Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28559808›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2017

Constructing Neuronal Network Models in Massively Parallel Environments.

Tammo Ippen, Jochen M Eppler, Hans E Plesser, Markus Diesmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Connectivity concepts in neuronal network modeling.PLoS computational biology · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. NeuroBox: Computational Mathematics in Multiscale Neuroscience.Computing And Visualization In Science · 2019
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tammo IppenInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-6) and Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS-6) and JARA BRAIN Institute I, Jülich Research CentreJülich, Germany.
Jochen M EpplerSimulation Laboratory Neuroscience-Bernstein Facility Simulation and Database Technology, Institute for Advanced Simulation, Jülich Research Centre and JARAJülich, Germany.
Hans E PlesserInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-6) and Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS-6) and JARA BRAIN Institute I, Jülich Research CentreJülich, Germany.
Markus DiesmannInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-6) and Institute for Advanced Simulation (IAS-6) and JARA BRAIN Institute I, Jülich Research CentreJülich, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

large-scale simulationmemory allocationmulti-core processormulti-threadingparallel computingspiking neuronal networksupercomputer

Identifiers

PMID28559808
PMCPMC5432669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.