"January 2019 Use Cases & Capability Delivery Plans" Rating

These four use cases, RC-03, RC-04, SPI-07, and SPI-08, are about Community Software Areas (CSAs), and you may rate them as a set (provide the same rating for all four) if you don't have time to read each individually.

When a new resource appears in XSEDE, it's typical for research communities to install software specific to their field of study on the resource so researchers in their field can use a common installation. This is currently handled uniquely for each XSEDE resource. There isn't a common process or procedure, even to discover how to approach a given resource about its CSA. The two RC use cases describe what researchers need: standard processes for approaching new resources about CSAs and discovering what's already available in CSAs. The two SPI use cases describe what service providers need: standard processes for documenting CSAs on resources (contact info, rules, etc.) and for publishing what's already available in a CSA.

The proposed work involves multiple XSEDE teams (user services, XCI, SPs) and is likely to require 2-4 weeks of total effort, with the majority being cross-team coordination and design/implementation of changes to the XSEDE website and/or XUP.

These four use cases, RC-03, RC-04, SPI-07, and SPI-08, are about Community Software Areas (CSAs), and you may rate them as a set (provide the same rating for all four) if you don't have time to read each individually.

When a new resource appears in XSEDE, it's typical for research communities to install software specific to their field of study on the resource so researchers in their field can use a common installation. This is currently handled uniquely for each XSEDE resource. There isn't a common process or procedure, even to discover how to approach a given resource about its CSA. The two RC use cases describe what researchers need: standard processes for approaching new resources about CSAs and discovering what's already available in CSAs. The two SPI use cases describe what service providers need: standard processes for documenting CSAs on resources (contact info, rules, etc.) and for publishing what's already available in a CSA.

The proposed work involves multiple XSEDE teams (user services, XCI, SPs) and is likely to require 2-4 weeks of total effort, with the majority being cross-team coordination and design/implementation of changes to the XSEDE website and/or XUP.

The three campus bridging use cases (CB-13, CB-14, and CB-15) describe a "campus queue" service. You may rate these three use cases as a set (provide the same rating for each use case) if you don't have time to review each individually.

The high-level idea is to enable campus IT organizations to build an on-campus queuing service that would provide access to any of the HPC/HTC services available to users at that campus: on-campus HPC, XSEDE HPC, or any others. This would raise awareness of both on-campus and off-campus (XSEDE) services among campus researchers and students, and would leverage the expertise XSEDE SPs have built around queuing services. The XCRI team proposes a first-step of presenting the idea to campus champions and gauging their response.  If the response is favorable, XCRI could proceed with software packaging (est. 2 person-weeks of effort) and then begin engaging specific campuses (est. 4-5 person-days per campus for local integration and training).

These six use cases (DM-05 through DM-10, not including DM-11) are about research metadata. You may treat them as a set (provide the same rating for all of them) if you don't have time to review each individually. XSEDE's Requirements Analysis and Capability Delivery team is currently conducting a "technology readiness assessment" to identify tools to support these use cases. The results of the assessment could be used to introduce a set of basic metadata services into the XSEDE community. Please rate the importance of each use case (or the set as a whole) to the XSEDE community.

Background/context: During XSEDE-1 (2011-2016), managing metadata was identified as a significant challenge for XSEDE's "big data" users. XSEDE's research consultants (ECSS) often help researchers find and implement strategies for managing their metadata. But the XSEDE system (User Portal, etc.) provides no specific features for this: researchers must identify their own metadata tools and rely on others to support those tools. Metadata management would be a significant "new feature" for the XSEDE system.

The three campus bridging use cases (CB-13, CB-14, and CB-15) describe a "campus queue" service. You may rate these three use cases as a set (provide the same rating for each use case) if you don't have time to review each individually.

The high-level idea is to enable campus IT organizations to build an on-campus queuing service that would provide access to any of the HPC/HTC services available to users at that campus: on-campus HPC, XSEDE HPC, or any others. This would raise awareness of both on-campus and off-campus (XSEDE) services among campus researchers and students, and would leverage the expertise XSEDE SPs have built around queuing services. The XCRI team proposes a first-step of presenting the idea to campus champions and gauging their response.  If the response is favorable, XCRI could proceed with software packaging (est. 2 person-weeks of effort) and then begin engaging specific campuses (est. 4-5 person-days per campus for local integration and training).

These six use cases (DM-05 through DM-10, not including DM-11) are about research metadata. You may treat them as a set (provide the same rating for all of them) if you don't have time to review each individually. XSEDE's Requirements Analysis and Capability Delivery team is currently conducting a "technology readiness assessment" to identify tools to support these use cases. The results of the assessment could be used to introduce a set of basic metadata services into the XSEDE community. Please rate the importance of each use case (or the set as a whole) to the XSEDE community.

Background/context: During XSEDE-1 (2011-2016), managing metadata was identified as a significant challenge for XSEDE's "big data" users. XSEDE's research consultants (ECSS) often help researchers find and implement strategies for managing their metadata. But the XSEDE system (User Portal, etc.) provides no specific features for this: researchers must identify their own metadata tools and rely on others to support those tools. Metadata management would be a significant "new feature" for the XSEDE system.

These six use cases (DM-05 through DM-10, not including DM-11) are about research metadata. You may treat them as a set (provide the same rating for all of them) if you don't have time to review each individually. XSEDE's Requirements Analysis and Capability Delivery team is currently conducting a "technology readiness assessment" to identify tools to support these use cases. The results of the assessment could be used to introduce a set of basic metadata services into the XSEDE community. Please rate the importance of each use case (or the set as a whole) to the XSEDE community.

Background/context: During XSEDE-1 (2011-2016), managing metadata was identified as a significant challenge for XSEDE's "big data" users. XSEDE's research consultants (ECSS) often help researchers find and implement strategies for managing their metadata. But the XSEDE system (User Portal, etc.) provides no specific features for this: researchers must identify their own metadata tools and rely on others to support those tools. Metadata management would be a significant "new feature" for the XSEDE system.