% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@INPROCEEDINGS{Kurth:894269,
author = {Kurth, Anno and Finnerty, Justin and Terhorst, Dennis and
Pronold, Jari and Senk, Johanna and Diesmann, Markus},
title = {{S}ub {R}ealtime {S}imulation of a {F}ull {D}ensity
{C}ortical {M}icrocircuit {M}odel on a {S}ingle {C}ompute
{N}ode},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-03144},
year = {2021},
abstract = {The cortical microcircuit is a building block of the
mammalian brain. In a model of the network below a 1 mm2
patch of cortical surface [1] the spatial structure is
replaced by cell-type specific random connectivity. Each
layer is represented by an excitatory and an inhibitory
population of integrate-and-fire model neurons. The network
model is a benchmark for neuromorphic systems [2, 3, 4].This
contribution shows performance data for the microcircuit
model on two AMD EPYC Rome 128 core compute nodes coupled by
a direct Infiniband interconnect and running NEST 2.14 [5]
(with fix 726f9b04bbd47c). On a single node we observe sub
realtime performance, on two the simulation is 1.7 times
faster than realtime. Our study of the aged 4g kernel serves
as a reference for present optimizations, exposes
bottlenecks, and guides the design of future computing
systems.For the single node the energy per synaptic event is
0.26 μJ, and for the fastest configuration using two nodes
0.39 μJ. These values are in the same order of magnitude as
the lowest reported so far. The findings confirm a
non-trivial relationship [2] between the resources in use
and the energy required. At the poster we demonstrate how
power measurements with a contemporary PDU can be aligned
with benchmark timers to obtain a reliable time course of
power consumption.AcknowledgementsPartially supported by EU
Horizon 2020 945539 (HBP SGA3) and Helmholtz IVF SO-092
(ACA).References 1. Potjans TC $\&$ Diesmann M (2014) The
cell-type specific cortical microcircuit: relating structure
and activity in a full-scale spiking network model. Cerebral
Cortex 24:785–806. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhs358 2. van
Albada SJ, et al. (2018) Performance comparison of the
digital neuromorphic hardware SpiNNaker and the neural
network simulation software NEST for a full-scale cortical
microcircuit model. Front Neurosci 12:291. doi:
10.3389/fnins.2018.00291 3. Knight JC $\&$ Nowotny T (2018)
GPUs outperform current HPC and neuromorphic solutions in
terms of speed and energy when simulating a highly-connected
cortical model. Front Neurosci 12:941. doi:
10.3389/fnins.2018.00941},
month = {Jun},
date = {2021-06-28},
organization = {NEST Conference 2021, Aas (Norway), 28
Jun 2021 - 29 Jun 2021},
subtyp = {After Call},
cin = {INM-6 / IAS-6 / INM-10},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-6-20090406 / I:(DE-Juel1)IAS-6-20130828 /
I:(DE-Juel1)INM-10-20170113},
pnm = {5234 - Emerging NC Architectures (POF4-523) / Advanced
Computing Architectures $(aca_20190115)$ / HBP SGA3 - Human
Brain Project Specific Grant Agreement 3 (945539)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5234 / $G:(DE-Juel1)aca_20190115$ /
G:(EU-Grant)945539},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)6},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/894269},
}