Advertisement

Employing Docker Swarm on OpenStack for Biomedical Analysis

  • Christoph Jansen
  • Michael Witt
  • Dagmar KreftingEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9787)

Abstract

Biomedical analysis, in particular image and biosignal analysis, often requires several methods applied to the same data. The data is typically of large volume, so data transfer can become a bottleneck in remote analysis. Furthermore, biomedical data may contain patient data, raising data protection issues. We propose a highly virtualized infrastructure, employing Docker Swarm technology as the computing infrastructure. An underlying Openstack based IaaS cloud provides additional security features for a flexible and efficient multi-tenant analysis platform. We introduce the prototype infrastructure along a sample use-case of multiple versions of a machine-learning method applied to feature sets extracted from multidimensional biosignal recordings from Sleep Apnea patients and healthy controls.

Keywords

Biomedical analysis SaaS IaaS OpenStack Docker swarm 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The work is supported by the German Ministry of Education and Research (Project BB-IT-Boost, 03FH0061X5) and the German Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy (ZIM Project BeCRF, Grant number KF3470401BZ4).

References

  1. 1.
    Solomonides, T. (ed.): Healthgrid Applications and Core Technologies. Proceedings of HealthGrid 2010. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, vol. 159. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Glatard, T., et al.: Large-scale functional MRI study on a production grid. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 26(4), 685–692 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gu, Y., Huang, Z.: Robinia-BLAST: an extensible parallel BLAST based on data-intensive distributed computing. In: 2014 IEEE 12th International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing (DASC) (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Korkhov, V., et al.: Exploring workflow interoperability for neuroimage analysis on the SHIWA platform. J. Grid Comput. 11, 1–18 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goldberger, A.L., et al.: PhysioBank, PhysioToolkit, and PhysioNet: components of a new research resource for complex physiologic signals. Circulation 101, e215–e220 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shahand, S., et al.: A data-centric neuroscience gateway: design, implementation, and experiences. Concur. Comput. Pract. Exper. 27, 489–506 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jansen, C., et al.: Extending XNAT towards a cloud-based quality assessment platform for retinal optical coherence tomographies. Scalable Comput. Pract. Exper. 16(1), 85–102 (2015)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krefting, D., et al.: Performance analysis of diffusion tensor imaging an academic production grid. In: Parashar, M., Buyya, R. (eds.) 10th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing. CPS Conference Publishing Service (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sherif, T., et al.: CBRAIN: a web-based, distributed computing platform for collaborative neuroimaging research. Front. Neuroinformatics 8, 54 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krefting, D., et al.: Grid based sleep research analysis of polysomnographies using a grid infrastructure. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 29(7), 1671–1679 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Young, T., et al.: Population-based study of sleep-disordered breathing as a risk factor for hypertension. Arch. Intern. Med. 157, 1746–1752 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bashan, A., et al.: Network physiology reveals relations between network topology and physiological function. Nat. Commun. 3, 702 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dickhaus, H., Maier, C.: Detection of sleep apnea episodes from multi-lead ECGs considering different physiological influences. Methods Inf. Med. 46, 216–221 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Srivastava, N., et al.: Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15(1), 1929–1958 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dooley, R., Stubbs, J.: Dynamically provisioning portable gateway infrastructure using Docker and Agave. In: Proceedings of the 2014 Annual Conference on Extreme Science and Engineering Discovery Environment, XSEDE 2014, pp. 55:1–55:2. ACM, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tristan, G., et al.: Boutiques: an application-sharing system based on Linux containers. Front. Neurosci. 9 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Jansen
    • 1
  • Michael Witt
    • 1
  • Dagmar Krefting
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.University of Applied Sciences Berlin (HTW Berlin)BerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations