A Fast and Scalable Low Dimensional Solver for Charged Particle Dynamics in Large Particle Accelerators

Presentation at ISC'12 in Hamburg (PRACE day)

Transcript

1. A Fast and Scalable Low Dimensional Solver for Charged Particle Dynamics in Large Particle Accelerators Yves Ineichen1,2,3, Andreas Adelmann2, Costas Bekas3, Alessandro Curioni3, Peter Arbenz1 1ETH Zürich Department of Computer Science CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland 2Paul Scherrer Institut Accelerator Modelling and Advanced Simulations CH-5234 Villigen, Switzerland 3IBM Research-Zurich CH-8803 Rüschlikon, Switzerland 17th June 2012 1 / 51
2. . . Physics • Particle accelerators • Applications • Design and Opt. Problem . HPC • “History” of code • Parallelization • Scaling . Optimization • Framework • Algorithms • Results . Complex Problem . Framework . Feasibility of Approach 2 / 51
3. . . Highly complex machines 3 / 51
4. Applications • particle physics • medical treatment • material science • life science 4 / 51
5. design, commissioning, and operation → non-trivial task . . d1 . d2 Design space . . o1 . o2 Objective space 5 / 51
6. Accelerator Principles (acceleration / guiding / focusing) . . Particle trajectory . Beam pipe 6 / 51
7. . . Focusing and guiding magnets 7 / 51
8. Time Evolution z [m] 0.083 0.084 0.085 0.086 0.087 x [m] -0.0015 -0.001 -0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 y [m] -0.0015 -0.001 -0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 Entries 10004 Mean x 0.08502 Mean y 2.227e-06 Mean z 1.231e-06 RMS x 0.0006551 RMS y 0.0006156 RMS z 0.0006149 Entries 10004 Mean x 0.08502 Mean y 2.227e-06 Mean z 1.231e-06 RMS x 0.0006551 RMS y 0.0006156 RMS z 0.0006149 z-x-y distr., step 5 FinPhase3.h5 z [m] 3.084 3.085 3.086 3.087 3.088 x [m] -0.0015 -0.001 -0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 y [m] -0.0015 -0.001 -0.0005 0 0.0005 0.001 0.0015 Entries Mean x Mean y Mean z RMS x RMS y RMS z Entries Mean x Mean y Mean z RMS x RMS y RMS z z-x-y distr., step FinPhase . 8 / 51
9. Example SwissFEL @ PSI (machine / complexity / objectives and physical meaning) 9 / 51
10. SwissFel 1: Switzerland’s X-ray free-electron laser Project at PSI • big project: > 100 people, expensive, 700 m long • 1 Ångström • to reach target it is of crucial importance to attain “good” beam properties (e.g. narrow beam/small phase space volume) . 1http://www.psi.ch/swissfel/ 10 / 51
11. SwissFel 1: Switzerland’s X-ray free-electron laser Project at PSI • big project: > 100 people, expensive, 700 m long • 1 Ångström • to reach target it is of crucial importance to attain “good” beam properties (e.g. narrow beam/small phase space volume) . . Calls for optimization of Injector • Several conflicting objectives • Key technology: multi-objective optimization 1http://www.psi.ch/swissfel/ 10 / 51
12. A Selection of Objectives • transverse dimension • bunch length • 6D phase space • energy spread • emittance . . x . y . . radial in y . radial in x 11 / 51
13. A Selection of Objectives • transverse dimension • bunch length • 6D phase space • energy spread • emittance . . z . x . . bunch length 12 / 51
14. A Selection of Objectives • transverse dimension • bunch length • 6D phase space • energy spread • emittance . . x . px . 13 / 51
15. A Selection of Objectives • transverse dimension • bunch length • 6D phase space • energy spread • emittance . . . dE/E (%) energy distribution in the beam small spread → particles have similar energy 14 / 51
16. Emittance volume of phase space small emittance: • particles confined to a small volume in configuration space • particles have same momenta spread 15 / 51
17. Design Variables Lots of elements with “knobs” to turn/tune: • EM field strength • acceleration voltage • radio frequency • radio frequency phase • ... Typically > 10 design variables 16 / 51
18. Maxwell’s Equation in the Electrostatic approximation . . Electro Magneto Optics . N-Body Dynamics . 1,2 or 3D Field Maps & Analytic Models (E, B)ext . Poisson Problem s.t. BC’s ∆ϕ′ sc = − ρ′ ϵ0 → (E, B)SC . H = Hext + Hsc . If E(x, t) and B(x) are known, the equation of motion can be integrated: • Boris-pusher (adaptive version soon!) • Leap-Frog • RK-4 17 / 51
19. Forward solver is expensive to run.. 18 / 51
20. Forward solver is expensive to run.. and we require a massive number of forward solves per optimization 18 / 51
21. Multi-Objective Optimization Framework • large multi-objective optimization problems • conflicting goals • expensive models • ... • structur analysis • scheduling • design • ... . . common settings for many applications 19 / 51
22. Multi-Objective Optimization Framework . . Optimizer . Pilot . - - input . - - obj . - - constr . - - sims . OPAL . Convex Optimization Algorithms . Heuristic Algorithms 20 / 51
23. Master/Worker Model Comp. Domain Optimizeri [coarse] multiple starting points, multiple opt. problems Corei Forward Solverj [fine] parallel E-T Workers [coarse] eval forward problem Optimizer [coarse] parallel optimizer 21 / 51
24. Issues with M/W Communication Model • Exponential increase in hot-spot latency with increasing # cores • Increasing congestion on links surrounding the master • Gets worse with increasing message sizes Flat network topologies not optimal Adapt number of masters depending on # cores Place master taking network topology into consideration Towards Message Passing for a Million Processes: Characterizing MPI on a Massive Scale Blue Gene/P, P. Balaji et. al. 22 / 51
25. Optimization Algorithms . . Optimizer . Pilot . - - input . - - obj . - - constr . - - sims . OPAL . Convex Optimization Algorithms . Heuristic Algorithms 23 / 51
26. Genetic Algorithms . . NSGA-II Selector . dispatch individuals . Variator . 2 individuals ready • PISA[1] • Finite state machine • Nsga-II selector • “Continuous generations” • Independent bit mutations • Various crossover polices [1] A Platform and Programming Language Independent Interface for Search Algorithms: http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/pisa/ 24 / 51
27. First Population . . dE [MeV] . 0.20 . 0.22 . 0.24 . 0.26 . 0.28 . 0.30 . emitx [mm mrad] . 0 . 5 . 10 . 15 . 20 25 / 51
28. 30th population . . dE [MeV] . 0.20 . 0.22 . 0.24 . 0.26 . 0.28 . 0.30 . emitx [mm mrad] . 0 . 5 . 10 . 15 . 20 26 / 51
29. 649th Population . . dE [MeV] . 0.20 . 0.22 . 0.24 . 0.26 . 0.28 . 0.30 . emitx [mm mrad] . 0 . 5 . 10 . 15 . 20 Now scientist/operator can specify preference 27 / 51
30. Forward Solver . . Optimizer . Pilot . - - input . - - obj . - - constr . - - sims . OPAL . Convex Optimization Algorithms . Heuristic Algorithms 28 / 51
31. Object Oriented Parallel Accelerator Library (OPAL) OPAL is a tool for precise charged-particle optics in large accelerator structures and beam lines including 3D space charge. • built from the ground up as a parallel application • runs on your laptop as well as on the largest HPC clusters • uses the mad language with extensions • written in C++ using OO-techniques, hence OPAL is easy to extend • nightly regression tests track the code quality OPAL: https://amas.psi.ch/OPAL 29 / 51
32. Architecture . . OPAL . MAD-Parser . Flavors: t,Cycl,env . Optimization . Space-charge Solvers . Integrators . Distributions . IP2L . FFT . D-Operators . NGP,CIC, TSI . Fields . Mesh . Particles . Load Balancing . Domain Decomp. . Message Passing . Particle Cache . PETE . Polymorphism . classic . H5hut . Trilinos & GSL • OPAL Object Oriented Parallel Accelerator Library • IP2L Independent Parallel Particle Layer • Class Library for Accelerator Simulation System and Control • H5hut for parallel particle and field I/O (HDF5) • Trilinos http://trilinos.sandia.gov/ 30 / 51
33. 3D Tracker . . e− . e− repulsive force of charged particles • Huge # of macro particles (100’000 – 100’000’000) • Computing space-charge is expensive • Load balancing difficult • Lots of synchronization points . . 31 / 51
34. Envelope Tracker . . z . x . y • # slices ≪ # macro particles • Slices distributed in contiguous blocks • Load imbalance of at most 1 slice • Low number of synchronization points 32 / 51
35. Envelope Equations Using a 5th order Runge-Kutta time stepper to update • Slice radius: d2 d2t Ri = ... • Slice energy: E = ... • Slice position: d dt zi = ... 33 / 51
36. Model Implementation 1: procedure ExecuteSliceTracker(tn , slices) 2: for all ti ∈ t1 , · · · , tn−1 , tn do 3: for all s ∈ slices do 4: getExternalFields(s) 5: end for 6: synchronizeSlices() 7: calcSpaceCharge() 8: for all s ∈ slices do 9: timeIntegration(s) 10: end for 11: end for 12: end procedure . 34 / 51
37. Model Implementation 1: procedure ExecuteSliceTracker(tn , slices) 2: for all ti ∈ t1 , · · · , tn−1 , tn do 3: for all s ∈ slices do 4: getExternalFields(s) 5: end for 6: synchronizeSlices() 7: calcSpaceCharge() 8: for all s ∈ slices do 9: timeIntegration(s) 10: end for 11: end for 12: end procedure . 34 / 51
38. N-Body Space Charge 1: procedure ComputeSpaceCharge(slices) 2: for all i ∈ my_slices do 3: for all j ∈ all_slices do 4: sm ← interaction(sj , si ) 5: end for 6: Fl,i ← longitudinalSpaceCharge(sm) 7: Ft,i ← transversalSpaceCharge() 8: end for 9: end procedure . 35 / 51
39. Analytical Space Charge . . . . L . R . z . . Electrical Field = Q 2πϵ0 R2   √ ( 1 − z L )2 + ( R L )2 − √ ( z L )2 + ( R L )2 − 1 − z L + z L   see Homdyn, M. Ferrario, http://nicadd.niu.edu/fnpl/homdyn/manual.pdf 36 / 51
40. Complexity Phase FLOPs #Allreduce size getExternalFields() O(m) – synchronizeSlices() O(1) 2 n calcSpaceCharge() O(n2) 2 1 calcSpaceCharge()∗ O(1) 2 1 timeIntegration() O(n) – Typical n = 10000, m = 150 37 / 51
41. Important quantities withtin 5% margin w. r. t. 3D tracker 38 / 51
42. Computational Platform Blue Gene/P2: • VN mode • Quad core 450 PowerPC (850 MHz) • peak performance of 13.6 GFLOP/s (per node) • 3D Torus network with bandwidth of 6 GB/s • collective (tree) network has a bandwidth of 2 GB/s • round-trip worst case latency of 2.5 µs Running first 2000 steps of SwissFel. . . 2Blue Gene/P is a trademark of the International Business Machines Corporation in the United States, other countries, or both. 39 / 51
43. “History” A stony road to achieve scalability.. Cores Wall [s] Comm [s] 1 321.46 – 2 167.93 3.67 (2.19%) 4 92.9 6.86 (7.43%) 8 57.1 9.08 (15.91%) Run on FELSIM Cluster at PSI. • proper load balancing • profiling and benchmarking: serial parts (Amdahl’s law) • one fix synchronization point per timestep 40 / 51
44. 500’000 Slices 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 Number of cores 10−1 100 101 102 103 log [ Timings ] [s] Total SC and I ode solve field evaluation Analytical space-charge. 41 / 51
45. 10’000 Slices: analytical Space-Charge 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 Number of cores 10−1 100 101 102 103 log [ Timings ] [s] Total SC and I ode solve field evaluation 42 / 51
46. 10’000 Slices: n2 Space-Charge 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 Number of cores 10−1 100 101 102 103 104 log [ Timings ] [s] Total SC and I ode solve field evaluation 43 / 51
47. Analytical Weak Scaling 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 Number of cores 0 50 100 150 200 250 Timings [s] SC and I field evaluation ode solve total MPI Problem scaling: n . . execisvely long MPI shutdown 44 / 51
48. n2 Weak Scaling 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256 512 1024 2048 4096 Number of cores 0 50 100 150 200 250 Timings [s] SC and I field evaluation ode solve total MPI Problem scaling: √ n 45 / 51
49. Conclusions Fast & scalable forward solver: • introduced a new low-dimensional model • almost 2 orders of magnitude reduction of runtime Crucial cornerstone of framework • becomes feasible with presented forward solver • vary “resolution” (3D, n2 sc., analytical sc.) • achieve an acceptable parallel efficiency for one forward solve • run as many parallel forward solves as possible Helps in design/opartion of particle accelerators 46 / 51
50. Outlook Investigate other multi-objective optimization algorithms Run real optimization problem on massive number of cores Visualization of results 47 / 51
51. This project is funded by: IBM Research – Zurich Paul Scherrer Institut Acknowledgements • OPAL developer team • SwissFel team 48 / 51
52. Backup 49 / 51
53. Optimization Problem min [energy spread, emittance] s.t. ∂t f(x, v, t) + v · ∇x f(x, v, t) + q m0 (Etot + v × Btot) · ∇v f(x, v, t) = 0 ∇ × B = µ0 J + µ0 ε0 ∂E ∂t , ∇ × E = − ∂B ∂t ∇ · E = ρ ε0 , ∇ · B = 0 ρ = −e ∫ f(x, v, t) d3p, J = −e ∫ f(x, v, t)v d3p E = Eext + Eself, B = Bext + Bself . . . 50 / 51
54. Envelope Equations d2 d2t Ri + βiγ2 i d dt (βi Ri) + Ri ∑ j Kj i = 2c2kp Riβi × ( G(∆i, Ar) γ3 i − (1 − β2 i ) G(δi, Ar) γi ) + 4εth n c γi 1 R3 i d dt βi = e0 m0 cγ3 i ( Eext z (zi, t) + Esc z (zi, t) ) d dt zi = cβi 51 / 51