Salient application properties Expectations TOPS has of users

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Fusion: The App of our Eyes David Keyes, Reporter and Questioner On behalf of your CS and Applied Math colleagues ISOFS Workshop San Diego, CA 18 September.
Advertisements

Trellis: A Framework for Adaptive Numerical Analysis Based on Multiparadigm Programming in C++ Jean-Francois Remacle, Ottmar Klaas and Mark Shephard Scientific.
INTRODUCTION OS/2 was initially designed to extend the capabilities of DOS by IBM and Microsoft Corporations. To create a single industry-standard operating.
Operating Systems Concepts 1. A Computer Model An operating system has to deal with the fact that a computer is made up of a CPU, random access memory.
Computer System Architectures Computer System Software
Optimization Under Uncertainty: Structure-Exploiting Algorithms Victor M. Zavala Assistant Computational Mathematician Mathematics and Computer Science.
Are their more appropriate domain-specific performance metrics for science and engineering HPC applications available then the canonical “percent of peak”
Parallel Programming Models Jihad El-Sana These slides are based on the book: Introduction to Parallel Computing, Blaise Barney, Lawrence Livermore National.
TOPS SciDAC Overview David Keyes, project lead Dept. of Mathematics & Statistics Old Dominion University.
1 Hardware Support for Collective Memory Transfers in Stencil Computations George Michelogiannakis, John Shalf Computer Architecture Laboratory Lawrence.
QCD Project Overview Ying Zhang September 26, 2005.
Page 1 Trilinos Software Engineering Technologies and Integration Numerical Algorithm Interoperability and Vertical Integration –Abstract Numerical Algorithms.
CCA Common Component Architecture Manoj Krishnan Pacific Northwest National Laboratory MCMD Programming and Implementation Issues.
R. Ryne, NUG mtg: Page 1 High Energy Physics Greenbook Presentation Robert D. Ryne Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory NERSC User Group Meeting.
ANS 1998 Winter Meeting DOE 2000 Numerics Capabilities 1 Barry Smith Argonne National Laboratory DOE 2000 Numerics Capability
ParCFD Parallel computation of pollutant dispersion in industrial sites Julien Montagnier Marc Buffat David Guibert.
OFI SW - Progress Sean Hefty - Intel Corporation.
Automatic Differentiation: Introduction Automatic differentiation (AD) is a technology for transforming a subprogram that computes some function into a.
Efficient Integration of Large Stiff Systems of ODEs Using Exponential Integrators M. Tokman, M. Tokman, University of California, Merced 2 hrs 1.5 hrs.
CMRS Review, PPPL, 5 June 2003 &. 4 projects in high energy and nuclear physics 5 projects in fusion energy science 14 projects in biological and environmental.
Computational Aspects of Multi-scale Modeling Ahmed Sameh, Ananth Grama Computing Research Institute Purdue University.
1 1 What does Performance Across the Software Stack mean?  High level view: Providing performance for physics simulations meaningful to applications 
ANKITHA CHOWDARY GARAPATI
Next Generation Operating Systems Zeljko Susnjar, Cisco CTG June 2015.
1 1  Capabilities: Scalable algebraic solvers for PDEs Freely available and supported research code Usable from C, C++, Fortran 77/90, Python, MATLAB.
 Advanced Accelerator Simulation Panagiotis Spentzouris Fermilab Computing Division (member of the SciDAC AST project)
A Software Framework for Distributed Services Michael M. McKerns and Michael A.G. Aivazis California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA Introduction.
CCA Common Component Architecture CCA Forum Tutorial Working Group CCA Status and Plans.
Domain Decomposition in High-Level Parallelizaton of PDE codes Xing Cai University of Oslo.
Computational Science & Engineering meeting national needs Steven F. Ashby SIAG-CSE Chair March 24, 2003.
Connections to Other Packages The Cactus Team Albert Einstein Institute
TR&D 2: NUMERICAL TOOLS FOR MODELING IN CELL BIOLOGY Software development: Jim Schaff Fei Gao Frank Morgan Math & Physics: Boris Slepchenko Diana Resasco.
3/12/2013Computer Engg, IIT(BHU)1 PARALLEL COMPUTERS- 2.
Algebraic Solvers in FASTMath Argonne Training Program on Extreme-Scale Computing August 2015.
Center for Extended MHD Modeling (PI: S. Jardin, PPPL) –Two extensively developed fully 3-D nonlinear MHD codes, NIMROD and M3D formed the basis for further.
Circuit Simulation using Matrix Exponential Method Shih-Hung Weng, Quan Chen and Chung-Kuan Cheng CSE Department, UC San Diego, CA Contact:
Adaptive grid refinement. Adaptivity in Diffpack Error estimatorError estimator Adaptive refinementAdaptive refinement A hierarchy of unstructured gridsA.
Background Computer System Architectures Computer System Software.
Quality of Service for Numerical Components Lori Freitag Diachin, Paul Hovland, Kate Keahey, Lois McInnes, Boyana Norris, Padma Raghavan.
CSCAPES Mission Research and development Provide load balancing and parallelization toolkits for petascale computation Develop advanced automatic differentiation.
INTRODUCTION TO HIGH PERFORMANCE COMPUTING AND TERMINOLOGY.
High Performance Computing Seminar II Parallel mesh partitioning with ParMETIS Parallel iterative solvers with Hypre M.Sc. Caroline Mendonça Costa.
Object Oriented Systems Design
Panel: Beyond Exascale Computing
Android Mobile Application Development
COMPSCI 110 Operating Systems
Advanced Computer Systems
OPERATING SYSTEMS CS 3502 Fall 2017
Virtual memory.
Department of Computer Science, TU München
Xing Cai University of Oslo
Definition CASE tools are software systems that are intended to provide automated support for routine activities in the software process such as editing.
Challenges in Electromagnetic Modeling Scalable Solvers
I. E. Venetis1, N. Nikoloutsakos1, E. Gallopoulos1, John Ekaterinaris2
Shrirang Abhyankar IEEE PES HPC Working Group Meeting
COMPSCI 110 Operating Systems
Programming Models for SimMillennium
Anne Pratoomtong ECE734, Spring2002
for more information ... Performance Tuning
GEOMATIKA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CHAPTER 2 OPERATING SYSTEM PRINCIPLES
Trilinos Software Engineering Technologies and Integration
Chapter 5 Designing the Architecture Shari L. Pfleeger Joanne M. Atlee
Objective of This Course
GENERAL VIEW OF KRATOS MULTIPHYSICS
Supported by the National Science Foundation.
A Simulator to Study Virtual Memory Manager Behavior
Multithreaded Programming
Embedded Nonlinear Analysis Tools Capability Area
Ph.D. Thesis Numerical Solution of PDEs and Their Object-oriented Parallel Implementations Xing Cai October 26, 1998.
Presentation transcript:

Salient application properties Expectations TOPS has of users Project Overview TOPS is developing a toolkit of open source solvers for PDEs that arise in many DOE mission areas. These algorithms – primarily multilevel methods – aim to reduce solver bottlenecks by magnitudes at the terascale, with goals of usability, robustness, algorithmic efficiency, and the highest performance consistent with these. Salient application properties Motivation for TOPS Not just algorithms, but vertically integrated software suites Portable, scalable, extensible, tunable implementations Motivated by representative apps, intended for many others Starring Hypre, PETSc, Sundials, SuperLU, and TAO, among other existing packages Driven by three applications SciDAC groups LBNL-led “21st Century Accelerator” designs ORNL-led core collapse supernovae simulations PPPL-led magnetic fusion energy simulations Coordinated with other ISIC SciDAC groups Multirate requiring fully or semi-implicit in time solvers Multiscale requiring finest mesh spacing much smaller than domain diameter Multicomponent requiring physics-informed preconditioners, transfer operators, and smoothers PEP-II cavity model c/o Advanced Computing for 21st Century Accelerator Science & Technology SciDAC group TOPS philosophy Scope for TOPS Optimizer Linear solver Eigensolver Time integrator Nonlinear solver Indicates dependence Sens. Analyzer Solution of a system of PDEs is rarely a goal in itself Actual goal is characterization of a response surface or a design or control strategy Solving the PDE is just a forward map Together with analysis, sensitivities and stability are often desired Software tools for PDE solution should also support related follow-on desires Demand for resolution is virtually insatiable Relieving resolution requirements with modeling (e.g., turbulence closures, homogenization) only defers the demand for resolution to the next level Validating such models requires high resolution Processor scalability and algorithmic scalability (optimality) are critical Solvers are employed in many ways over the life cycle of an applications code During development and upgrading, robustness (of the solver) and verbose diagnostics are important During production, solvers are streamlined for performance Tunability is important Solvers are used by people of varying numerical backgrounds Some expect MATLAB-like defaults Others want to control everything, e.g., even varying the type of smoother and number of smoothings on different levels of a multigrid algorithm Multilayered software design is important Design and implementation of “solvers” Time integrators, with sens. analysis Nonlinear solvers, with sens. analysis Optimizers Linear solvers Eigensolvers Software integration Performance optimization #include "petscsles.h" #include "petscmg.h" MGSetNumberSmoothUp(pc, n) … SLESSolve(sles,b, x, *its) Why is TOPS needed? What exists already? Adaptive time integrators for stiff systems: variable-step BDF methods Nonlinear implicit solvers: Newton-like methods, FAS multilevel methods Optimizers (with constraints): quasi-Newton RSQP methods Linear solvers: subspace projection methods (multigrid, Schwarz, classical smoothers), Krylov methods (CG, GMRES), sparse direct methods Eigensolvers: matrix reduction techniques followed by tridiagonal eigensolvers, Arnoldi solvers What is wrong? Today’s components do not “talk to” each other very well Mixing and matching procedures too often requires mapping data between different storage structures (taxes memory and memory bandwidth) Logically innermost (solver) kernels are often the most computationally complex — should be designed from the inside out by experts and present the right “handles” to users Many widely used libraries are “behind the times” algorithmically x=b\A T3D A continuous operator may appear in a discrete code in many different instances Optimal algorithms tend to be hierarchical and nested iterative Processor-scalable algorithms tend to be domain-decomposed and concurrent iterative Majority of progress towards desired highly resolved, high fidelity result occurs through cost-effective low resolution, low fidelity parallel efficient stages Operator abstractions and recurrence are important No general purpose PDE solver can anticipate all needs Why we have national laboratories, not numerical libraries for PDEs today A PDE solver improves with user interaction Pace of algorithmic development is very rapid Extensibility is important SP4 Hardware changes many times over the life cycle of a solver package Processors, memory, and networks evolve annually Machines are replaced every 3-5 years at major DOE centers Codes persist for decades Portability is critical Solvers are employed as part of a larger code Solver library is not only library to be linked Solvers may be called in multiple, nested places Solvers typically make callbacks Solvers should be swappable Solver threads must be isolable from other component threads, including other simultaneous instances of themselves Expectations TOPS has of users Willingness to experiment with novel algorithmic choices – optimality is rarely achieved beyond model problems without interplay between physics and algorithmics! Adoption of flexible, extensible programming styles in which algorithmic and data structures are not hardwired Willingness to make concrete requests, to understand that requests must be prioritized, and to work with us in addressing the high priority requests for more information ... http://www.tops-scidac.org