Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.9718/JBER.2020.41.3.128

Computing Performance Comparison of CPU and GPU Parallelization for Virtual Heart Simulation  

Kim, Sang Hee (Dept of IT Convergence Engineering, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
Jeong, Da Un (Dept of Medical IT Convergence Engineering, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
Setianto, Febrian (Dept of IT Convergence Engineering, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
Lim, Ki Moo (Dept of IT Convergence Engineering, Kumoh National Institute of Technology)
Publication Information
Journal of Biomedical Engineering Research / v.41, no.3, 2020 , pp. 128-137 More about this Journal
Abstract
Cardiac electrophysiology studies often use simulation to predict how cardiac will behave under various conditions. To observe the cardiac tissue movement, it needs to use the high--resolution heart mesh with a sophisticated and large number of nodes. The higher resolution mesh is, the more computation time is needed. To improve computation speed and performance, parallel processing using multi-core processes and network computing resources is performed. In this study, we compared the computational speeds of CPU parallelization and GPU parallelization in virtual heart simulation for efficiently calculating a series of ordinary differential equations (ODE) and partial differential equations (PDE) and determined the optimal CPU and GPU parallelization architecture. We used 2D tissue model and 3D ventricular model to compared the computation performance. Then, we measured the time required to the calculation of ODEs and PDEs, respectively. In conclusion, for the most efficient computation, using GPU parallelization rather than CPU parallelization can improve performance by 4.3 times and 2.3 times in calculations of ODEs and PDE, respectively. In CPU parallelization, it is best to use the number of processors just before the communication cost between each processor is incurred.
Keywords
Virtual heart simulation; CPU parallelization; GPU parallelization; ordinary differential equation (ODE); partial differential equation (PDE);
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Trayanova NA, Whole-Heart Modeling. Circ. Res. 2011;108(1):113-28.   DOI
2 Niederer SA, Lumens J, Trayanova NA. Computational models in cardiology. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 2019;16(2):100-11.   DOI
3 Courtemanche M, Ramirez RJ, Nattel S. Ionic mechanisms underlying human atrial action potential properties: Insights from a mathematical model. Am. J. Physiol. - Hear. Circ. Physiol. 1998;275(1):301-21.
4 Ten Tusscher KHWJ, Panfilov AV. Alternans and spiral breakup in a human ventricular tissue model. Am. J. Physiol. Circ. Physiol. 2006;291(3):1088-100.
5 O'Hara T, Virag L, Varro A, Rudy Y. Simulation of the undiseased human cardiac ventricular action potential: Model formulation and experimental validation. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2011;7(5):1-29.
6 Guccione JM, Costa KD, McCulloch AD. Finite element stress analysis of left ventricular mechanics in the beating dog heart. J. Biomech. 1995;28(10):1167-77.   DOI
7 Butcher JC. Numerical methods for ordinary differential equations. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons; 2016. pp. 1-538.
8 Chang KC, Trayanova NA. Mechanisms of arrhythmogenesis related to calcium-driven alternans in a model of human atrial fibrillation. Sci. Rep.Nature Publishing Group. 2016;6(1):1-12.   DOI
9 Pathmanathan P, Gray RA. Filament Dynamics during Simulated Ventricular Fibrillation in a High-Resolution Rabbit Heart. Biomed Res. Int. 2015;20151-14.
10 Bartocci E, Cherry EM, Glimm J, Grosu R, Smolka SA, Fenton FH. Toward real-time simulation of cardiac dynamics. Proc. 9th Int. Conf. Comput. Methods Syst. Biol. C. 2011;103-12.
11 Adhianto L et al. HPCTOOLKIT: Tools for performance analysis of optimized parallel programs. Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp. 2010;22(6):685-701.
12 Vigmond EJ, Boyle PM, Leon LJ, Plank G. Near-real-time simulations of biolelectric activity in small mammalian hearts using graphical processing units. Proc. 31st Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. Eng. Futur. Biomed. EMBC 2009IEEE. 2009; 3290-3.
13 Qu Z, Garfinkel A. An advanced algorithm for solving partial differential equation in cardiac conduction. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 1999;46(9):1166-8.   DOI
14 Plank G, Liebmann M, dos Santos RW, Vigmond EJ, Haase G. Algebraic multigrid preconditioner for the cardiac bidomain model. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2007;54(4):585-96.   DOI
15 Ten Tusscher KHWJ. A model for human ventricular tissue. AJP Hear. Circ. Physiol. 2004;286(4):H1573-H1589.   DOI
16 Strang G. On the Construction and Comparison of Difference Schemes Author (s): Gilbert Strang Source : SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis , Vol . 5 , No . 3 (Sep ., 1968), pp . 506-517 Published by : Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics Stable URL : h. SIAM J. Numer. Anal. 1968;5(3):506-17.   DOI
17 Nvidia C. Nvidia cuda c programming guide. Nvidia Corp; 2013. pp. 1-280.
18 van der Vorst HA. Bi-cgstab: a fast and smoothly converging variant of Bi-CG for the solution of nonsymmetric linear systems. SIAM J. Sci. Stat. Comput. 1992;13(2):631-44.   DOI
19 Minden V, Smith B, Knepley MG. Preliminary implementation of PETSc using GPUs. Lect. Notes Earth Syst. Sci. 2013;(9783642164040):131-40.
20 Stranden I, Lidauer M. Solving large mixed linear models using preconditioned conjugate gradient iteration. J. Dairy Sci. 1999;82(12):2779-87.   DOI
21 Labutin IB, Surodina IV. Algorithm for sparse approximate inverse preconditioners in the conjugate gradient method. Reliab. Comput. 2013;19(1):120-6.
22 Vigmond EJ, Dos Santos RW, Prassl AJ, Deo M, Plank G. Solvers for the cardiac bidomain equations. Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. Elsevier. 2008;96(1-3):3-18.   DOI
23 Balay S et al. PETSc Users Manual: Mathematics and Computer Science Division. Terms and Conditions of Use for Oxford University Research Archive; 2001. pp. 267.
24 Volkov V. Better performance at lower occupancy. Proceedings of the GPU technology conference. 2010;16.