From: "prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu<mailto:prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu>" 
<prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu<mailto:prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu>>
Reply-To: "prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu<mailto:prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu>" 
<prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu<mailto:prentice.bis...@rutgers.edu>>
Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 11:58 AM
To: "beowulf@beowulf.org<mailto:beowulf@beowulf.org>" 
<beowulf@beowulf.org<mailto:beowulf@beowulf.org>>
Subject: Re: [Beowulf] SC13 wrapup, please post your own

John,

Since you work in F1...

The guys from Intelligent Light (http://www.ilight.com/) gave a presentation at 
SC13 on how they helped both Red Bull F1 and Zipp wheels (http://www.zipp.com) 
with HPC. I think both of these examples show how easily quantifiable ROI can 
be in certain scenarios. It also shows how you can use different methods to 
calculate ROI.

In the Red Bull F1 case, they made it easier and quicker for Red Bull to 
analyze the results of their CFD simulations. Obviously, if you can calculate 
the # of aerodynamics simulations they were able to analyze per week before and 
after, you can figure out the value based on the cost of labor for the 
aerodynamics experts, and then calculate the value of this increase in 
productivity. The ultimate measure, though, would be to measure the increase in 
co-sponsor dollars/prize-winnings after using this new workflow.



---


But this kind of thing is hard to really quantify.   It's like trying to 
quantify the value of a square foot of laboratory space (or office space).  You 
don't really have a nice relationship for productivity: someone will argue that 
had they had less computational resources, they would have come up with better 
analytical solutions.  After all, the atomic bomb was designed with slide 
rules, and the computers used for trajectory calcs for Apollo weren't a whole 
lot better.  One will hear exhortations from managers to "do more with less, in 
these straitened economic times", and most of the time, people will do this 
(work hours grow, but salaries do not).

(at least until an alternative for the employee arises.. If they can go 
elsewhere, they will)

It's like those "studies" that show that open plan offices are more cost 
effective.  What it really means is that you have to buy or rent fewer square 
meters per employee because you aren't procuring walls, hallways, and doors. 
Even more extreme is "hoteling", where you don't even have cubes.   The problem 
is that "people productivity" for knowledge workers is as hard to measure as 
HPC ROI.  You need many years of data to know if you are working better or 
worse; but the immediate cost reduction is obvious.  So you might be able to 
save money on a per employee basis, but get less total "value" out of them.

It's only if the alternatives are equally viable that you can do a head to head 
comparison:  A room full of 1950s era "computers" with their Marchand 
calculators against an old IBM PC doing the same calculations.

How do you quantify (in an absolute, accounting/book-keeping sense) the "value" 
of running twice as many simulations? There are very few HPC situations where 
you can draw a curve that has value/additional run.   Usually, the number of 
runs is set either by a resource limit (wall clock time, money, etc.), or by 
some aspect of the underlying randomness (simulating at a finer scale doesn't 
provide information because the underlying phenomenon has a larger scale), or 
the problem becomes numerically unstable or ill conditioned (which is really a 
"precision" issue).  But there are engineering problems where "doing better", 
particularly with one aspect, can be shown not to improve things. (This can all 
be formalized with things like Cramer-Rao bounds and the Fisher Information 
Matrix).  You can improve the signal processing in a single frequency GPS 
receiver to your heart's content, but the accuracy will be limited by the 
uncertainty of ionospheric propagation.

What is the economic value of getting weather predictions that are better?   
Over many years, one can figure out statistics that say how much it saves to 
know where the hurricane landfall will be with higher accuracy: the reduced 
costs of evacuation, for instance. But even in those situations, the estimates 
are a bit fuzzy, with lots of externalities.
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit 
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

Reply via email to