ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2017
Constructing Neuronal Network Models in Massively Parallel Environments.
Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient parameter calibration and real-time simulation of large-scale spiking neural networks with GeNN and NEST.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2023Article
- Connectivity concepts in neuronal network modeling.PLoS computational biology · 2022Review
- A Modular Workflow for Performance Benchmarking of Neuronal Network Simulations.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2022Article
- Parallelization of Neural Processing on Neuromorphic Hardware.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Routing Brain Traffic Through the Von Neumann Bottleneck: Parallel Sorting and Refactoring.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2021Article
- Understanding Computational Costs of Cellular-Level Brain Tissue Simulations Through Analytical Performance Models.Neuroinformatics · 2020Article
- Efficient Communication in Distributed Simulations of Spiking Neuronal Networks With Gap Junctions.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2020Article
- NeuroBox: Computational Mathematics in Multiscale Neuroscience.Computing And Visualization In Science · 2019Article
- How Amdahl's Law limits the performance of large artificial neural networks : why the functionality of full-scale brain simulation on processor-based simulators is limited.Brain informatics · 2019Article
- CoreNEURON : An Optimized Compute Engine for the NEURON Simulator.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2019Article
- Extremely Scalable Spiking Neuronal Network Simulation Code: From Laptops to Exascale Computers.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2018Article
- Performance Comparison of the Digital Neuromorphic Hardware SpiNNaker and the Neural Network Simulation Software NEST for a Full-Scale Cortical Microcircuit Model.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in the development of data structures to represent spiking neuron network models enable us to exploit the complete memory of petascale computers for a single brain-scale network simulation. In this work, we investigate how well we can exploit the computing power of such supercomputers for the creation of neuronal networks. Using an established benchmark, we divide the runtime of simulation code into the phase of network construction and the phase during which the dynamical state is advanced in time. We find that on multi-core compute nodes network creation scales well with process-parallel code but exhibits a prohibitively large memory consumption. Thread-parallel network creation, in contrast, exhibits speedup only up to a small number of threads but has little overhead in terms of memory. We further observe that the algorithms creating instances of model neurons and their connections scale well for networks of ten thousand neurons, but do not show the same speedup for networks of millions of neurons. Our work uncovers that the lack of scaling of thread-parallel network creation is due to inadequate memory allocation strategies and demonstrates that thread-optimized memory allocators recover excellent scaling. An analysis of the loop order used for network construction reveals that more complex tests on the locality of operations significantly improve scaling and reduce runtime by allowing construction algorithms to step through large networks more efficiently than in existing code. The combination of these techniques increases performance by an order of magnitude and harnesses the increasingly parallel compute power of the compute nodes in high-performance clusters and supercomputers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.