Ewa Deelman, Anirban Mandal, Angela P. Murillo, Jarek Nabrzyski, Valerio Pascucci, Robert Ricci, Ilya Baldin, Susan Sons, Laura Christopherson, Charles Vardeman, Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Jane Wyngaard, Steve Petruzza, Mats Rynge, Karan Vahi, Wendy R. Whitcup, Josh Drake, Erik Scott
In 2018, NSF funded an effort to pilot a Cyberinfrastructure Center of Excellence (CI CoE or Center) that would serve the cyberinfrastructure (CI) needs of the NSF Major Facilities (MFs) and large projects with advanced CI architectures. The goal of the CI CoE Pilot project (Pilot) effort was to develop a model and a blueprint for such a CoE by engaging with the MFs, understanding their CI needs, understanding the contributions the MFs are making to the CI community, and exploring opportunities for building a broader CI community. This document summarizes the results of community engagements conducted during the first two years of the project and describes the identified CI needs of the MFs. To better understand MFs' CI, the Pilot has developed and validated a model of the MF data lifecycle that follows the data generation and management within a facility and gained an understanding of how this model captures the fundamental stages that the facilities' data passes through from the scientific instruments to the principal investigators and their teams, to the broader collaborations and the public. The Pilot also aimed to understand what CI workforce development challenges the MFs face while designing, constructing, and operating their CI and what solutions they are exploring and adopting within their projects. Based on the needs of the MFs in the data lifecycle and workforce development areas, this document outlines a blueprint for a CI CoE that will learn about and share the CI solutions designed, developed, and/or adopted by the MFs, provide expertise to the largest NSF projects with advanced and complex CI architectures, and foster a community of CI practitioners and researchers.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Kyle Chard, Henri Casanova, Dan Laney, Dong Ahn, Shantenu Jha, William E. Allcock, Gregory Bauer, Dmitry Duplyakin, Bjoern Enders, Todd M. Heer, Eric Lancon, Sergiu Sanielevici, Kevin Sayers
The importance of workflows is highlighted by the fact that they have underpinned some of the most significant discoveries of the past decades. Many of these workflows have significant computational, storage, and communication demands, and thus must execute on a range of large-scale computer systems, from local clusters to public clouds and upcoming exascale HPC platforms. Historically, infrastructures for workflow execution consisted of complex, integrated systems, developed in-house by workflow practitioners with strong dependencies on a range of legacy technologies. Due to the increasing need to support workflows, dedicated workflow systems were developed to provide abstractions for creating, executing, and adapting workflows conveniently and efficiently while ensuring portability. While these efforts are all worthwhile individually, there are now hundreds of independent workflow systems. The resulting workflow system technology landscape is fragmented, which may present significant barriers for future workflow users due to many seemingly comparable, yet usually mutually incompatible, systems that exist. In order to tackle some of these challenges, the DOE-funded ExaWorks and NSF-funded WorkflowsRI projects have organized in 2021 a series of events entitled the "Workflows Community Summit". The third edition of the ``Workflows Community Summit" explored workflows challenges and opportunities from the perspective of computing centers and facilities. The third summit brought together a small group of facilities representatives with the aim to understand how workflows are currently being used at each facility, how facilities would like to interact with workflow developers and users, how workflows fit with facility roadmaps, and what opportunities there are for tighter integration between facilities and workflows. More information at: https://workflowsri.org/summits/facilities/
Thomas Beck, Alessandro Baroni, Ryan Bennink, Gilles Buchs, Eduardo Antonio Coello Perez, Markus Eisenbach, Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Muralikrishnan Gopalakrishnan Meena, Kalyan Gottiparthi, Peter Groszkowski, Travis S. Humble, Ryan Landfield, Ketan Maheshwari, Sarp Oral, Michael A. Sandoval, Amir Shehata, In-Saeng Suh, Christopher Zimmer
Aug 28, 2024·quant-ph·PDF Quantum Computing (QC) offers significant potential to enhance scientific discovery in fields such as quantum chemistry, optimization, and artificial intelligence. Yet QC faces challenges due to the noisy intermediate-scale quantum era's inherent external noise issues. This paper discusses the integration of QC as a computational accelerator within classical scientific high-performance computing (HPC) systems. By leveraging a broad spectrum of simulators and hardware technologies, we propose a hardware-agnostic framework for augmenting classical HPC with QC capabilities. Drawing on the HPC expertise of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the HPC lifecycle management of the Department of Energy (DOE), our approach focuses on the strategic incorporation of QC capabilities and acceleration into existing scientific HPC workflows. This includes detailed analyses, benchmarks, and code optimization driven by the needs of the DOE and ORNL missions. Our comprehensive framework integrates hardware, software, workflows, and user interfaces to foster a synergistic environment for quantum and classical computing research. This paper outlines plans to unlock new computational possibilities, driving forward scientific inquiry and innovation in a wide array of research domains.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Deborah Bard, Kyle Chard, Shaun de Witt, Ian T. Foster, Tom Gibbs, Carole Goble, William Godoy, Johan Gustafsson, Utz-Uwe Haus, Stephen Hudson, Shantenu Jha, Laila Los, Drew Paine, Frédéric Suter, Logan Ward, Sean Wilkinson, Marcos Amaris, Yadu Babuji, Jonathan Bader, Riccardo Balin, Daniel Balouek, Sarah Beecroft, Khalid Belhajjame, Rajat Bhattarai, Wes Brewer, Paul Brunk, Silvina Caino-Lores, Henri Casanova, Daniela Cassol, Jared Coleman, Taina Coleman, Iacopo Colonnelli, Anderson Andrei Da Silva, Daniel de Oliveira, Pascal Elahi, Nour Elfaramawy, Wael Elwasif, Brian Etz, Thomas Fahringer, Wesley Ferreira, Rosa Filgueira, Jacob Fosso Tande, Luiz Gadelha, Andy Gallo, Daniel Garijo, Yiannis Georgiou, Philipp Gritsch, Patricia Grubel, Amal Gueroudji, Quentin Guilloteau, Carlo Hamalainen, Rolando Hong Enriquez, Lauren Huet, Kevin Hunter Kesling, Paula Iborra, Shiva Jahangiri, Jan Janssen, Joe Jordan, Sehrish Kanwal, Liliane Kunstmann, Fabian Lehmann, Ulf Leser, Chen Li, Peini Liu, Jakob Luettgau, Richard Lupat, Jose M. Fernandez, Ketan Maheshwari, Tanu Malik, Jack Marquez, Motohiko Matsuda, Doriana Medic, Somayeh Mohammadi, Alberto Mulone, John-Luke Navarro, Kin Wai Ng, Klaus Noelp, Bruno P. Kinoshita, Ryan Prout, Michael R. Crusoe, Sashko Ristov, Stefan Robila, Daniel Rosendo, Billy Rowell, Jedrzej Rybicki, Hector Sanchez, Nishant Saurabh, Sumit Kumar Saurav, Tom Scogland, Dinindu Senanayake, Woong Shin, Raul Sirvent, Tyler Skluzacek, Barry Sly-Delgado, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Abel Souza, Renan Souza, Domenico Talia, Nathan Tallent, Lauritz Thamsen, Mikhail Titov, Benjamin Tovar, Karan Vahi, Eric Vardar-Irrgang, Edite Vartina, Yuandou Wang, Merridee Wouters, Qi Yu, Ziad Al Bkhetan, Mahnoor Zulfiqar
The Workflows Community Summit gathered 111 participants from 18 countries to discuss emerging trends and challenges in scientific workflows, focusing on six key areas: time-sensitive workflows, AI-HPC convergence, multi-facility workflows, heterogeneous HPC environments, user experience, and FAIR computational workflows. The integration of AI and exascale computing has revolutionized scientific workflows, enabling higher-fidelity models and complex, time-sensitive processes, while introducing challenges in managing heterogeneous environments and multi-facility data dependencies. The rise of large language models is driving computational demands to zettaflop scales, necessitating modular, adaptable systems and cloud-service models to optimize resource utilization and ensure reproducibility. Multi-facility workflows present challenges in data movement, curation, and overcoming institutional silos, while diverse hardware architectures require integrating workflow considerations into early system design and developing standardized resource management tools. The summit emphasized improving user experience in workflow systems and ensuring FAIR workflows to enhance collaboration and accelerate scientific discovery. Key recommendations include developing standardized metrics for time-sensitive workflows, creating frameworks for cloud-HPC integration, implementing distributed-by-design workflow modeling, establishing multi-facility authentication protocols, and accelerating AI integration in HPC workflow management. The summit also called for comprehensive workflow benchmarks, workflow-specific UX principles, and a FAIR workflow maturity model, highlighting the need for continued collaboration in addressing the complex challenges posed by the convergence of AI, HPC, and multi-facility research environments.
Tainã Coleman, Henri Casanova, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
Scientific workflow applications have become mainstream and their automated and efficient execution on large-scale compute platforms is the object of extensive research and development. For these efforts to be successful, a solid experimental methodology is needed to evaluate workflow algorithms and systems. A foundation for this methodology is the availability of realistic workflow instances. Dozens of workflow instances for a few scientific applications are available in public repositories. While these are invaluable, they are limited: workflow instances are not available for all application scales of interest. To address this limitation, previous work has developed generators of synthetic, but representative, workflow instances of arbitrary scales. These generators are popular, but implementing them is a manual, labor-intensive process that requires expert application knowledge. As a result, these generators only target a handful of applications, even though hundreds of applications use workflows in production. In this work, we present WfChef, a framework that fully automates the process of constructing a synthetic workflow generator for any scientific application. Based on an input set of workflow instances, WfChef automatically produces a synthetic workflow generator. We define and evaluate several metrics for quantifying the realism of the generated workflows. Using these metrics, we compare the realism of the workflows generated by WfChef generators to that of the workflows generated by the previously available, hand-crafted generators. We find that the WfChef generators not only require zero development effort (because it is automatically produced), but also generate workflows that are more realistic than those generated by hand-crafted generators.
Tainã Coleman, Henri Casanova, Loïc Pottier, Manav Kaushik, Ewa Deelman, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
Scientific workflows are a cornerstone of modern scientific computing. They are used to describe complex computational applications that require efficient and robust management of large volumes of data, which are typically stored/processed on heterogeneous, distributed resources. The workflow research and development community has employed a number of methods for the quantitative evaluation of existing and novel workflow algorithms and systems. In particular, a common approach is to simulate workflow executions. In previous works, we have presented a collection of tools that have been adopted by the community for conducting workflow research. Despite their popularity, they suffer from several shortcomings that prevent easy adoption, maintenance, and consistency with the evolving structures and computational requirements of production workflows. In this work, we present WfCommons, a framework that provides a collection of tools for analyzing workflow executions, for producing generators of synthetic workflows, and for simulating workflow executions. We demonstrate the realism of the generated synthetic workflows by comparing their simulated executions to real workflow executions. We also contrast these results with results obtained when using the previously available collection of tools. We find that the workflow generators that are automatically constructed by our framework not only generate representative same-scale workflows (i.e., with structures and task characteristics distributions that resemble those observed in real-world workflows), but also do so at scales larger than that of available real-world workflows. Finally, we conduct a case study to demonstrate the usefulness of our framework for estimating the energy consumption of large-scale workflow executions.
William F. Godoy, Tatiana Melnichenko, Pedro Valero-Lara, Wael Elwasif, Philip Fackler, Rafael Ferreira Da Silva, Keita Teranishi, Jeffrey S. Vetter
We explore the performance and portability of the novel Mojo language for scientific computing workloads on GPUs. As the first language based on the LLVM's Multi-Level Intermediate Representation (MLIR) compiler infrastructure, Mojo aims to close performance and productivity gaps by combining Python's interoperability and CUDA-like syntax for compile-time portable GPU programming. We target four scientific workloads: a seven-point stencil (memory-bound), BabelStream (memory-bound), miniBUDE (compute-bound), and Hartree-Fock (compute-bound with atomic operations); and compare their performance against vendor baselines on NVIDIA H100 and AMD MI300A GPUs. We show that Mojo's performance is competitive with CUDA and HIP for memory-bound kernels, whereas gaps exist on AMD GPUs for atomic operations and for fast-math compute-bound kernels on both AMD and NVIDIA GPUs. Although the learning curve and programming requirements are still fairly low-level, Mojo can close significant gaps in the fragmented Python ecosystem in the convergence of scientific computing and AI.
Amir Shehata, Peter Groszkowski, Thomas Naughton, Murali Gopalakrishnan Meena, Elaine Wong, Daniel Claudino, Rafael Ferreira da Silvaa, Thomas Beck
This paper presents a comprehensive software stack architecture for integrating quantum computing (QC) capabilities with High-Performance Computing (HPC) environments. While quantum computers show promise as specialized accelerators for scientific computing, their effective integration with classical HPC systems presents significant technical challenges. We propose a hardware-agnostic software framework that supports both current noisy intermediate-scale quantum devices and future fault-tolerant quantum computers, while maintaining compatibility with existing HPC workflows. The architecture includes a quantum gateway interface, standardized APIs for resource management, and robust scheduling mechanisms to handle both simultaneous and interleaved quantum-classical workloads. Key innovations include: (1) a unified resource management system that efficiently coordinates quantum and classical resources, (2) a flexible quantum programming interface that abstracts hardware-specific details, (3) A Quantum Platform Manager API that simplifies the integration of various quantum hardware systems, and (4) a comprehensive tool chain for quantum circuit optimization and execution. We demonstrate our architecture through implementation of quantum-classical algorithms, including the variational quantum linear solver, showcasing the framework's ability to handle complex hybrid workflows while maximizing resource utilization. This work provides a foundational blueprint for integrating QC capabilities into existing HPC infrastructures, addressing critical challenges in resource management, job scheduling, and efficient data movement between classical and quantum resources.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Milad Abolhasani, Dionysios A. Antonopoulos, Laura Biven, Ryan Coffee, Ian T. Foster, Leslie Hamilton, Shantenu Jha, Theresa Mayer, Benjamin Mintz, Robert G. Moore, Salahudin Nimer, Noah Paulson, Woong Shin, Frederic Suter, Mitra Taheri, Michela Taufer, Newell R. Washburn
Scientific discovery is being revolutionized by AI and autonomous systems, yet current autonomous laboratories remain isolated islands unable to collaborate across institutions. We present the Autonomous Interconnected Science Lab Ecosystem (AISLE), a grassroots network transforming fragmented capabilities into a unified system that shorten the path from ideation to innovation to impact and accelerates discovery from decades to months. AISLE addresses five critical dimensions: (1) cross-institutional equipment orchestration, (2) intelligent data management with FAIR compliance, (3) AI-agent driven orchestration grounded in scientific principles, (4) interoperable agent communication interfaces, and (5) AI/ML-integrated scientific education. By connecting autonomous agents across institutional boundaries, autonomous science can unlock research spaces inaccessible to traditional approaches while democratizing cutting-edge technologies. This paradigm shift toward collaborative autonomous science promises breakthroughs in sustainable energy, materials development, and public health.
Frédéric Suter, Tainã Coleman, İlkay Altintaş, Rosa M. Badia, Bartosz Balis, Kyle Chard, Iacopo Colonnelli, Ewa Deelman, Paolo Di Tommaso, Thomas Fahringer, Carole Goble, Shantenu Jha, Daniel S. Katz, Johannes Köster, Ulf Leser, Kshitij Mehta, Hilary Oliver, J. -Luc Peterson, Giovanni Pizzi, Loïc Pottier, Raül Sirvent, Eric Suchyta, Douglas Thain, Sean R. Wilkinson, Justin M. Wozniak, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
The term scientific workflow has evolved over the last two decades to encompass a broad range of compositions of interdependent compute tasks and data movements. It has also become an umbrella term for processing in modern scientific applications. Today, many scientific applications can be considered as workflows made of multiple dependent steps, and hundreds of workflow management systems (WMSs) have been developed to manage and run these workflows. However, no turnkey solution has emerged to address the diversity of scientific processes and the infrastructure on which they are implemented. Instead, new research problems requiring the execution of scientific workflows with some novel feature often lead to the development of an entirely new WMS. A direct consequence is that many existing WMSs share some salient features, offer similar functionalities, and can manage the same categories of workflows but also have some distinct capabilities. This situation makes researchers who develop workflows face the complex question of selecting a WMS. This selection can be driven by technical considerations, to find the system that is the most appropriate for their application and for the resources available to them, or other factors such as reputation, adoption, strong community support, or long-term sustainability. To address this problem, a group of WMS developers and practitioners joined their efforts to produce a community-based terminology of WMSs. This paper summarizes their findings and introduces this new terminology to characterize WMSs. This terminology is composed of fives axes: workflow characteristics, composition, orchestration, data management, and metadata capture. Each axis comprises several concepts that capture the prominent features of WMSs. Based on this terminology, this paper also presents a classification of 23 existing WMSs according to the proposed axes and terms.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Rosa M. Badia, Venkat Bala, Debbie Bard, Peer-Timo Bremer, Ian Buckley, Silvina Caino-Lores, Kyle Chard, Carole Goble, Shantenu Jha, Daniel S. Katz, Daniel Laney, Manish Parashar, Frederic Suter, Nick Tyler, Thomas Uram, Ilkay Altintas, Stefan Andersson, William Arndt, Juan Aznar, Jonathan Bader, Bartosz Balis, Chris Blanton, Kelly Rosa Braghetto, Aharon Brodutch, Paul Brunk, Henri Casanova, Alba Cervera Lierta, Justin Chigu, Taina Coleman, Nick Collier, Iacopo Colonnelli, Frederik Coppens, Michael Crusoe, Will Cunningham, Bruno de Paula Kinoshita, Paolo Di Tommaso, Charles Doutriaux, Matthew Downton, Wael Elwasif, Bjoern Enders, Chris Erdmann, Thomas Fahringer, Ludmilla Figueiredo, Rosa Filgueira, Martin Foltin, Anne Fouilloux, Luiz Gadelha, Andy Gallo, Artur Garcia Saez, Daniel Garijo, Roman Gerlach, Ryan Grant, Samuel Grayson, Patricia Grubel, Johan Gustafsson, Valerie Hayot-Sasson, Oscar Hernandez, Marcus Hilbrich, AnnMary Justine, Ian Laflotte, Fabian Lehmann, Andre Luckow, Jakob Luettgau, Ketan Maheshwari, Motohiko Matsuda, Doriana Medic, Pete Mendygral, Marek Michalewicz, Jorji Nonaka, Maciej Pawlik, Loic Pottier, Line Pouchard, Mathias Putz, Santosh Kumar Radha, Lavanya Ramakrishnan, Sashko Ristov, Paul Romano, Daniel Rosendo, Martin Ruefenacht, Katarzyna Rycerz, Nishant Saurabh, Volodymyr Savchenko, Martin Schulz, Christine Simpson, Raul Sirvent, Tyler Skluzacek, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Renan Souza, Sreenivas Rangan Sukumar, Ziheng Sun, Alan Sussman, Douglas Thain, Mikhail Titov, Benjamin Tovar, Aalap Tripathy, Matteo Turilli, Bartosz Tuznik, Hubertus van Dam, Aurelio Vivas, Logan Ward, Patrick Widener, Sean Wilkinson, Justyna Zawalska, Mahnoor Zulfiqar
Scientific workflows have become integral tools in broad scientific computing use cases. Science discovery is increasingly dependent on workflows to orchestrate large and complex scientific experiments that range from execution of a cloud-based data preprocessing pipeline to multi-facility instrument-to-edge-to-HPC computational workflows. Given the changing landscape of scientific computing and the evolving needs of emerging scientific applications, it is paramount that the development of novel scientific workflows and system functionalities seek to increase the efficiency, resilience, and pervasiveness of existing systems and applications. Specifically, the proliferation of machine learning/artificial intelligence (ML/AI) workflows, need for processing large scale datasets produced by instruments at the edge, intensification of near real-time data processing, support for long-term experiment campaigns, and emergence of quantum computing as an adjunct to HPC, have significantly changed the functional and operational requirements of workflow systems. Workflow systems now need to, for example, support data streams from the edge-to-cloud-to-HPC enable the management of many small-sized files, allow data reduction while ensuring high accuracy, orchestrate distributed services (workflows, instruments, data movement, provenance, publication, etc.) across computing and user facilities, among others. Further, to accelerate science, it is also necessary that these systems implement specifications/standards and APIs for seamless (horizontal and vertical) integration between systems and applications, as well as enabling the publication of workflows and their associated products according to the FAIR principles. This document reports on discussions and findings from the 2022 international edition of the Workflows Community Summit that took place on November 29 and 30, 2022.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Henri Casanova, Kyle Chard, Tainã Coleman, Dan Laney, Dong Ahn, Shantenu Jha, Dorran Howell, Stian Soiland-Reys, Ilkay Altintas, Douglas Thain, Rosa Filgueira, Yadu Babuji, Rosa M. Badia, Bartosz Balis, Silvina Caino-Lores, Scott Callaghan, Frederik Coppens, Michael R. Crusoe, Kaushik De, Frank Di Natale, Tu M. A. Do, Bjoern Enders, Thomas Fahringer, Anne Fouilloux, Grigori Fursin, Alban Gaignard, Alex Ganose, Daniel Garijo, Sandra Gesing, Carole Goble, Adil Hasan, Sebastiaan Huber, Daniel S. Katz, Ulf Leser, Douglas Lowe, Bertram Ludaescher, Ketan Maheshwari, Maciej Malawski, Rajiv Mayani, Kshitij Mehta, Andre Merzky, Todd Munson, Jonathan Ozik, Loïc Pottier, Sashko Ristov, Mehdi Roozmeh, Renan Souza, Frédéric Suter, Benjamin Tovar, Matteo Turilli, Karan Vahi, Alvaro Vidal-Torreira, Wendy Whitcup, Michael Wilde, Alan Williams, Matthew Wolf, Justin Wozniak
Scientific workflows are a cornerstone of modern scientific computing, and they have underpinned some of the most significant discoveries of the last decade. Many of these workflows have high computational, storage, and/or communication demands, and thus must execute on a wide range of large-scale platforms, from large clouds to upcoming exascale HPC platforms. Workflows will play a crucial role in the data-oriented and post-Moore's computing landscape as they democratize the application of cutting-edge research techniques, computationally intensive methods, and use of new computing platforms. As workflows continue to be adopted by scientific projects and user communities, they are becoming more complex. Workflows are increasingly composed of tasks that perform computations such as short machine learning inference, multi-node simulations, long-running machine learning model training, amongst others, and thus increasingly rely on heterogeneous architectures that include CPUs but also GPUs and accelerators. The workflow management system (WMS) technology landscape is currently segmented and presents significant barriers to entry due to the hundreds of seemingly comparable, yet incompatible, systems that exist. Another fundamental problem is that there are conflicting theoretical bases and abstractions for a WMS. Systems that use the same underlying abstractions can likely be translated between, which is not the case for systems that use different abstractions. More information: https://workflowsri.org/summits/technical
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Henri Casanova, Kyle Chard, Ilkay Altintas, Rosa M Badia, Bartosz Balis, Tainã Coleman, Frederik Coppens, Frank Di Natale, Bjoern Enders, Thomas Fahringer, Rosa Filgueira, Grigori Fursin, Daniel Garijo, Carole Goble, Dorran Howell, Shantenu Jha, Daniel S. Katz, Daniel Laney, Ulf Leser, Maciej Malawski, Kshitij Mehta, Loïc Pottier, Jonathan Ozik, J. Luc Peterson, Lavanya Ramakrishnan, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Douglas Thain, Matthew Wolf
The landscape of workflow systems for scientific applications is notoriously convoluted with hundreds of seemingly equivalent workflow systems, many isolated research claims, and a steep learning curve. To address some of these challenges and lay the groundwork for transforming workflows research and development, the WorkflowsRI and ExaWorks projects partnered to bring the international workflows community together. This paper reports on discussions and findings from two virtual "Workflows Community Summits" (January and April, 2021). The overarching goals of these workshops were to develop a view of the state of the art, identify crucial research challenges in the workflows community, articulate a vision for potential community efforts, and discuss technical approaches for realizing this vision. To this end, participants identified six broad themes: FAIR computational workflows; AI workflows; exascale challenges; APIs, interoperability, reuse, and standards; training and education; and building a workflows community. We summarize discussions and recommendations for each of these themes.
Tainã Coleman, Henri Casanova, Ketan Maheshwari, Loïc Pottier, Sean R. Wilkinson, Justin Wozniak, Frédéric Suter, Mallikarjun Shankar, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
The prevalence of scientific workflows with high computational demands calls for their execution on various distributed computing platforms, including large-scale leadership-class high-performance computing (HPC) clusters. To handle the deployment, monitoring, and optimization of workflow executions, many workflow systems have been developed over the past decade. There is a need for workflow benchmarks that can be used to evaluate the performance of workflow systems on current and future software stacks and hardware platforms. We present a generator of realistic workflow benchmark specifications that can be translated into benchmark code to be executed with current workflow systems. Our approach generates workflow tasks with arbitrary performance characteristics (CPU, memory, and I/O usage) and with realistic task dependency structures based on those seen in production workflows. We present experimental results that show that our approach generates benchmarks that are representative of production workflows, and conduct a case study to demonstrate the use and usefulness of our generated benchmarks to evaluate the performance of workflow systems under different configuration scenarios.
Brian D. Etz, David M. Rogers, Michael J. Brim, Ketan Maheshwari, Kellen Leland, Tyler J. Skluzacek, Jack Lange, Daniel Pelfrey, Jordan Webb, Patrick Widener, Ryan Adamson, Christopher Zimmer, Veronica G. Melesse Vergara, Mallikarjun Shankar, Sarp Oral, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
The evolving landscape of scientific computing requires seamless transitions from experimental to production HPC environments for interactive workflows. This paper presents a structured transition pathway developed at OLCF that bridges the gap between development testbeds and production systems. We address both technological and policy challenges, introducing frameworks for data streaming architectures, secure service interfaces, and adaptive resource scheduling for time-sensitive workloads and improved HPC interactivity. Our approach transforms traditional batch-oriented HPC into a more dynamic ecosystem capable of supporting modern scientific workflows that require near real-time data analysis, experimental steering, and cross-facility integration.
Woong Shin, Renan Souza, Daniel Rosendo, Frédéric Suter, Feiyi Wang, Prasanna Balaprakash, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
Modern scientific discovery increasingly requires coordinating distributed facilities and heterogeneous resources, forcing researchers to act as manual workflow coordinators rather than scientists. Advances in AI leading to AI agents show exciting new opportunities that can accelerate scientific discovery by providing intelligence as a component in the ecosystem. However, it is unclear how this new capability would materialize and integrate in the real world. To address this, we propose a conceptual framework where workflows evolve along two dimensions which are intelligence (from static to intelligent) and composition (from single to swarm) to chart an evolutionary path from current workflow management systems to fully autonomous, distributed scientific laboratories. With these trajectories in mind, we present an architectural blueprint that can help the community take the next steps towards harnessing the opportunities in autonomous science with the potential for 100x discovery acceleration and transformational scientific workflows.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Loïc Pottier, Tainã Coleman, Ewa Deelman, Henri Casanova
Scientific workflows are a cornerstone of modern scientific computing. They are used to describe complex computational applications that require efficient and robust management of large volumes of data, which are typically stored/processed at heterogeneous, distributed resources. The workflow research and development community has employed a number of methods for the quantitative evaluation of existing and novel workflow algorithms and systems. In particular, a common approach is to simulate workflow executions. In previous work, we have presented a collection of tools that have been used for aiding research and development activities in the Pegasus project, and that have been adopted by others for conducting workflow research. Despite their popularity, there are several shortcomings that prevent easy adoption, maintenance, and consistency with the evolving structures and computational requirements of production workflows. In this work, we present WorkflowHub, a community framework that provides a collection of tools for analyzing workflow execution traces, producing realistic synthetic workflow traces, and simulating workflow executions. We demonstrate the realism of the generated synthetic traces by comparing simulated executions of these traces with actual workflow executions. We also contrast these results with those obtained when using the previously available collection of tools. We find that our framework not only can be used to generate representative synthetic workflow traces (i.e., with workflow structures and task characteristics distributions that resembles those in traces obtained from real-world workflow executions), but can also generate representative workflow traces at larger scales than that of available workflow traces.
Rafael Ferreira da Silva, Henri Casanova, Kyle Chard, Dan Laney, Dong Ahn, Shantenu Jha, Carole Goble, Lavanya Ramakrishnan, Luc Peterson, Bjoern Enders, Douglas Thain, Ilkay Altintas, Yadu Babuji, Rosa M. Badia, Vivien Bonazzi, Taina Coleman, Michael Crusoe, Ewa Deelman, Frank Di Natale, Paolo Di Tommaso, Thomas Fahringer, Rosa Filgueira, Grigori Fursin, Alex Ganose, Bjorn Gruning, Daniel S. Katz, Olga Kuchar, Ana Kupresanin, Bertram Ludascher, Ketan Maheshwari, Marta Mattoso, Kshitij Mehta, Todd Munson, Jonathan Ozik, Tom Peterka, Loic Pottier, Tim Randles, Stian Soiland-Reyes, Benjamin Tovar, Matteo Turilli, Thomas Uram, Karan Vahi, Michael Wilde, Matthew Wolf, Justin Wozniak
Scientific workflows have been used almost universally across scientific domains, and have underpinned some of the most significant discoveries of the past several decades. Many of these workflows have high computational, storage, and/or communication demands, and thus must execute on a wide range of large-scale platforms, from large clouds to upcoming exascale high-performance computing (HPC) platforms. These executions must be managed using some software infrastructure. Due to the popularity of workflows, workflow management systems (WMSs) have been developed to provide abstractions for creating and executing workflows conveniently, efficiently, and portably. While these efforts are all worthwhile, there are now hundreds of independent WMSs, many of which are moribund. As a result, the WMS landscape is segmented and presents significant barriers to entry due to the hundreds of seemingly comparable, yet incompatible, systems that exist. As a result, many teams, small and large, still elect to build their own custom workflow solution rather than adopt, or build upon, existing WMSs. This current state of the WMS landscape negatively impacts workflow users, developers, and researchers. The "Workflows Community Summit" was held online on January 13, 2021. The overarching goal of the summit was to develop a view of the state of the art and identify crucial research challenges in the workflow community. Prior to the summit, a survey sent to stakeholders in the workflow community (including both developers of WMSs and users of workflows) helped to identify key challenges in this community that were translated into 6 broad themes for the summit, each of them being the object of a focused discussion led by a volunteer member of the community. This report documents and organizes the wealth of information provided by the participants before, during, and after the summit.
Sean R. Wilkinson, Ketan Maheshwari, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
We observe and analyze usage of the login nodes of the leadership class Summit supercomputer from the perspective of an ordinary user -- not a system administrator -- by periodically sampling user activities (job queues, running processes, etc.) for two full years (2020-2021). Our findings unveil key usage patterns that evidence misuse of the system, including gaming the policies, impairing I/O performance, and using login nodes as a sole computing resource. Our analysis highlights observed patterns for the execution of complex computations (workflows), which are key for processing large-scale applications.
Irene Bonati, Silvina Caino-Lores, Tainã Coleman, Sagar Dolas, Sandro Fiore, Venkatesh Kannan, Marco Verdicchio, Sean R. Wilkinson, Rafael Ferreira da Silva
Scientific workflows have become essential for orchestrating complex computational processes across distributed resources, managing large datasets, and ensuring reproducibility in modern research. The Workflows Community Summit 2025, held in Amsterdam on June 6th, 2025, convened international experts to examine emerging challenges and opportunities in this domain. Participants identified key barriers to workflow adoption, including tensions between system generality and domain-specific utility, concerns over long-term sustainability of workflow systems and services, insufficient recognition for those who develop and maintain reproducible workflows, and gaps in standardization, funding, training, and cross-disciplinary collaboration. To address these challenges, the summit proposed action lines spanning technology, policy, and community dimensions: shifting evaluation metrics from raw computational performance toward measuring genuine scientific impact; formalizing workflow patterns and community-driven benchmarks to improve transparency, reproducibility, and usability; cultivating a cohesive international workflows community that engages funding bodies and research stakeholders; and investing in human capital through dedicated workflow engineering roles, career pathways, and integration of workflow concepts into educational curricula and long-term training initiatives. This document presents the summit's findings, beginning with an overview of the current computing ecosystem and the rationale for workflow-centric approaches, followed by a discussion of identified challenges and recommended action lines for advancing scientific discovery through workflows.