Slashdot Mirror


Linux Cluster Supercomputer Performs Surgery on Dog

An anonymous reader writes "In April, the Lonestar supercomputer, a Dell Linux Cluster with 5,840 processors at the Texas Advanced Computing Center in Austin, performed laser surgery on a dog in Houston without the intervention of a surgeon. The article describes the process: 'The treatment itself is broken into four stages: 1) Lonestar instructs the laser to heat the domain with a non-damaging calibration pulse; 2) the thermal MRI acquires baseline images of the heating and cooling of the patient's tissue for model calibration; 3) Lonestar inputs this patient-specific information and recomputes the optimal power profile for the rest of the treatments; and 4) surgery begins, with remote visualizations and evolving predictions continuing throughout the procedure.'"

68 comments

  1. O rly? by JK_the_Slacker · · Score: 0, Troll

    I for one welcome our new shark-controlling surgical supercomputer overlords.

    --
    I'm waiting for a "-1 somepeoplejustshouldn'tgetmodprivileges" meta-moderation.
    1. Re:O rly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lame.

  2. I, for one, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    welcome our new robotic surgeon overlords.

    1. Re:I, for one, by mazarin5 · · Score: 1

      I can imagine the dreams I'll have tonight:

      "I exist to cut flesh...

      PC LOAD LETTER...
      PC LOAD LETTER!"

      "Nooo!"

      --
      Fnord.
  3. New Robot Overlords by backtick · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wow, how about bowing down before a cluster of those? Heheh. Mixing the memes, sorry...

  4. Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Automated, computerized surgery, but "linux" is the important part.

    1. Re:Wow. by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      Actually, I believe they were just identifying the type of supercomputer that it was. There are a few types, one of which is to use linux to cluster a bunch of lesser computers until they're to the level of being a supercomputer. The only way that they could have put the same information into the statement while making "linux" less prominent would have been to use a more awkward phrasing, like making the statement passive (ie "surgery performed on dog by linux cluster supercomputer"). Initially, I would have agreed with your statement, but upon further reflection I believe the headline to be more than satisfactory.

  5. The dog died. by cduffy · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...and they bury that very far down in TFA. The question, of course, is whether that was the planned outcome; I'd like to see it answered a little more explicitly.

    If it is the intended outcome... well, so be it. If not, OTOH, that makes me a little less likely to sign up to be an early human test subject. :)

    1. Re:The dog died. by J'ai+Friedpork · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Second. I for one would like to know whether the dog died because of the treatment, in spite of it, or because they had to do an autopsy. Probably the latter, but the fact that they didn't specify it is a little worrying.

      --
      Took this comment seriously, did you?
    2. Re:The dog died. by crackp1pe · · Score: 5, Funny

      Linux killed a dog? It must have been using ReiserFS, I hear it's a killer file system.

    3. Re:The dog died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hint: there was no word "successfully" in the headline.

    4. Re:The dog died. by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

      They state that the dog gave it's life for the test. It does not state that the dog died as a result of the surgery.

      A more likely interpretation is that the surgery was completed and that the dog was killed and dissected to determine if the surgery was a success. That is what normally happens during animal trials.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
    5. Re:The dog died. by Phyrexicaid · · Score: 2, Funny

      And then they installed Linux on it.

      --
      The meme is dead, long live the meme!
    6. Re:The dog died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      The Lonestar may not be able to successfully perform surgery, but I hear it's pretty good at jamming Dark Helmet's radar.

    7. Re:The dog died. by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 4, Funny

      Did they go for yellow dog or puppy?

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    8. Re:The dog died. by DrSkwid · · Score: 2

      I doubt it was a volunteer.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    9. Re:The dog died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better than installing on a dead badger.

    10. Re:The dog died. by morari · · Score: 0, Troll

      Only because we, as a species, don't have the balls to subject ourselves to stupid experiments. We force other living creatures to do it for use.

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    11. Re:The dog died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Go on mate, be the first. No? Then sit down and have your nice, big, warm glass of the ol' shut the fuck up.

    12. Re:The dog died. by 192939495969798999 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it doesn't count to do computer surgery if the thing dies anyways.

      --
      stuff |
    13. Re:The dog died. by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Funny

      Look on the bright side: The cancer died too.

    14. Re:The dog died. by SUB7IME · · Score: 2, Informative

      In medical research using animals, the animal is traditionally sacrificed for the purpose of accessing the tissue, seeing the anatomy, and gaining a more complete understanding of what actually happened during the experiment.

    15. Re:The dog died. by Slashdot+Suxxors · · Score: 1

      We can't all be as pessimistic as Anonymous Coward.

    16. Re:The dog died. by cduffy · · Score: 1

      Makes good sense. It wouldn't hurt for an article aimed at people who aren't domain experts to be somewhat more explicit, though.

    17. Re:The dog died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No you worded that all wrong...



      Look on the bright side: The dog no longer has to worry about the cancer.

    18. Re:The dog died. by MiniMike · · Score: 4, Funny

      It was in a EULA printed on the back of a doggy treat: 'By eating this buscuit, you agree to be bound and dissected by the terms of this agreement...'

    19. Re:The dog died. by Threni · · Score: 0, Troll

      1) Experiment on dogs
      2) ...
      3) ...
      4) ...
      5) ...
      6) ...
      7) ...
      8) Experiment on people

      I'm just wondering what those missing steps are, and how they'll be filled. Perhaps the Chinese can experiment on prisoners or something.

    20. Re:The dog died. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go on mate, be the first. No? Then sit down and have your nice, big, warm glass of the ol' shut the fuck up.


      From one AC to another, how about my Doc Marten up your fucking ass... what'dya think about that, big boy?

      The test subjects are called "human death row prisoners".
    21. Re:The dog died. by SUB7IME · · Score: 1

      Strong point, well taken.

    22. Re:The dog died. by SUB7IME · · Score: 1

      There really aren't that many steps in between. It's more like this:

      1) Do the basic science
      2) Ask your IRB for approval
      3) Experiment on dogs
      4) Ask your IRB for approval
      5) Experiment on people
      6) Use evidence to demonstrate that your procedure works
      7) Procedure becomes mainstream

      In case you were actually wondering, and not just making a roundabout point in opposition to animal research.

    23. Re:The dog died. by Skrapion · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you read further than the headline, but they do say it "went off without a hitch". It's all pretty vague, though.

      --
      The details are trivial and useless; The reasons, as always, purely human ones.
  6. Dog? Big deal... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let me know when they do that on a penguin!

  7. And they killed the dog.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Although the dog gave his life to the research, his sacrifice furthers science by allowing researchers to assess the success of the treatment and plan improvements."

    Maybe next time the researchers should try it...damn vivisectionists.

  8. Awesome by timeOday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For the big dollars that surgeons pull down, they are after all performing mostly rote procedures for the most part. When you can replace a decade of training a person with a simple file copy to load software on to a robot, think of the savings that represents. Health care costs are a big drag on our standard of living in all other areas and it's only getting worse. Not to mention the millions who die around the world because they simply cannot afford the procedures. I'm by no means saying this technology is ready or that I'd be willing to go under the robo-knife at this point, but I'm sure glad they're working on it.

    1. Re:Awesome by Xtravar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      We could get the savings now, without machines, if we lowered the bar to doing certain doctor-only actions and stopped artificially limiting the amount of doctors in the market.

      In some cases, they already are by allowing doctor's assistants and nurses' assistants the same powers. But I won't really consider it a success until I can go down the street and have eye surgery in Boris's basement, right next to where he makes the bootleg vodka.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    2. Re:Awesome by HuguesT · · Score: 4, Informative

      Of course replacing a surgeon with a reliable fully automated robot would be great.

      However your description of surgery is not correct. Surgery is difficult, minutious and different for ever patient. Great surgeons must be able to plan ahead, direct a team and control all the details of a surgery procedure as it happens, as well as improvising with a cool head for hours on end if things go wrong.

      It's the exact opposite of rote procedure. Especially now with recent advances in real-time non-invasive imaging and haptic instruments procedures change all the time.

    3. Re:Awesome by Free+the+Cowards · · Score: 4, Funny

      How very appropriate, to have your sight both destroyed and restored by the same man's products!

      --
      If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
    4. Re:Awesome by inKubus · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, sight destroys your bootleg vodka.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
  9. The dog died. But he is a hero. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "... the dog gave his life to the research, his sacrifice furthers science... "

    Would you trust your surgery to a Dell computer?

    1. Re:The dog died. But he is a hero. by Skrapion · · Score: 2, Funny

      The surgery was done with lasers, not exploding batteries.

      --
      The details are trivial and useless; The reasons, as always, purely human ones.
  10. Re:Should have read... by MyLongNickName · · Score: 2, Funny

    Please tag "linuxkillsdogs". The dog died. If this were a Microsoft product, the dog would have lived. You open source freaks are just evil.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
  11. The Dog Died...When? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait...I don't get it. Did the dog die before or after the surgery? Was it already dead ahead of time in order to be immobile?

  12. Yellow Dog Linux? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    If only it was a PowerPC cluster!

    Yellow Dog Linux distro home page.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  13. Free software is the right tool for the job. by westbake · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Prostate cancer is the target of the research, so your comment is closer to reality than you might like.

    In this case, free software was the right tool. HPC with GNU/Linux is both flexible and mature. MD Anderson and everyone has better ways to spend their money than on software licenses for 5,000+ computers required to do this kind of work. Every kind of task will go this way eventually and most are already there. Whenever you start a task, you should look to see if some free program does not already do what you want.

    --
    I am a name troll of Westlake. Visit my homepage to learn why.
    1. Re:Free software is the right tool for the job. by willyhill · · Score: 2, Insightful
      That does not mean it's the only tool for the job. FOSS is not perfect, just like commercial software isn't always the best solution. Like in most areas, the cost of software licenses is minuscule compared to salaries, facilities, materials, etc; software is a tool regardless of whether money is charged for it or not.

      I'd rather have cancer cured than agendas furthered.

      --
      The twitter monologues. Click on my homepage and be amazed.
    2. Re:Free software is the right tool for the job. by sjames · · Score: 1

      The sticker price is minuscule compared to salaries etc. but there are a lot of other costs to licensed software. Like having to keep track of license keys and certificates, having to deal with various license management dane bramage, having licensing prevent quickly getting a service back up quickly and efficiently, etc.

      If you consider all the licensing problems and the extra hoops to be jumped through over the life of a server, the up-front cost of the license is really just the beginning.

      The BIG advantage FOSS has is that no part of it is designed to "decide" if it should work or not. There's no need to spend time (money) to "convince" it that it's OK for it to do it's job. There's no incentive (or ability) to keep critical parts of it hidden away or deny useful debugging information out of fear that someone might get it to run for free.

      There are many other reasons why Windows in particular costs more than it should in man hours, but that's another posting.

  14. If this gets big... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..., will in vitro fertilization than be like having sex with a robot?

  15. Re:Should have read... by Mozk · · Score: 1

    Should have read Yellow Dog operates on yellow dog.

    --
    No existe.
  16. Autodoc? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This sounds like one of the first steps in creating an autodoc from Larry Niven's books. Basically a box (coffin) you put someone in, close the lid and wait for it to fix them. It contains full life support, can perform surgery and produce (cloning?) it's own replacement parts.

    Of more immediate use, this sort of thing could be very useful for situations where surgeons are not available. Ships at sea, trips to Mars, NHS hospitals with long waiting lists...

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Autodoc? by awrowe · · Score: 1

      Do you reckon NASA would get upset at the astronaut who typed 'apt-get dist-update && apt-get dist-upgrade' from mars? "But dude, they finally fixed X in this one!"

      --
      A.I. Research. The peculiar science in which we know the question and we know the answer, but can't show the working
    2. Re:Autodoc? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      aw shit...fglrx doesn't work with this kernel...oh well..init 3 and email houston...
      tune in next week for "Deep Space Command Line"

    3. Re:Autodoc? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Actually, the first step was to develop techniques for imaging (parts of) the body (CAT, MRI, PET, X-Ray, whatever.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  17. Planning the surgery by DrYak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When you can replace a decade of training a person with a simple file copy to load software on to a robot, think of the savings that represents. And who is going to plan the surgery ?
    A doctor who has gone medical training is still required. The only thing is after a long intellectually preparation part (reflection, selecting the route, specifying the region, everything else that needs to be planned by someone with lots of experience), the doctor can give the instruction to the robot and move to the next case.

    The price are going to go down. Not because you'll get rid of the doctors, but because the "planning" doctors we'll be able to handle more cases per day (and can all be grouped in specialised centres to handle the cases more efficiently)*, and then in the operating block, you'll only need to have one surgery team waiting in standby in case something goes wrong in one of the operations and needs to be finished by hand, as opposed to have one surgery team for every patient.

    *: the same kind of speed up we currently have thanks to modern radiology technology and electronic archives : it pretty cool. You sit the whole day in front of a console and the exams are constantly coming in, get looked at, you quickly dictate a report and jump to the next exam, while the previous one is subsequently transmitted to a supervisor who'll double check the result. Or you read /. when there isn't as much work....
    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:Planning the surgery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A lot of the cost of the procedure is in the recovery, Switching to something that requires a lot less recovery time will decrease complications and recovery time. These days its all about reducing the time the patient is in the hospital.

      Its good and bad, bad because they cannot monitor the patient as well outside the hospital for complications, but good because they don't get as many in hospital infections (like MRSA).

      Surgeons will always be needed, they're not the biggest expense. Some proceedures and tests can be quite a penny too.

      Japan's health care system has MRI visits down to around $100.. ours? $3k easy.

  18. Bad analogy by jonaskoelker · · Score: 2, Funny

    Jokes about killer file systems are like cars with missing passenger seats.

  19. It's not a Beowulf Cluster by russlar · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does this qualify as a Beowoof Cluster?

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
  20. Always mount a scratch monkey! by waldo2020 · · Score: 1

    Before testing or reconfiguring, always mount a scratch monkey

  21. Killer app by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a real killer app.

  22. "Surgery" is a bit misleading by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

    From the article it sounds like the real development is combining thermal MR and thermal ablation therapy with a computer to give you more confidence that you've properly heated the whole target. The computer doesn't do any cutting. It doesn't make the incision, or sew it back up.

    If you want to consider what it does surgery then you really should include radiotherapy treatments that have been computer controlled for years.

  23. Re:Should have read... by thatotherguy007 · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, blame the fact that they ran a program on an open source operating system. It looks to me like the software that ran the surgical operation wasn't open source at all. It seems it was all closed source software that was doing anything except running the computers. Although I am a bit lost; I don't seem to remember when Microsoft went into the medical field.

  24. So, how many by Reservoir+Penguin · · Score: 1

    linux computers doe it take to KILL a dog?

    --
    US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
  25. Re:Should have read... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was a joke. Really.

  26. Here the *-scopy procedure did it already. by DrYak · · Score: 1

    I failed to take that into account. Maybe because I live in a country which has already done massive effort to reduce recovery time, thank to less invasive surgery (nothing fancy requiring robots. Just simply using *-scopy instead of *-tomy procedure whenever possible).

    Thus, for me, the introduction of robots, both classical surgical and new autonomous one, doesn't translate into shorter hospitalisation times. The procedure that our new overlords are going to replace where already minimally invasive in the first place.

    It's more about convenience for the surgeon :
    - tentacle-like robots are able to follow organ movement
    - remotely controllable bots allow to receive help from great specialists without needing to fly them at the destination first.
    - programmable autonomous (like TFA's surgery both, or like the cancer-killing radiation-machine used for some time) allow very careful planning of complicated or delicate procedure and then being sure that the procedure will be carried exactly as planned (well - except for that scandal about the miscalibrated radiation-machine)

    about MRI visits' cost : they also depend on the financing plan adopted by the institute.
    I've heard that some constructors subsidize the cost of the machine but in exchange require a "tax" on all performed exams.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  27. The "New You"... by Visual+Echo · · Score: 1

    The "New You" cosmetic surgery laser gone haywire in "Logan's Run" comes to mind. On the other hand, can I get one of these to melt snow on the road a few centimeters in front of my 70MPH tires? How many development cycles before 5,840 processors will fit in my glove box?

    --
    "I stomp in clown shoes where daemons fear to tread."