↓ Skip to main content

Meeting the Memory Challenges of Brain-Scale Network Simulation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Meeting the Memory Challenges of Brain-Scale Network Simulation
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fninf.2011.00035
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanne Kunkel, Tobias C. Potjans, Jochen M. Eppler, Hans Ekkehard Plesser, Abigail Morrison, Markus Diesmann

Abstract

The development of high-performance simulation software is crucial for studying the brain connectome. Using connectome data to generate neurocomputational models requires software capable of coping with models on a variety of scales: from the microscale, investigating plasticity, and dynamics of circuits in local networks, to the macroscale, investigating the interactions between distinct brain regions. Prior to any serious dynamical investigation, the first task of network simulations is to check the consistency of data integrated in the connectome and constrain ranges for yet unknown parameters. Thanks to distributed computing techniques, it is possible today to routinely simulate local cortical networks of around 10(5) neurons with up to 10(9) synapses on clusters and multi-processor shared-memory machines. However, brain-scale networks are orders of magnitude larger than such local networks, in terms of numbers of neurons and synapses as well as in terms of computational load. Such networks have been investigated in individual studies, but the underlying simulation technologies have neither been described in sufficient detail to be reproducible nor made publicly available. Here, we discover that as the network model sizes approach the regime of meso- and macroscale simulations, memory consumption on individual compute nodes becomes a critical bottleneck. This is especially relevant on modern supercomputers such as the Blue Gene/P architecture where the available working memory per CPU core is rather limited. We develop a simple linear model to analyze the memory consumption of the constituent components of neuronal simulators as a function of network size and the number of cores used. This approach has multiple benefits. The model enables identification of key contributing components to memory saturation and prediction of the effects of potential improvements to code before any implementation takes place. As a consequence, development cycles can be shorter and less expensive. Applying the model to our freely available Neural Simulation Tool (NEST), we identify the software components dominant at different scales, and develop general strategies for reducing the memory consumption, in particular by using data structures that exploit the sparseness of the local representation of the network. We show that these adaptations enable our simulation software to scale up to the order of 10,000 processors and beyond. As memory consumption issues are likely to be relevant for any software dealing with complex connectome data on such architectures, our approach and our findings should be useful for researchers developing novel neuroinformatics solutions to the challenges posed by the connectome project.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 3%
Switzerland 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Belarus 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 58 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 27%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 2 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 25%
Computer Science 14 22%
Neuroscience 9 14%
Physics and Astronomy 8 13%
Linguistics 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 3 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 April 2020.
All research outputs
#5,872,793
of 24,226,848 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#268
of 795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,338
of 251,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,226,848 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 795 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 251,533 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.