Congestion Game Scheduling Implementation for High-Throughput Virtual Drug Screening Using BOINC-Based Desktop Grid

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10421)


Virtual drug screening is one of the most common applications of high-throughput computing. As virtual screening is time consuming, a problem of obtaining a diverse set of hits in a short time is very important. We propose a mathematical model based on game theory. Task scheduling for virtual drug screening in high-performance computational systems is considered as a congestion game between computing nodes to find the equilibrium solutions for best balancing between the number of interim hits and their chemical diversity. We present the developed scheduling algorithm implementation for Desktop Grid and Enterprise Desktop Grid, and perform comprehensive computational experiments to evaluate its performance. We compare the algorithm with two known heuristics used in practice and observe that game-based scheduling outperforms them by the hits discovery rate and chemical diversity at earlier steps.


Drug discovery Virtual drug screening High-performance computing High-throughput computing Desktop grid BOINC Scheduling Game theory Congestion game 



This work is partially supported by the Russian Fund for Basic Research under grants no. 16-07-00622 and 15-29-07974, and CONACYT (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología, México) under grant no. 178415.


  1. 1.
    Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). Biopharmaceutical Industry Profile (2016). accessed 2017/05/14
  2. 2.
    Bielska, E., Lucas, X., Czerwoniec, A., et al.: Virtual screening strategies in drug design — methods and applications. J. Biotechnol. Comput. Biol. Bionanotechnol. 92(3), 249–264 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bohacek, R.S., McMartin, C., Guida, W.C.: The art and practice of structure-based drug design: A molecular modeling perspective. Med. Res. Rev. 16(1), 3–50 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Irwin, J., et al.: ZINC: a free tool to discover chemistry for biology. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 52, 1757–1768 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bento, A.P., et al.: The ChEMBL bioactivity database: an update. Nucleic Acids Res. 42, 1083–1090 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pence, H.E., Williams, A.: ChemSpider: an online chemical information resource. J. Chem. Educ. 87(11), 1123–1124 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bolton, E.E., et al.: Chapter 12 - PubChem: integrated platform of small molecules and biological activities. Annu. Rep. Comput. Chem. 4, 217–241 (2008). ElsevierCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ruddigkeit, L., van Deursen, R., Blum, L.C., Reymond, J.-L.: Enumeration of 166 billion organic small molecules in the chemical universe database GDB-17. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 52, 2864–2875 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Liu, T., et al.: Applying high performance computing in drug discovery and molecular simulation. Nat. Sci. Rev. 3(1), 49–63 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yasuda, S., Nogami, Y., Fukushi, M.: A dynamic job scheduling method for reliable and high-performance volunteer computing. In: 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Security (ICISS 2015), pp. 1–4. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sonnek, J., Chandra, A., Weissman, J.: Adaptive reputation-based scheduling on unreliable distributed infrastructures. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 18(11), 1551–1564 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Byun, E., et al.: MJSA: Markov job scheduler based on availability in desktop grid computing environment. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 23, 616–622 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gil, J.-M., Kim, S., Lee, J.: Task scheduling scheme based on resource clustering in desktop grids. Int. J. Commun. Syst. 27(6), 918–930 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Miyakoshi, Y., Watanabe, K., Fukushi, M., Nogami, Y.: A job scheduling method based on expected probability of completion of voting in volunteer computing. In: 2nd International Symposium on Computing and Networking, pp. 399–405. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang, Y., et al.: Toward integrity assurance of outsourced computing — a game theoretic perspective. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 55, 87–100 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Donassolo, B., et al.: Non-cooperative scheduling considered harmful in collaborative volunteer computing environments. In: Proceedings of 11th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Grid Computing (CCGrid), pp. 144–153 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Legrand, A.: Scheduling for large scale distributed computing systems: approaches and performance evaluation issues. Distrib. Parallel, Clust. Comput. [cs.DC], Université Grenoble Alpes, p. 167 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tanrikulu, Y., Krüger, B., Proschak, E.: The holistic integration of virtual screening in drug discovery. Drug Discov. Today 18(7/8), 358–364 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lionta, E., Spyrou, G., Vassilatis, D.K., Cournia, Z.: Structure-based virtual screening for drug discovery: principles, applications and recent advances. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 14, 1923–1938 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rupakheti, C., Virshup, A., Yang, W., Beratan, D.N.: Strategy to discover diverse optimal molecules in the small molecule universe. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 55, 529–537 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ashton, M., et al.: Identification of diverse database subsets using property-based and fragment-based molecular descriptions. Quant. Struct. Act. Relationsh. 21, 598–604 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Downs, G.M., Barnard, J.M.: Clustering methods and their uses in computational chemistry. Rev. Comput. Chem. 18, 1–40 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Oprea, T.I., Gottfries, J.: Chemography: the art of navigating in chemical space. J. Comb. Chem. 3, 157–166 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nikitina, N., Ivashko, E., Tchernykh, A.: Congestion game scheduling for virtual drug screening optimization. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. (2017). Manuscript submitted for publication Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Patterson, D.E., et al.: Neighborhood behavior: a useful concept for validation of “molecular diversity” descriptors. J. Med. Chem. 39, 3049–3059 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Willet, P., Barnard, J.M., Downs, G.M.: Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 38(6), 983–996 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hann, M.M., Leach, A.R., Harper, G.: Molecular complexity and its impact on the probability of finding leads for drug discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 41, 856–864 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rosenthal, R.: A class of games possessing pure-strategy Nash equilibria. Int. J. Game Theor. 2(1), 65–67 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Milchtaich, I.: Congestion games with player-specific payoff functions. Games Econ. Behav. 13, 111–124 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ieong, S. et al.: Fast and compact: a simple class of congestion games. In: Proceedings of AIII, pp. 1–6 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gairing, M., Klimm, M.: Congestion games with player-specific costs revisited. In: Vöcking, B. (ed.) SAGT 2013. LNCS, vol. 8146, pp. 98–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-41392-6_9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Anderson, D.P.: BOINC: A system for public-resource computing and storage. In: Proceedings of 5th IEEE/ACM International Workshop on Grid Computing, pp. 4–10 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Applied Mathematical ResearchKarelian Research Center, Russian Academy of SciencesPetrozavodskRussia
  2. 2.Computer Science DepartmentCICESE Research CenterEnsenadaMexico

Personalised recommendations