algorithms,
scalability, etc..
Design drivers• Hardware design choices will define
calibration and processing performance (e.g. dynamic range), cost, and feasibility.
• In turn, need to identify calibration and processing constraints on hardware designs.
US SKA Nov 08
Calibration and processing design elements
CPG goals• Determine feasibility of calibration and
processing required to meet SKA science goals;
• Determine quantitative cost equation contributions and design drivers as a function of key design parameters (e.g. antenna diameter, field-of-view, etc)
• Measure algorithm cost and feasibility using prototype implementations
• Demonstrate calibration and processing design elements using pathfinder data.
US technology development emphases• Large-N small-diameter (LNSD) parabolic
antenna design, wide-band single-pixel feeds, mid to high frequency range.
• Close liaison with current international and national efforts.
US SKA Nov 08
Pathfinder demonstrations
Need complementary approaches:• Pathfinder demonstration; each
pathfinder illuminates different calibration and processing problems.
• Design studies and simulations to scale.
Special emphases• Strong ties to most SKA pathfinders,
national and international.• TDP will work substantially with ATA,
EVLA, MWA for pathfinder demonstration
• Agreement with EVLA/NRAO regarding EVLA test data requests
(ATA)
(EVLA)
US SKA Nov 08
Current CPG membership
• Athol Kemball (Illinois) (Chair)• Sanjay Bhatnagar (NRAO)• Geoff Bower (UCB)• Jim Cordes (Cornell; TDP PI)• Shep Doeleman (Haystack/MIT)• Joe Lazio (NRL)• Colin Lonsdale (Haystack/MIT)• Lynn Matthews (Haystack/MIT)• Steve Myers (NRAO)• Jeroen Stil (Calgary)• Greg Taylor (UNM)• David Whysong (UCB)
Calgary.... .
. .Cornell
NRLUIUC MIT
NRAOUCB UNM→
→
→
→
US SKA Nov 08
CPG event timeline Oct 07 – Sep 08
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP
CPG formation
Project execution plan
Execution plan implementation
F2F planning meeting (Urbana)
URSI 2008 LNSD session
CPG meeting
CPG F2F meeting (Perth)
SKA CALIM 08
CPG F2F meeting (Washington DC)
URSI GA meetings (Chicago)
US SKA Nov 08
CPG event timeline Sep 08 →
SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
Implementation
SAC review
PDRA Lynn Matthews starts
PrepSKA WP2 planning meeting
US SKA Madison
URSI 08 NC (Boulder)
PDRA David Whysong starts
Student conference (CT)
SKA DR conference (CT)
US SKA Nov 08
CPG project execution planCPG work breakdown structure • WBS 2.0: General• WBS 2.1: Signal transport• WBS 2.2: Calibration algorithms• WBS 2.3: Imaging, spectroscopy, &
time-domain imaging• WBS 2.4: Scalability, & high-
performance computing• WBS 2.5: RFI• WBS 2.6: Surveys• WBS 2.7: Data management
Cross-cutting goals• LNSD feasibility:
– e.g. dynamic range error budget• LNSD cost equation contributions (per
calibration and processing technology)
OVERALL TDP GOALS
WBS 2 CAL & PROCESSING GOALS
1. Feasibility
2. Cost equation contribution
3. Design driver identification
4. Pathfinder demonstration
Calibration & processing issue #1
Calibration & processing issue #2
Calibration & processing issue #3
Calibration & processing issue #4
… X Design parameters (e.g. diameter, mid-range upper cutoff frequency, amongst others)
Calibration and processing issues Design parameters
PrepSKA/CDIT SKA pathfinders
US SKA Nov 08
CPG FTE resources
PostdocSenior
• Directly TDP-funded over 4 years:– Postdoctoral fellows (11.0 FTE)– Senior personnel or summer
salary support (2.4 FTE)– Total: 13.4 FTE
• In-kind contributions via partnerships and collaborations.
• Hiring postdoctoral fellows in this area has been challenging:
– FTE deficit in year #1
• Hiring progress has been made:– MIT postdoc started 09/08 (Lynn
Matthews)– UCB postdoc will start 11/17
(David Whysong)– UIUC postdoc in process for fall
2008.
00.5
11.5
22.5
33.5
4
FTE
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
PlannedHired
US SKA Nov 08
WBS 2.0.1: Science goal mapping to C&P requirements
• UCB lead (G. Bower)• Hired postdoc: David Whysong:
– Currently NRAO postdoc– Moving to Berkeley in Nov 08– Whysong spent one week in
Berkeley to learn about ATA & TDP (July 08)
• Science requirements– Bower &Whysong met with
Gaensler to discuss requirements in SKA Memos 100 (July 08); emphasis on dynamic range requirements
– Bower, Lazio, Lonsdale, Kemball met to discuss joint approach between TDP & SKA SWG and translation of results into engineering requirements(Aug 08)
US SKA Nov 08
WBS 2.1.x: Signal transport
• WBS 2.1.1: Real-time imaging and calibration (UCB/MIT):
– Prototyping real-time imaging (ATA: Wright).
– Simultaneous in-beam calibrator observations for precision VLBI astrometry and faint source detection (ATA).
– Global Sky Model, decimation, and image-based archiving (MWA)
• WBS 2.1.2: Sidelobe stability & beam-forming (UCB):
– Test stability, calibration, interference rejection of phased array signals for SKA station use (ATA)
US SKA Nov 08
WBS 2.0.2: Instrumental simulation infrastructure
• MIT lead (S. Doeleman)• CPG Postdoc position filled (9/08): Lynn
Matthews• Summer student (2008) • MAPS (MIT Array Performance Simulator)
– Extended to process SKA configurations.
– All-sky image capability.– Time-variable station beam-shape
implementation.– In partnership with MWA program.– Functioning package for CPG
simulations. – Developing suite of sample skies for
simulation.– Provides data sets for FOV shaping
algorithm development.– Postdoc recently joined to work on
this.(MWA schematic)
US SKA Nov 08
• LNSD data rates (Perley & Clark 2003):
where D = dish diameter, B = max. baseline, ∆ν = bandwidth, and ν = frequency
• Wide-field imaging cost ~ O(D-4 to -8) (Perley & Clark 2003; Cornwell 2004; Lonsdale et al 2004).
• Full-field continuum imaging cost (derived from Cornwell 2004):
• Strong dependence on 1/D and B. Data rates of Tbps and computational costs in PF are readily obtained from underlying geometric terms.
• Spectral line imaging costs exceed continuum imaging costs (further multiplier )
• Possible mitigation through FOV tailoring (Lonsdale et al 2004), beam-forming, and antenna aggregation approaches (Wright et al.)
WBS 2.3.1: Imaging cost equation contributions
tNNN
TBpsV antantchanvis
∆−
=⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛1210
)1(20
⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛ ∆
⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛
⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛ −
νν2
1410~DNB
TBpsVvis
1500273.02
2 2103.22−
⎟⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛≈⎟
⎠⎞
⎜⎝⎛ D
B
ant DBN
PFC
0
500
1000
1500
2000
D=12.5m, B=5km
D=12.5m,B=35km
D=6m, B=5km
TB per hour
0
2
4
6
8
10
D=12.5m,B=5km
D=12.5m,B=35km
D=6m,B=5km
Peak PF
chanN
(Kemball et al. (2008), CPG Memo #1)
US SKA Nov 08
WBS 2.1.3: Central processor architecture & transport (MIT): FOV shaping• FOV shaping reduces sidelobe contamination. • Initial tests use 4 station L-band data from MERLIN of 3c343/3c343.1
pair (29’ separation)
No Convolution Convolution• Jinc function convolution of UV data removes 3c343.1 source and
sidelobes.
US SKA Nov 08
WBS 2.1.3: Central processor architecture & transport (MIT): FOV shaping
• New MERLIN Data Set– MERLIN has proper baseline length dynamic range to support FOV
shaping by UV convolution.– New 6-station observations completed -this week - and at Haystack
for processing: observed 3c343/3c343.1 and M31 (to test algorithm with more background sources).
– Software package written to extract correlated data and perform convolution.
– Involves undergraduate student and newly arrived postdoc.– Tests on new data set:
• effects of RFI on algorithm (will imperfect convolution kernel compromise FOV shaping?)
• Tests of optimal convolution kernel (Gaussian, Jinc, Spheroidal …)
US SKA Nov 08
SKA dynamic range assessment – beyond the central pixel
• Current achieved dynamic ranges degrade significantly with radial projected distance from field center, for reasons understood qualitatively (e.g. direction-dependent gains, sidelobe confusion etc.)
• An SKA design with routine uniform, ultra-high dynamic range requires a quantitative dynamic range budget.
• Strategies:– Real data from similar pathfinders (e.g.
ATA, EVLA) are key.– Simulations are useful if relative dynamic
range contributions or absolute fidelity are being assessed with simple models.
– New statistical methods:• Statistical resampling (Kemball et al
2005, 2008) and Bayesian methods (Sutton & Wandeldt 2005) offer new approaches.
– Best-practice survey: Underway (Kemball)
Feasibility: dynamic range assessment
( )S ρ
Noordarm et al 1982
3C84 WSRT 1.4 GHz 10,000:1
Geller et al 2000 1935-692 ATCA 1.4 GHz 77,000:1
de Bruyn & Brentjens 2005
Perseus WSRT 92 cm 400,000:1
de Bruyn et al, 2007
3C147 WSRT 1.4 GHz 1,000,000:1
Dynamic range
(de Bruyn and Brentjens, 2005)
US SKA Nov 08
Direction-dependent variance estimation methods
M1: Np=1; ∆t = 60 s
M2: Np=1; ∆t = 150 s
M3: Np=1; ∆t = 300 s
M4: Np=2; ∆t = 900 s
S1: delete frac. 12.5%
S2: delete frac. 25%
S3: delete frac. 50%
S4: delete frac. 75%
MC M1 M2
M3 M4 S1
S2 S3 S3
(Kemball et al. (2008), AJ, (joint TDP paper))
Truth from MC simulation Other estimates from statistical methods
US SKA Nov 08
WBS 2.4: Scalability• Sustained petascale calibration and imaging
performance for SKA requires:– Demonstrated mapping of SKA calibration
and imaging algorithms to modern HPC architectures, and proof of feasible scalability to petascale: [O(105) processor cores].
– Remains a considerable design unknown in both feasibility and cost.
• Need to leverage existing NSF support and existing leading-edge HPC experience in the physical sciences:
– Radio imaging efforts at UIUC (incl. SKA) will move to new Center for Extreme-scale Computing
• Matching UI investment in NSF-funded petascale system “Blue Waters”.
• Up to ten interdisciplinary EECE / CS and applications faculty
• Collective access to pre-cursor petascale systems and engineering and computing teams
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
10 TF 100 TF 1 PF
No processors
US SKA Nov 08
Joint SKA calibration and processing efforts
US SKA Nov 08
• Meeting goal: define PrepSKA process & structure; refine WBS for WP2• Initial PrepSKA computing program task orientation:
• Proposed (and adopted) reorganization:
• Also P9:T2 becomes:
PrepSKA WP2 liaison meeting 11/08 (SPDO)
• Rationale:– Calibration and processing
technologies can be decomposed optimally by receptor type and implied frequency
• Matches regional activities more closely, so reduces management complexity
– New focus in T2 to deal with important SKA problem and to leverage available additional resources
– Better mix of tasks and reflection of TDP resources committed
US SKA Nov 08
OVERALL PREPSKA DESIGN AND COST MODEL
PREPSKA WP2 CALIBRATION AND PROCESSING DESIGN AND COST
MODEL
1. Feasibility
2. Cost equation contribution
3. Design driver identification
4. Pathfinder demonstration
Calibration & processing
issue #1
Calibration & processing issue #2
Calibration & processing issue #3
Calibration & processing
issue #4
Design parameters (e.g. diameter, mid-range upper cutoff frequency, amongst others)
Calibration and processing issues Design parameters
Design and/or evaluation studiesSKA pathfinders PrepSKA needs
good coverage of design parameter space
Priority of individual calibration and processing design elements depends on factors such as receptor type, frequency, etc.
Central, synthesized and updated design model
US SKA Nov 08
PrepSKA integration issues• Next steps for CPG:
– Refine statements of work in PrepSKA WP2 / P9– Ensure existing CPG WBS matches TDP SOW
• Good agreement in scope, but prioritization needs attention
• Challenge:– PrepSKA has important technology decision point in mid-2010– 18 months earlier than end-point of TDP/CPG delivery– So, can’t deliver full CPG WBS on PrepSKA time-scale. Options:
• Iterative refinement of LNSD CPG cost-feasibility model already adopted in CPG earlier this year; deliver best model available mid-2010
• Abbreviate or truncateTDP PrepSKA work plan
US SKA Nov 08
CPG 2009 planning
• Detailed milestones already discussed and filed with NSF at time of last annual report
• Immediate focus is first iteration (v0.1) of LNSD cost-feasibility model
• In implementation phase of project execution plan, but have been affected by hiring delays. 0
0.51
1.52
2.53
3.54
FTE
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
PlannedHired
US SKA Nov 08
END