Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
80
One-at-a-time
With routing scheduling
With routing scheduling
70
100%
100%
88%
60
87%
100%
91%
50
100%
69%
40
80%
55%
64%
30
20
36%
10
0
1
2
3
5
Sub-problem #
Figure 3.28
Comparison of droplet-routing times for four subproblems (#1, #2, #3, #5).
Next, we apply the power-oblivious version of the proposed method to
the same problem instance. The computation time for the power-oblivious
routing-scheduling and manipulation method for the entire assay is
288 s, on a Intel Core Duo 2 GHz PC with 2 GB of RAM. We compare the
results (completion time and power consumption, the latter measured in
terms of the average number of pins activated per droplet-manipulation
step) with [63] and the power-efficient version of the proposed method.
Figures 3.29 and 3.30 show that although the proposed power-efficient
droplet-manipulation method leads to a slightly longer completion time
than [63] for some subproblems, it activates a much smaller number of
control pins in each manipulation cycle. This results in a significant
reduction in power consumption.
Compared to [63], the power-oblivious variant of the proposed method
achieves a significant reduction in assay completion time. As a trade-off, it
50
Power-ecient method
Power-oblivious method
[58]
40
30
20
10
0
1
2
3
4
Subproblem #
Figure 3.29
Comparison of droplet-routing times for the power-efficient-method, the power-oblivious
method, and the method from [63].
