This vignette demonstrates the ability to implement
sim_fixed_n()
using user-defined backends to parallelize
simulations. We will consider the backends supported by the future framework.
The backends supported by the future package include:
sequential
- default and non-parallel backend.multisession
- uses multiple background R sessions on a
single machine.multicore
- uses multiple forked R processes on a
single non-Windows machine outside of RStudio.cluster
- supports external R sessions across multiple
machines.You can also choose other backend types supported by additional future extension packages, such as the HPC job scheduler backends from future.batchtools.
The function sim_fixed_n()
provides a simulation
workflow for a two-arm trial with a single endpoint. We can vary the
parameters of the trial using different functions outlined in the
documentation. This function now provides users the opportunity to
implement their simulations using the previously described parallel
backends to accelerate the computation.
Without specifying a backend, sim_fixed_n()
will execute
sequentially. The sequential execution will run all n_sim
iterations within the same process or session of R. In order to execute
in parallel, we must define the environment prior to calling the
function. Setting your seed prior to calling the function will ensure
that the results are reproducible.
Suppose you want to investigate the duration of a trial under two possible enrollments strategies. Both enrollments are piecewise, but have varying durations and rates.
set.seed(1)
n <- 5000
enroll_rate1 <- data.frame(rate = c(5, 20, 10), duration = c(100, 150, 150))
enroll_rate2 <- data.frame(rate = c(10, 15, 30), duration = c(150, 175, 75))
x1 <- rpwexp_enroll(n = n, enroll_rate = enroll_rate1)
x2 <- rpwexp_enroll(n = n, enroll_rate = enroll_rate2)
plot(
x1, 1:n,
type = "l",
col = palette()[4],
xlim = c(0, max(x1, x2)),
main = "Piecewise enrollments",
xlab = "Time",
ylab = "Enrollment"
)
lines(x2, 1:n, col = palette()[7])
legend(
250, 1500,
legend = c("Enrollment 1", "Enrollment 2"),
col = c(palette()[4], palette()[7]),
lty = c(1, 1)
)
We see that Enrollment 2 enrolls individuals more quickly than Enrollment 1 at onset. Later, Enrollment 1 will outpace Enrollment 2 before eventually being overtaken again. As such, we want to consider how the duration of the study changes under these enrollments.
Naively, we can execute these simulations sequentially. We set the
target of a total enrollment of 3000 individuals with the trial ending
after observing 700 events. We use timing_type = 2
to
return the correct trial duration.
set.seed(1)
n_sim <- 200
start_sequential <- proc.time()
seq_result1 <- sim_fixed_n(
n_sim = n_sim,
sample_size = 3000,
target_event = 700,
enroll_rate = enroll_rate1,
timing_type = 2 # Time until targeted event count achieved
)
#> Backend uses sequential processing.
seq_result2 <- sim_fixed_n(
n_sim = n_sim,
sample_size = 3000,
target_event = 700,
enroll_rate = enroll_rate2,
timing_type = 2 # Time until targeted event count achieved
)
#> Backend uses sequential processing.
duration_sequential <- proc.time() - start_sequential
A message automatically appears in the console that indicates what backend is being used for processing.
The calls to proc.time()
allow us to evaluate the
computation time of these procedures. This function provides three
outputs, we will focus on user and elapsed time. User time represents
the CPU time spent evaluating the function and elapsed time represents
the “wall clock” time spent by the end user waiting for the results.
We can see that the CPU time is 29.93 and the elapsed time is 21.11 seconds. These provide our baseline for the computation time.
As you may have anticipated, we see that for a lower number of events, enrollment 2 has a shorter average duration of 99.8 over that of enrollment 1, which is 131.2.
We also see that there is a distinction between the duration of the study under the proposed enrollment strategies.
If we instead, wanted to run more simulations for each enrollment, we
can expect the time to run our simulations to increase. As we vary and
increase the number of parameter inputs that we consider, we expect the
simulation process to continue to increase in duration. To help combat
the growing computational burden, we can run these simulations in
parallel using the multisession
backend available to us in
plan()
.
We can adjust the default number of cores with the function
parallelly::availableCores()
. The multisession backend will
automatically use all available cores by default, but here we will use
two. To initialize our backend, we change our plan.
Once we have configured the backend details, we can execute the same
code as before to automatically distribute the n_sim
simulations across the available cores.
set.seed(1)
start_sequential <- proc.time()
seq_result1m <- sim_fixed_n(
n_sim = n_sim,
sample_size = 3000,
target_event = 700,
enroll_rate = enroll_rate1,
timing_type = 2 # Time until targeted event count achieved
)
#> Using 2 cores with backend multisession
seq_result2m <- sim_fixed_n(
n_sim = n_sim,
sample_size = 3000,
target_event = 700,
enroll_rate = enroll_rate2,
timing_type = 2 # Time until targeted event count achieved
)
#> Using 2 cores with backend multisession
duration_sequential <- proc.time() - start_sequential
We can see that the CPU time is 1.27 and the elapsed time is 16.99 seconds. The user time here appears to be drastically reduced because of how R keeps track of time; the time used by the parent process and not the children processes are reported for the user time. Therefore, we compare the elapsed time to see the real-world impact of the parallelization.
To change the implementation back to a sequential backend, we simply use what is below.
We can also verify that the simulation results are identical because of setting a seed and that the backend type will not affect the results. Below, it is clear that the results from our sequential and multisession backends match completely.
Note: A parallel implementation may not always be faster than a serial implementation. If there is substantial overhead associated with executing in parallel, sequential evaluation may be faster. For a low number of simulations or available cores, it may be preferable to continue computation in serial rather than parallel. We leave it to the end user to determine this difference based on the resources available to them.
We provide an additional example using a nested parallel structure for users with more extensive resources, such as high-performance computing clusters, available to them. Because these resources are not commonly available, we will not execute the below code herein. Consider that you have two accessible nodes, each with three cores (shown in the diagram below).
Ideally, all available resources will be used when executing the
simulations. To do this, we need to correctly define our backend using
plan()
and run the same code as previously. The different
structures, or topologies, for a backend can be changed with a more in
depth explanation given in the future
topologies vignette. Our below example follows closely their
example.
In our below snippet, we consider the two nodes named n1
and n2
and create a function to select the number of cores
to use on those named nodes. While trivial here, a courteous user of
shared machines would specify fewer than all available cores and can do
such using a modification of the below code. We then implement our
backend using a list that follows the hierarchy of the available
resources.
nodes <- c("n1", "n2")
custom_cores <- function() {
switch(Sys.info()[["nodename"]],
"n1" = 3L, # Modify here for number of cores on node1
"n2" = 3L, # Modify here for number of cores on node2
## Default:
availableCores()
)
}
plan(list(
tweak(cluster, workers = nodes),
tweak(multisession, workers = custom_cores)
))
The function tweak()
is necessary to override the
inherent protection of nested parallelism, meant to help avoid
overloading one’s resources by errantly starting too many processes.
Because of the need to tweak backends, the message echoed to the console
for nested backends reflects the highest level of the nested
hierarchy.
With the backend in place, we then can run the identical code from before using all available resources and return the same results as before.
set.seed(1)
enroll_rates <- list(enroll_rate1, enroll_rate2)
seq_resultc <- foreach::foreach(
i = 1:2,
.combine = "list",
.options.future = list(seed = TRUE)
) %dofuture% {
sim_fixed_n(
n_sim = n_sim,
sample_size = 3000,
target_event = 700,
enroll_rate = enroll_rates[[i]],
timing_type = 2 # Time until targeted event count achieved
)
}
Then, we reset the plan
to sequential to avoid
accidentally continuing to execute later calls within these
resources.