ArticleIEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing, Workshops and Phd Forum : [proceedings]. IEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing, Workshops and Phd Forum2020
Optimizing High-Performance Computing Systems for Biomedical Workloads.
Article in IEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing, Workshops and Phd Forum : [proceedings]. IEEE International Symposium on Parallel & Distributed Processing, Workshops and Phd Forum, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term exposure to wildfire-related PMThe Lancet. Oncology · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Use of AI agents to assess preoperative frailty in cancer patients.npj digital surgery · 2026Article
- Predicting Acute Cerebrovascular Events in Stroke Alerts Using Large-Language Models and Structured Data.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Biology and medicine in the landscape of quantum advantages.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2022Review
- Article
- Artificial intelligence in cancer research: learning at different levels of data granularity.Molecular oncology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The productivity of computational biologists is limited by the speed of their workflows and subsequent overall job throughput. Because most biomedical researchers are focused on better understanding scientific phenomena rather than developing and optimizing code, a computing and data system implemented in an adventitious and/or non-optimized manner can impede the progress of scientific discovery. In our experience, most computational, life-science applications do not generally leverage the full capabilities of high-performance computing, so tuning a system for these applications is especially critical. To optimize a system effectively, systems staff must understand the effects of the applications on the system. Effective stewardship of the system includes an analysis of the impact of the applications on the compute cores, file system, resource manager and queuing policies. The resulting improved system design, and enactment of a sustainability plan, help to enable a long-term resource for productive computational and data science. We present a case study of a typical biomedical computational workload at a leading academic medical center supporting over $100 million per year in computational biology research. Over the past eight years, our high-performance computing system has enabled over 900 biomedical publications in four major areas: genetics and population analysis, gene expression, machine learning, and structural and chemical biology. We have upgraded the system several times in response to trends, actual usage, and user feedback. Major components crucial to this evolution include scheduling structure and policies, memory size, compute type and speed, parallel file system capabilities, and deployment of cloud technologies. We evolved a 70 teraflop machine to a 1.4 petaflop machine in seven years and grew our user base nearly 10-fold. For long-term stability and sustainability, we established a chargeback fee structure. Our overarching guiding principle for each progression has been to increase scientific throughput and enable enhanced scientific fidelity with minimal impact to existing user workflows or code. This highly-constrained system optimization has presented unique challenges, leading us to adopt new approaches to provide constructive pathways forward. We share our practical strategies resulting from our ongoing growth and assessments.
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.