skip to main content


Title: On-Demand Urgent High Performance Computing Utilizing the Google Cloud Platform
In this paper we describe how high performance computing in the Google Cloud Platform can be utilized in an urgent and emergency situation to process large amounts of traffic data efficiently and on demand. Our approach provides a solution to an urgent need for disaster management using massive data processing and high performance computing. The traffic data used in this demonstration is collected from the public camera systems on Interstate highways in the Southeast United States. Our solution launches a parallel processing system that is the size of a Top 5 supercomputer using the Google Cloud Platform. Results show that the parallel processing system can be launched in a few hours, that it is effective at fast processing of high volume data, and can be de-provisioned in a few hours. We processed 211TB of video utilizing 6,227,593 core hours over the span of about eight hours with an average cost of around $0.008 per vCPU hour, which is less than the cost of many on-premise HPC systems.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1725573
NSF-PAR ID:
10201360
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
2019 IEEE/ACM HPC for Urgent Decision Making (UrgentHPC)
Page Range / eLocation ID:
13 to 23
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Developments in large scale computing environments have led to design of workflows that rely on containers and analytics platform that are well supported by the commercial cloud. The National Science Foundation also envisions a future in science and engineering that includes commercial cloud service providers (CSPs) such as Amazon Web Services, Azure and Google Cloud. These twin forces have made researchers consider the commercial cloud as an alternative option to current high performance computing (HPC) environments. Training and knowledge on how to migrate workflows, cost control, data management, and system administration remain some of the commonly listed concerns with adoption of cloud computing. In an effort to ameliorate this situation, CSPs have developed online and in-person training platforms to help address this problem. Scalability, ability to impart knowledge, evaluating knowledge gain, and accreditation are the core concepts that have driven this approach. Here, we present a review of our experience using Google’s Qwiklabs online platform for remote and in-person training from the perspective of a HPC user. For this study, we completed over 50 online courses, earned five badges and attended a one-day session. We identify the strengths of the approach, identify avenues to refine them, and consider means to further community engagement. We further evaluate the readiness of these resources for a cloud-curious researcher who is familiar with HPC. Finally, we present recommendations on how the large scale computing community can leverage these opportunities to work with CSPs to assist researchers nationally and at their home institutions. 
    more » « less
  2. Sadayappan, Ponnuswamy ; Chamberlain, Bradford L. ; Juckeland, Guido ; Ltaief, Hatem (Ed.)
    As we approach the Exascale era, it is important to verify that the existing frameworks and tools will still work at that scale. Moreover, public Cloud computing has been emerging as a viable solution for both prototyping and urgent computing. Using the elasticity of the Cloud, we have thus put in place a pre-exascale HTCondor setup for running a scientific simulation in the Cloud, with the chosen application being IceCube's photon propagation simulation. I.e. this was not a purely demonstration run, but it was also used to produce valuable and much needed scientific results for the IceCube collaboration. In order to reach the desired scale, we aggregated GPU resources across 8 GPU models from many geographic regions across Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, and the Google Cloud Platform. Using this setup, we reached a peak of over 51k GPUs corresponding to almost 380 PFLOP32s, for a total integrated compute of about 100k GPU hours. In this paper we provide the description of the setup, the problems that were discovered and overcome, as well as a short description of the actual science output of the exercise. 
    more » « less
  3. Obeid, Iyad Selesnick (Ed.)
    Electroencephalography (EEG) is a popular clinical monitoring tool used for diagnosing brain-related disorders such as epilepsy [1]. As monitoring EEGs in a critical-care setting is an expensive and tedious task, there is a great interest in developing real-time EEG monitoring tools to improve patient care quality and efficiency [2]. However, clinicians require automatic seizure detection tools that provide decisions with at least 75% sensitivity and less than 1 false alarm (FA) per 24 hours [3]. Some commercial tools recently claim to reach such performance levels, including the Olympic Brainz Monitor [4] and Persyst 14 [5]. In this abstract, we describe our efforts to transform a high-performance offline seizure detection system [3] into a low latency real-time or online seizure detection system. An overview of the system is shown in Figure 1. The main difference between an online versus offline system is that an online system should always be causal and has minimum latency which is often defined by domain experts. The offline system, shown in Figure 2, uses two phases of deep learning models with postprocessing [3]. The channel-based long short term memory (LSTM) model (Phase 1 or P1) processes linear frequency cepstral coefficients (LFCC) [6] features from each EEG channel separately. We use the hypotheses generated by the P1 model and create additional features that carry information about the detected events and their confidence. The P2 model uses these additional features and the LFCC features to learn the temporal and spatial aspects of the EEG signals using a hybrid convolutional neural network (CNN) and LSTM model. Finally, Phase 3 aggregates the results from both P1 and P2 before applying a final postprocessing step. The online system implements Phase 1 by taking advantage of the Linux piping mechanism, multithreading techniques, and multi-core processors. To convert Phase 1 into an online system, we divide the system into five major modules: signal preprocessor, feature extractor, event decoder, postprocessor, and visualizer. The system reads 0.1-second frames from each EEG channel and sends them to the feature extractor and the visualizer. The feature extractor generates LFCC features in real time from the streaming EEG signal. Next, the system computes seizure and background probabilities using a channel-based LSTM model and applies a postprocessor to aggregate the detected events across channels. The system then displays the EEG signal and the decisions simultaneously using a visualization module. The online system uses C++, Python, TensorFlow, and PyQtGraph in its implementation. The online system accepts streamed EEG data sampled at 250 Hz as input. The system begins processing the EEG signal by applying a TCP montage [8]. Depending on the type of the montage, the EEG signal can have either 22 or 20 channels. To enable the online operation, we send 0.1-second (25 samples) length frames from each channel of the streamed EEG signal to the feature extractor and the visualizer. Feature extraction is performed sequentially on each channel. The signal preprocessor writes the sample frames into two streams to facilitate these modules. In the first stream, the feature extractor receives the signals using stdin. In parallel, as a second stream, the visualizer shares a user-defined file with the signal preprocessor. This user-defined file holds raw signal information as a buffer for the visualizer. The signal preprocessor writes into the file while the visualizer reads from it. Reading and writing into the same file poses a challenge. The visualizer can start reading while the signal preprocessor is writing into it. To resolve this issue, we utilize a file locking mechanism in the signal preprocessor and visualizer. Each of the processes temporarily locks the file, performs its operation, releases the lock, and tries to obtain the lock after a waiting period. The file locking mechanism ensures that only one process can access the file by prohibiting other processes from reading or writing while one process is modifying the file [9]. The feature extractor uses circular buffers to save 0.3 seconds or 75 samples from each channel for extracting 0.2-second or 50-sample long center-aligned windows. The module generates 8 absolute LFCC features where the zeroth cepstral coefficient is replaced by a temporal domain energy term. For extracting the rest of the features, three pipelines are used. The differential energy feature is calculated in a 0.9-second absolute feature window with a frame size of 0.1 seconds. The difference between the maximum and minimum temporal energy terms is calculated in this range. Then, the first derivative or the delta features are calculated using another 0.9-second window. Finally, the second derivative or delta-delta features are calculated using a 0.3-second window [6]. The differential energy for the delta-delta features is not included. In total, we extract 26 features from the raw sample windows which add 1.1 seconds of delay to the system. We used the Temple University Hospital Seizure Database (TUSZ) v1.2.1 for developing the online system [10]. The statistics for this dataset are shown in Table 1. A channel-based LSTM model was trained using the features derived from the train set using the online feature extractor module. A window-based normalization technique was applied to those features. In the offline model, we scale features by normalizing using the maximum absolute value of a channel [11] before applying a sliding window approach. Since the online system has access to a limited amount of data, we normalize based on the observed window. The model uses the feature vectors with a frame size of 1 second and a window size of 7 seconds. We evaluated the model using the offline P1 postprocessor to determine the efficacy of the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique. As shown by the results of experiments 1 and 4 in Table 2, these changes give us a comparable performance to the offline model. The online event decoder module utilizes this trained model for computing probabilities for the seizure and background classes. These posteriors are then postprocessed to remove spurious detections. The online postprocessor receives and saves 8 seconds of class posteriors in a buffer for further processing. It applies multiple heuristic filters (e.g., probability threshold) to make an overall decision by combining events across the channels. These filters evaluate the average confidence, the duration of a seizure, and the channels where the seizures were observed. The postprocessor delivers the label and confidence to the visualizer. The visualizer starts to display the signal as soon as it gets access to the signal file, as shown in Figure 1 using the “Signal File” and “Visualizer” blocks. Once the visualizer receives the label and confidence for the latest epoch from the postprocessor, it overlays the decision and color codes that epoch. The visualizer uses red for seizure with the label SEIZ and green for the background class with the label BCKG. Once the streaming finishes, the system saves three files: a signal file in which the sample frames are saved in the order they were streamed, a time segmented event (TSE) file with the overall decisions and confidences, and a hypotheses (HYP) file that saves the label and confidence for each epoch. The user can plot the signal and decisions using the signal and HYP files with only the visualizer by enabling appropriate options. For comparing the performance of different stages of development, we used the test set of TUSZ v1.2.1 database. It contains 1015 EEG records of varying duration. The any-overlap performance [12] of the overall system shown in Figure 2 is 40.29% sensitivity with 5.77 FAs per 24 hours. For comparison, the previous state-of-the-art model developed on this database performed at 30.71% sensitivity with 6.77 FAs per 24 hours [3]. The individual performances of the deep learning phases are as follows: Phase 1’s (P1) performance is 39.46% sensitivity and 11.62 FAs per 24 hours, and Phase 2 detects seizures with 41.16% sensitivity and 11.69 FAs per 24 hours. We trained an LSTM model with the delayed features and the window-based normalization technique for developing the online system. Using the offline decoder and postprocessor, the model performed at 36.23% sensitivity with 9.52 FAs per 24 hours. The trained model was then evaluated with the online modules. The current performance of the overall online system is 45.80% sensitivity with 28.14 FAs per 24 hours. Table 2 summarizes the performances of these systems. The performance of the online system deviates from the offline P1 model because the online postprocessor fails to combine the events as the seizure probability fluctuates during an event. The modules in the online system add a total of 11.1 seconds of delay for processing each second of the data, as shown in Figure 3. In practice, we also count the time for loading the model and starting the visualizer block. When we consider these facts, the system consumes 15 seconds to display the first hypothesis. The system detects seizure onsets with an average latency of 15 seconds. Implementing an automatic seizure detection model in real time is not trivial. We used a variety of techniques such as the file locking mechanism, multithreading, circular buffers, real-time event decoding, and signal-decision plotting to realize the system. A video demonstrating the system is available at: https://www.isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_pfi_tt/resources/videos/realtime_eeg_analysis/v2.5.1/video_2.5.1.mp4. The final conference submission will include a more detailed analysis of the online performance of each module. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Research reported in this publication was most recently supported by the National Science Foundation Partnership for Innovation award number IIP-1827565 and the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Universal Research Enhancement Program (PA CURE). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of any of these organizations. REFERENCES [1] A. Craik, Y. He, and J. L. Contreras-Vidal, “Deep learning for electroencephalogram (EEG) classification tasks: a review,” J. Neural Eng., vol. 16, no. 3, p. 031001, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab0ab5. [2] A. C. Bridi, T. Q. Louro, and R. C. L. Da Silva, “Clinical Alarms in intensive care: implications of alarm fatigue for the safety of patients,” Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem, vol. 22, no. 6, p. 1034, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.3488.2513. [3] M. Golmohammadi, V. Shah, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Deep Learning Approaches for Automatic Seizure Detection from Scalp Electroencephalograms,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 233–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36844-9_8. [4] “CFM Olympic Brainz Monitor.” [Online]. Available: https://newborncare.natus.com/products-services/newborn-care-products/newborn-brain-injury/cfm-olympic-brainz-monitor. [Accessed: 17-Jul-2020]. [5] M. L. Scheuer, S. B. Wilson, A. Antony, G. Ghearing, A. Urban, and A. I. Bagic, “Seizure Detection: Interreader Agreement and Detection Algorithm Assessments Using a Large Dataset,” J. Clin. Neurophysiol., 2020. https://doi.org/10.1097/WNP.0000000000000709. [6] A. Harati, M. Golmohammadi, S. Lopez, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved EEG Event Classification Using Differential Energy,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium, 2015, pp. 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPMB.2015.7405421. [7] V. Shah, C. Campbell, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Improved Spatio-Temporal Modeling in Automated Seizure Detection using Channel-Dependent Posteriors,” Neurocomputing, 2021. [8] W. Tatum, A. Husain, S. Benbadis, and P. Kaplan, Handbook of EEG Interpretation. New York City, New York, USA: Demos Medical Publishing, 2007. [9] D. P. Bovet and C. Marco, Understanding the Linux Kernel, 3rd ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2005. https://www.oreilly.com/library/view/understanding-the-linux/0596005652/. [10] V. Shah et al., “The Temple University Hospital Seizure Detection Corpus,” Front. Neuroinform., vol. 12, pp. 1–6, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00083. [11] F. Pedregosa et al., “Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 12, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1953048.2078195. [12] J. Gotman, D. Flanagan, J. Zhang, and B. Rosenblatt, “Automatic seizure detection in the newborn: Methods and initial evaluation,” Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., vol. 103, no. 3, pp. 356–362, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0013-4694(97)00003-9. 
    more » « less
  4. Today’s systems, rely on sending all the data to the cloud, and then use complex algorithms, such as Deep Neural Networks, which require billions of parameters and many hours to train a model. In contrast, the human brain can do much of this learning effortlessly. Hyperdimensional (HD) Computing aims to mimic the behavior of the human brain by utilizing high dimensional representations. This leads to various desirable properties that other Machine Learning (ML) algorithms lack such as: robustness to noise in the system and simple, highly parallel operations. In this paper, we propose \(\mathsf {HyDREA} \) , a Hy per D imensional Computing system that is R obust, E fficient, and A ccurate. We propose a Processing-in-Memory (PIM) architecture that works in a federated learning environment with challenging communication scenarios that cause errors in the transmitted data. \(\mathsf {HyDREA} \) adaptively changes the bitwidth of the model based on the signal to noise ratio (SNR) of the incoming sample to maintain the accuracy of the HD model while achieving significant speedup and energy efficiency. Our PIM architecture is able to achieve a speedup of 28 × and 255 × better energy efficiency compared to the baseline PIM architecture for Classification and achieves 32 × speed up and 289 × higher energy efficiency than the baseline architecture for Clustering. \(\mathsf {HyDREA} \) is able to achieve this by relaxing hardware parameters to gain energy efficiency and speedup while introducing computational errors. We show experimentally, HD Computing is able to handle the errors without a significant drop in accuracy due to its unique robustness property. For wireless noise, we found that \(\mathsf {HyDREA} \) is 48 × more robust to noise than other comparable ML algorithms. Our results indicate that our proposed system loses less than \(1\% \) Classification accuracy, even in scenarios with an SNR of 6.64. We additionally test the robustness of using HD Computing for Clustering applications and found that our proposed system also looses less than \(1\% \) in the mutual information score, even in scenarios with an SNR under 7 dB , which is 57 × more robust to noise than K-means. 
    more » « less
  5. null (Ed.)
    Bacterial colonization of biotic and abiotic surfaces and antibiotic resistance are grand challenges with paramount societal impacts. However, in the face of increasing bacterial resistance to all known antibiotics, efforts to discover new classes of antibiotics have languished, creating an urgent need to accelerate the antibiotic discovery pipeline. A major deterrent in the discovering of new antibiotics is the limited permeability of molecules across the bacterial envelope. Notably, the Gram-negative bacteria have nutrient specific protein channels (or porins) that restrict the permeability of non-essential molecules, including antibiotics. Here, we have developed the Computational Antibiotic Screening Platform (CLASP) for screening of potential drug molecules through the porins. The CLASP takes advantage of coarse grain (CG) resolution, advanced sampling techniques, and a parallel computing environment to maximize its performance. The CLASP yields comprehensive thermodynamic and kinetic output data of a potential drug molecule within a few hours of wall-clock time. Its output includes the potential of mean force profile, energy barrier, the rate constant, and contact analysis of the molecule with the pore-lining residues, and the orientational analysis of the molecule in the porin channel. In our first CLASP application, we report the transport properties of six carbapenem antibiotics—biapenem, doripenem, ertapenem, imipenem, meropenem, and panipenem—through OccD3, a major channel for carbapenem uptake in Pseudomonas aeruginosa . The CLASP is designed to screen small molecule libraries with a fast turnaround time to yield structure–property relationships to discover antibiotics with high permeability. The CLASP will be freely distributed to enable accelerated antibiotic drug discovery. 
    more » « less