An FPGA implementation of an investigative many-core processor, Fynbos : in support of a Fortran autoparallelising software pipeline

Includes bibliographical references.In light of the power, memory, ILP, and utilisation walls facing the computing industry, this work examines the hypothetical many-core approach to finding greater compute performance and efficiency. In order to achieve greater efficiency in an environment in which Moore’s law continues but TDP has been capped, a means of deriving performance from dark and dim silicon is needed. The many-core hypothesis is one approach to exploiting these available transistors efficiently. As understood in this work, it involves trading in hardware control complexity for hundreds to thousands of parallel simple processing elements, and operating at a clock speed sufficiently low as to allow the efficiency gains of near threshold voltage operation. Performance is there- fore dependant on exploiting a new degree of fine-grained parallelism such as is currently only found in GPGPUs, but in a manner that is not as restrictive in application domain range. While removing the complex control hardware of traditional CPUs provides space for more arithmetic hardware, a basic level of control is still required. For a number of reasons this work chooses to replace this control largely with static scheduling. This pushes the burden of control primarily to the software and specifically the compiler, rather not to the programmer or to an application specific means of control simplification. An existing legacy tool chain capable of autoparallelising sequential Fortran code to the degree of parallelism necessary for many-core exists. This work implements a many-core architecture to match it. Prototyping the design on an FPGA, it is possible to examine the real world performance of the compiler-architecture system to a greater degree than simulation only would allow. Comparing theoretical peak performance and real performance in a case study application, the system is found to be more efficient than any other reviewed, but to also significantly under perform relative to current competing architectures. This failing is apportioned to taking the need for simple hardware too far, and an inability to implement static scheduling mitigating tactics due to lack of support for such in the compiler

Current status of the End-of-Substructure (EoS) card project for the ATLAS Strip Tracker Upgrade using final ASICs

The silicon tracker of the ATLAS experiment will be upgraded for the upcoming High-Luminosity Upgrade of the LHC (HL-LHC). The main building blocks of the new strip tracker are modules that consist of silicon sensors and hybrid PCBs hosting the read-out ASICs. The modules are mounted on rigid carbon-fibre substructures, that provide common services to all the modules. At the end of each substructure, a so-called End-of-Substructure (EoS) card facilitates the transfer of data, power, high voltage and control signals between the modules and the off-detector systems. The module front-end electronics transfer data to the EoS card on 640Mbit/s differential lines. The EoS connects up to 28 data lines to one or two lpGBT chips that provide data serialisation and uses a 10GBit/s versatile optical link (VTRx+) to transmit signals to the off-detector systems. The lpGBT also recovers the LHC clock on the down-link and generates clock and control signals for the modules. To meet the tight integration requirements in the detector, several different EoS card designs are needed. Production-ready EoS card’s electronic design integrating final lpGBTv1 and VTRx+ ASICs from CERN are described, as well as results from recent quality assurance tests including detailed characterisation of the opto-electronics system by its bit error rate, jitter, and eye diagram representation. Since each EoS sits at a single-point-of-failure for an entire side of a substructure, a dedicated quality control (QC) procedure for the production has been developed

Global variation in postoperative mortality and complications after cancer surgery: a multicentre, prospective cohort study in 82 countries

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licenseBackground: 80% of individuals with cancer will require a surgical procedure, yet little comparative data exist on early outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared postoperative outcomes in breast, colorectal, and gastric cancer surgery in hospitals worldwide, focusing on the effect of disease stage and complications on postoperative mortality. Methods: This was a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for primary breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer requiring a skin incision done under general or neuraxial anaesthesia. The primary outcome was death or major complication within 30 days of surgery. Multilevel logistic regression determined relationships within three-level nested models of patients within hospitals and countries. Hospital-level infrastructure effects were explored with three-way mediation analyses. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03471494. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, we enrolled 15 958 patients from 428 hospitals in 82 countries (high income 9106 patients, 31 countries; upper-middle income 2721 patients, 23 countries; or lower-middle income 4131 patients, 28 countries). Patients in LMICs presented with more advanced disease compared with patients in high-income countries. 30-day mortality was higher for gastric cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 3·72, 95% CI 1·70–8·16) and for colorectal cancer in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (4·59, 2·39–8·80) and upper-middle-income countries (2·06, 1·11–3·83). No difference in 30-day mortality was seen in breast cancer. The proportion of patients who died after a major complication was greatest in low-income or lower-middle-income countries (6·15, 3·26–11·59) and upper-middle-income countries (3·89, 2·08–7·29). Postoperative death after complications was partly explained by patient factors (60%) and partly by hospital or country (40%). The absence of consistently available postoperative care facilities was associated with seven to 10 more deaths per 100 major complications in LMICs. Cancer stage alone explained little of the early variation in mortality or postoperative complications. Interpretation: Higher levels of mortality after cancer surgery in LMICs was not fully explained by later presentation of disease. The capacity to rescue patients from surgical complications is a tangible opportunity for meaningful intervention. Early death after cancer surgery might be reduced by policies focusing on strengthening perioperative care systems to detect and intervene in common complications. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit

Effects of hospital facilities on patient outcomes after cancer surgery: an international, prospective, observational study

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 licenseBackground: Early death after cancer surgery is higher in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared with in high-income countries, yet the impact of facility characteristics on early postoperative outcomes is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the association between hospital infrastructure, resource availability, and processes on early outcomes after cancer surgery worldwide. Methods: A multimethods analysis was performed as part of the GlobalSurg 3 study—a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study of patients who had surgery for breast, colorectal, or gastric cancer. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major complication rates. Potentially beneficial hospital facilities were identified by variable selection to select those associated with 30-day mortality. Adjusted outcomes were determined using generalised estimating equations to account for patient characteristics and country-income group, with population stratification by hospital. Findings: Between April 1, 2018, and April 23, 2019, facility-level data were collected for 9685 patients across 238 hospitals in 66 countries (91 hospitals in 20 high-income countries; 57 hospitals in 19 upper-middle-income countries; and 90 hospitals in 27 low-income to lower-middle-income countries). The availability of five hospital facilities was inversely associated with mortality: ultrasound, CT scanner, critical care unit, opioid analgesia, and oncologist. After adjustment for case-mix and country income group, hospitals with three or fewer of these facilities (62 hospitals, 1294 patients) had higher mortality compared with those with four or five (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3·85 [95% CI 2·58–5·75]; p<0·0001), with excess mortality predominantly explained by a limited capacity to rescue following the development of major complications (63·0% vs 82·7%; OR 0·35 [0·23–0·53]; p<0·0001). Across LMICs, improvements in hospital facilities would prevent one to three deaths for every 100 patients undergoing surgery for cancer. Interpretation: Hospitals with higher levels of infrastructure and resources have better outcomes after cancer surgery, independent of country income. Without urgent strengthening of hospital infrastructure and resources, the reductions in cancer-associated mortality associated with improved access will not be realised. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research

Delaying surgery for patients with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection

Not availabl