Trigger Detection for Adaptive Scientific Workflows Using Percentile Sampling

Increasing complexity of scientific simulations and HPC architectures are driving the need for adaptive workflows, where the composition and execution of computational and data manipulation steps dynamically depend on the evolutionary state of the simulation itself. Consider for example, the frequency of data storage. Critical phases of the simulation should be captured with high frequency and with high fidelity for post-analysis, however we cannot afford to retain the same frequency for the full simulation due to the high cost of data movement. We can instead look for triggers, indicators that the simulation will be entering a critical phase and adapt the workflow accordingly. We present a method for detecting triggers and demonstrate its use in direct numerical simulations of turbulent combustion using S3D. We show that chemical explosive mode analysis (CEMA) can be used to devise a noise-tolerant indicator for rapid increase in heat release. However, exhaustive computation of CEMA values dominates the total simulation, thus is prohibitively expensive. To overcome this bottleneck, we propose a quantile-sampling approach. Our algorithm comes with provable error/confidence bounds, as a function of the number of samples. Most importantly, the number of samples is independent of the problem size, thus our proposed algorithm offers perfect scalability. Our experiments on homogeneous charge compression ignition (HCCI) and reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI) simulations show that the proposed method can detect rapid increases in heat release, and its computational overhead is negligible. Our results will be used for dynamic workflow decisions about data storage and mesh resolution in future combustion simulations. Proposed framework is generalizable and we detail how it could be applied to a broad class of scientific simulation workflows.

[1]  Ray W. Grout,et al.  Ultrascale Visualization In Situ Visualization for Large-Scale Combustion Simulations , 2010 .

[2]  Tamara G. Kolda,et al.  Counting Triangles in Massive Graphs with MapReduce , 2013, SIAM J. Sci. Comput..

[3]  Alessandro Panconesi,et al.  Concentration of Measure for the Analysis of Randomized Algorithms , 2009 .

[4]  Scott Klasky,et al.  Terascale direct numerical simulations of turbulent combustion using S3D , 2008 .

[5]  Tamara G. Kolda,et al.  Triadic Measures on Graphs: The Power of Wedge Sampling , 2012, SDM.

[6]  Ali Pinar,et al.  A provably-robust sampling method for generating colormaps of large data , 2013, 2013 IEEE Symposium on Large-Scale Data Analysis and Visualization (LDAV).

[7]  Tamara G. Kolda,et al.  Diamond Sampling for Approximate Maximum All-Pairs Dot-Product (MAD) Search , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining.

[8]  Tianfeng Lu,et al.  Three-dimensional direct numerical simulation of a turbulent lifted hydrogen jet flame in heated coflow: a chemical explosive mode analysis , 2010, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[9]  Kesheng Wu,et al.  Scientific Discovery at the Exascale , 2011 .

[10]  D. Splitter,et al.  Fuel reactivity controlled compression ignition (RCCI): a pathway to controlled high-efficiency clean combustion , 2011 .

[11]  S. Dosanjh,et al.  Architectures and Technology for Extreme Scale Computing Report from the Workshop Node Architecture and Power Reduction Strategies , 2011 .

[12]  Ali Pinar,et al.  Path Sampling: A Fast and Provable Method for Estimating 4-Vertex Subgraph Counts , 2014, WWW.

[13]  Ali Pinar,et al.  A space efficient streaming algorithm for triangle counting using the birthday paradox , 2012, KDD.

[14]  Fan Zhang,et al.  Combining in-situ and in-transit processing to enable extreme-scale scientific analysis , 2012, 2012 International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis.

[15]  Jeremy S. Meredith,et al.  Parallel in situ coupling of simulation with a fully featured visualization system , 2011, EGPGV '11.

[16]  Earl Lawrence,et al.  Partitioning a Large Simulation as It Runs , 2014, Technometrics.

[17]  Ankit Bhagatwala,et al.  Numerical investigation of spontaneous flame propagation under RCCI conditions , 2015 .

[18]  Kenneth Moreland,et al.  Sandia National Laboratories , 2000 .

[19]  Karsten Schwan,et al.  Just in time: adding value to the IO pipelines of high performance applications with JITStaging , 2011, HPDC '11.

[20]  Tamara G. Kolda,et al.  Wedge sampling for computing clustering coefficients and triangle counts on large graphs † , 2013, Stat. Anal. Data Min..

[21]  Jacqueline H. Chen,et al.  Computational diagnostics for n-heptane flames with chemical explosive mode analysis , 2012 .

[22]  Ronitt Rubinfeld,et al.  Robust Characterizations of Polynomials with Applications to Program Testing , 1996, SIAM J. Comput..

[23]  Dana Ron,et al.  Algorithmic and Analysis Techniques in Property Testing , 2010, Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci..

[24]  Michael E. Papka,et al.  Toward simulation-time data analysis and I/O acceleration on leadership-class systems , 2011, 2011 IEEE Symposium on Large Data Analysis and Visualization.

[25]  James P. Ahrens,et al.  ADR visualization: A generalized framework for ranking large-scale scientific data using Analysis-Driven Refinement , 2014, 2014 IEEE 4th Symposium on Large Data Analysis and Visualization (LDAV).

[26]  Ronitt Rubinfeld,et al.  Sublinear Time Algorithms , 2011, SIAM J. Discret. Math..

[27]  E. Fischer THE ART OF UNINFORMED DECISIONS: A PRIMER TO PROPERTY TESTING , 2004 .

[28]  W. Hoeffding Probability Inequalities for sums of Bounded Random Variables , 1963 .