skip to main content
Explore Scholarly Publications and Datasets in the NSF-PAR

Title: Simple and Automatic Distributed Machine Learning on Ray
In recent years, the pace of innovations in the fields of machine learning (ML) has accelerated, researchers in SysML have created algorithms and systems that parallelize ML training over multiple devices or computational nodes. As ML models become more structurally complex, many systems have struggled to provide all-round performance on a variety of models. Particularly, ML scale-up is usually underestimated in terms of the amount of knowledge and time required to map from an appropriate distribution strategy to the model. Applying parallel training systems to complex models adds nontrivial development overheads in addition to model prototyping, and often results in lower-than-expected performance. This tutorial identifies research and practical pain points in parallel ML training, and discusses latest development of algorithms and systems on addressing these challenges in both usability and performance. In particular, this tutorial presents a new perspective of unifying seemingly different distributed ML training strategies. Based on it, introduces new techniques and system architectures to simplify and automate ML parallelization. This tutorial is built upon the authors' years' of research and industry experience, comprehensive literature survey, and several latest tutorials and papers published by the authors and peer researchers. The tutorial consists of four parts. The first part will more » present a landscape of distributed ML training techniques and systems, and highlight the major difficulties faced by real users when writing distributed ML code with big model or big data. The second part dives deep to explain the mainstream training strategies, guided with real use case. By developing a new and unified formulation to represent the seemingly different data- and model- parallel strategies, we describe a set of techniques and algorithms to achieve ML auto-parallelization, and compiler system architectures for auto-generating and exercising parallelization strategies based on models and clusters. The third part of this tutorial exposes a hidden layer of practical pain points in distributed ML training: hyper-parameter tuning and resource allocation, and introduces techniques to improve these aspects. The fourth part is designed as a hands-on coding session, in which we will walk through the audiences on writing distributed training programs in Python, using the various distributed ML tools and interfaces provided by the Ray ecosystem. « less
Authors:
; ; ;
Award ID(s):
1730628
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10310459
Journal Name:
KDD '21: Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ( , 26th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining)
    With the explosion in Big Data, it is often forgotten that much of the data nowadays is generated at the edge. Specifically, a major source of data is users' endpoint devices like phones, smart watches, etc., that are connected to the internet, also known as the Internet-of-Things (IoT). This "edge of data" faces several new challenges related to hardware-constraints, privacy-aware learning, and distributed learning (both training as well as inference). So what systems and machine learning algorithms can we use to generate or exploit data at the edge? Can network science help us solve machine learning (ML) problems? Can IoT-devices help people who live with some form of disability and many others benefit from health monitoring? In this tutorial, we introduce the network science and ML techniques relevant to edge computing, discuss systems for ML (e.g., model compression, quantization, HW/SW co-design, etc.) and ML for systems design (e.g., run-time resource optimization, power management for training and inference on edge devices), and illustrate their impact in addressing concrete IoT applications.
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ( , Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB))
    Obeid, I. (Ed.)
    The Neural Engineering Data Consortium (NEDC) is developing the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus (TUDP), an open source database of high-resolution images from scanned pathology samples [1], as part of its National Science Foundation-funded Major Research Instrumentation grant titled “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning” [2]. The long-term goal of this project is to release one million images. We have currently scanned over 100,000 images and are in the process of annotating breast tissue data for our first official corpus release, v1.0.0. This release contains 3,505 annotated images of breast tissue including 74 patients with cancerous diagnoses (out of a total of 296 patients). In this poster, we will present an analysis of this corpus and discuss the challenges we have faced in efficiently producing high quality annotations of breast tissue. It is well known that state of the art algorithms in machine learning require vast amounts of data. Fields such as speech recognition [3], image recognition [4] and text processing [5] are able to deliver impressive performance with complex deep learning models because they have developed large corpora to support training of extremely high-dimensional models (e.g., billions of parameters). Other fields that do notmore »have access to such data resources must rely on techniques in which existing models can be adapted to new datasets [6]. A preliminary version of this breast corpus release was tested in a pilot study using a baseline machine learning system, ResNet18 [7], that leverages several open-source Python tools. The pilot corpus was divided into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Portions of these slides were manually annotated [1] using the nine labels in Table 1 [8] to identify five to ten examples of pathological features on each slide. Not every pathological feature is annotated, meaning excluded areas can include focuses particular to these labels that are not used for training. A summary of the number of patches within each label is given in Table 2. To maintain a balanced training set, 1,000 patches of each label were used to train the machine learning model. Throughout all sets, only annotated patches were involved in model development. The performance of this model in identifying all the patches in the evaluation set can be seen in the confusion matrix of classification accuracy in Table 3. The highest performing labels were background, 97% correct identification, and artifact, 76% correct identification. A correlation exists between labels with more than 6,000 development patches and accurate performance on the evaluation set. Additionally, these results indicated a need to further refine the annotation of invasive ductal carcinoma (“indc”), inflammation (“infl”), nonneoplastic features (“nneo”), normal (“norm”) and suspicious (“susp”). This pilot experiment motivated changes to the corpus that will be discussed in detail in this poster presentation. To increase the accuracy of the machine learning model, we modified how we addressed underperforming labels. One common source of error arose with how non-background labels were converted into patches. Large areas of background within other labels were isolated within a patch resulting in connective tissue misrepresenting a non-background label. In response, the annotation overlay margins were revised to exclude benign connective tissue in non-background labels. Corresponding patient reports and supporting immunohistochemical stains further guided annotation reviews. The microscopic diagnoses given by the primary pathologist in these reports detail the pathological findings within each tissue site, but not within each specific slide. The microscopic diagnoses informed revisions specifically targeting annotated regions classified as cancerous, ensuring that the labels “indc” and “dcis” were used only in situations where a micropathologist diagnosed it as such. Further differentiation of cancerous and precancerous labels, as well as the location of their focus on a slide, could be accomplished with supplemental immunohistochemically (IHC) stained slides. When distinguishing whether a focus is a nonneoplastic feature versus a cancerous growth, pathologists employ antigen targeting stains to the tissue in question to confirm the diagnosis. For example, a nonneoplastic feature of usual ductal hyperplasia will display diffuse staining for cytokeratin 5 (CK5) and no diffuse staining for estrogen receptor (ER), while a cancerous growth of ductal carcinoma in situ will have negative or focally positive staining for CK5 and diffuse staining for ER [9]. Many tissue samples contain cancerous and non-cancerous features with morphological overlaps that cause variability between annotators. The informative fields IHC slides provide could play an integral role in machine model pathology diagnostics. Following the revisions made on all the annotations, a second experiment was run using ResNet18. Compared to the pilot study, an increase of model prediction accuracy was seen for the labels indc, infl, nneo, norm, and null. This increase is correlated with an increase in annotated area and annotation accuracy. Model performance in identifying the suspicious label decreased by 25% due to the decrease of 57% in the total annotated area described by this label. A summary of the model performance is given in Table 4, which shows the new prediction accuracy and the absolute change in error rate compared to Table 3. The breast tissue subset we are developing includes 3,505 annotated breast pathology slides from 296 patients. The average size of a scanned SVS file is 363 MB. The annotations are stored in an XML format. A CSV version of the annotation file is also available which provides a flat, or simple, annotation that is easy for machine learning researchers to access and interface to their systems. Each patient is identified by an anonymized medical reference number. Within each patient’s directory, one or more sessions are identified, also anonymized to the first of the month in which the sample was taken. These sessions are broken into groupings of tissue taken on that date (in this case, breast tissue). A deidentified patient report stored as a flat text file is also available. Within these slides there are a total of 16,971 total annotated regions with an average of 4.84 annotations per slide. Among those annotations, 8,035 are non-cancerous (normal, background, null, and artifact,) 6,222 are carcinogenic signs (inflammation, nonneoplastic and suspicious,) and 2,714 are cancerous labels (ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma in situ.) The individual patients are split up into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Of the 74 cancerous patients, 20 were allotted for both the development and evaluation sets, while the remain 34 were allotted for train. The remaining 222 patients were split up to preserve the overall distribution of labels within the corpus. This was done in hope of creating control sets for comparable studies. Overall, the development and evaluation sets each have 80 patients, while the training set has 136 patients. In a related component of this project, slides from the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) Biosample Repository (https://www.foxchase.org/research/facilities/genetic-research-facilities/biosample-repository -facility) are being digitized in addition to slides provided by Temple University Hospital. This data includes 18 different types of tissue including approximately 38.5% urinary tissue and 16.5% gynecological tissue. These slides and the metadata provided with them are already anonymized and include diagnoses in a spreadsheet with sample and patient ID. We plan to release over 13,000 unannotated slides from the FCCC Corpus simultaneously with v1.0.0 of TUDP. Details of this release will also be discussed in this poster. Few digitally annotated databases of pathology samples like TUDP exist due to the extensive data collection and processing required. The breast corpus subset should be released by November 2021. By December 2021 we should also release the unannotated FCCC data. We are currently annotating urinary tract data as well. We expect to release about 5,600 processed TUH slides in this subset. We have an additional 53,000 unprocessed TUH slides digitized. Corpora of this size will stimulate the development of a new generation of deep learning technology. In clinical settings where resources are limited, an assistive diagnoses model could support pathologists’ workload and even help prioritize suspected cancerous cases. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is supported by the National Science Foundation under grants nos. CNS-1726188 and 1925494. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. REFERENCES [1] N. Shawki et al., “The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” 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 City, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 67 104. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030368432. [2] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning.” Major Research Instrumentation (MRI), Division of Computer and Network Systems, Award No. 1726188, January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2021. https://www. isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_dpath/. [3] A. Gulati et al., “Conformer: Convolution-augmented Transformer for Speech Recognition,” in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (INTERSPEECH), 2020, pp. 5036-5040. https://doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2020-3015. [4] C.-J. Wu et al., “Machine Learning at Facebook: Understanding Inference at the Edge,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2019, pp. 331–344. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8675201. [5] I. Caswell and B. Liang, “Recent Advances in Google Translate,” Google AI Blog: The latest from Google Research, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/06/recent-advances-in-google-translate.html. [Accessed: 01-Aug-2021]. [6] V. Khalkhali, N. Shawki, V. Shah, M. Golmohammadi, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Low Latency Real-Time Seizure Detection Using Transfer Deep Learning,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2021, pp. 1 7. https://www.isip. piconepress.com/publications/conference_proceedings/2021/ieee_spmb/eeg_transfer_learning/. [7] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning,” Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2020. https://www.isip.piconepress.com/publications/reports/2020/nsf/mri_dpath/. [8] I. Hunt, S. Husain, J. Simons, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Recent Advances in the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2019, pp. 1–4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9037859. [9] A. P. Martinez, C. Cohen, K. Z. Hanley, and X. (Bill) Li, “Estrogen Receptor and Cytokeratin 5 Are Reliable Markers to Separate Usual Ductal Hyperplasia From Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ,” Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., vol. 140, no. 7, pp. 686–689, Apr. 2016. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2015-0238-OA.« less
  3. ; ; ( , 2016 45th International Conference on Parallel Processing Workshops (ICPPW))
    Computer scientists and programmers face the difficultly of improving the scalability of their applications while using conventional programming techniques only. As a base-line hypothesis of this paper we assume that an advanced runtime system can be used to take full advantage of the available parallel resources of a machine in order to achieve the highest parallelism possible. In this paper we present the capabilities of HPX - a distributed runtime system for parallel applications of any scale - to achieve the best possible scalability through asynchronous task execution [1]. OP2 is an active library which provides a framework for the parallel execution for unstructured grid applications on different multi-core/many-core hardware architectures [2]. OP2 generates code which uses OpenMP for loop parallelization within an application code for both single-threaded and multi-threaded machines. In this work we modify the OP2 code generator to target HPX instead of OpenMP, i.e. port the parallel simulation backend of OP2 to utilize HPX. We compare the performance results of the different parallelization methods using HPX and OpenMP for loop parallelization within the Airfoil application. The results of strong scaling and weak scaling tests for the Airfoil application on one node with up to 32 threads aremore »presented. Using HPX for parallelization of OP2 gives an improvement in performance by 5%-21%. By modifying the OP2 code generator to use HPX's parallel algorithms, we observe scaling improvements by about 5% as compared to OpenMP. To fully exploit the potential of HPX, we adapted the OP2 API to expose a future and dataflow based programming model and applied this technique for parallelizing the same Airfoil application. We show that the dataflow oriented programming model, which automatically creates an execution tree representing the algorithmic data dependencies of our application, improves the overall scaling results by about 21% compared to OpenMP. Our results show the advantage of using the asynchronous programming model implemented by HPX.« less
  4. ; ; ( , The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications)
    Simulating the dynamics of ions near polarizable nanoparticles (NPs) using coarse-grained models is extremely challenging due to the need to solve the Poisson equation at every simulation timestep. Recently, a molecular dynamics (MD) method based on a dynamical optimization framework bypassed this obstacle by representing the polarization charge density as virtual dynamic variables and evolving them in parallel with the physical dynamics of ions. We highlight the computational gains accessible with the integration of machine learning (ML) methods for parameter prediction in MD simulations by demonstrating how they were realized in MD simulations of ions near polarizable NPs. An artificial neural network–based regression model was integrated with MD simulation and predicted the optimal simulation timestep and optimization parameters characterizing the virtual system with 94.3% success. The ML-enabled auto-tuning of parameters generated accurate dynamics of ions for ≈ 10 million steps while improving the stability of the simulation by over an order of magnitude. The integration of ML-enhanced framework with hybrid Open Multi-Processing / Message Passing Interface (OpenMP/MPI) parallelization techniques reduced the computational time of simulating systems with thousands of ions and induced charges from thousands of hours to tens of hours, yielding a maximum speedup of ≈ 3 from ML-onlymore »acceleration and a maximum speedup of ≈ 600 from the combination of ML and parallel computing methods. Extraction of ionic structure in concentrated electrolytes near oil–water emulsions demonstrates the success of the method. The approach can be generalized to select optimal parameters in other MD applications and energy minimization problems.« less
  5. ; ; ( , SysML 2019)
    Existing deep learning systems commonly parallelize deep neural network (DNN) training using data or model parallelism, but these strategies often result in suboptimal parallelization performance. We introduce SOAP, a more comprehensive search space of parallelization strategies for DNNs that includes strategies to parallelize a DNN in the Sample, Operator, Attribute, and Parameter dimensions. We present FlexFlow, a deep learning engine that uses guided randomized search of the SOAP space to find a fast parallelization strategy for a specific parallel machine. To accelerate this search, FlexFlow introduces a novel execution simulator that can accurately predict a parallelization strategy’s performance and is three orders of magnitude faster than prior approaches that execute each strategy. We evaluate FlexFlow with six real-world DNN benchmarks on two GPU clusters and show that FlexFlow increases training throughput by up to 3.3× over state-of-the-art approaches, even when including its search time, and also improves scalability.
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email