I am a computer science major trying to understand what pros and cons each simulator provides as I have to work with them for custom use required by a lab.
Any insights would be appreciated!
We can’t speak directly for HumMod or BioGears, but here’s what sets Pulse apart:
- Fully open-source under the permissive Apache 2.0 license, allowing unrestricted use, modification, and integration. Our repository integration branch includes some of our active feature development.
- Active development with regular updates, new features, and ongoing improvements to both the physiology engine and its supporting tools.
- Cross-platform and multi-language support, including bindings for Python, Java, C#, and C++, with builds available for Windows, Linux, and macOS, Android, iOS with prebuilt plugins for the Unreal and Unity Game engines
- Extensive documentation and validation, including automated validation tests and detailed examples. We continuously update our website with new features and methodologies.
- Growing community use across medical training, research, AI model development, and digital twin applications. You can explore some featured projects here and publications here.
The origin of Pulse lies in a fork of BioGears back in 2017. We outline the reasoning and development goals in more detail at the bottom of our FAQs.
We’d love to hear more about your lab’s needs and your experience working with these platforms.
1 Like
Thank you for the insight.
I can see that Pulse has the huge advantage of being open source and being compatible with various methods of operation, in contrast to HumMod’s closed-source desktop app. However, I am tasked with essentially creating a custom engine using the HumMod schema, so that is not my primary concern.
Therefore, I was wondering what differences you are aware of in the actual accuracy, speed and other performance metrics between the 3 simulations. I found 1 or 2 papers regarding accuracy in Hemorrhoid prediction, but it seems like a rather niche metric.
Hello,
I apologize for the delay in our response.
We are not the developers or maintainers of HumMod and do not have access to their closed source engine. Therefore, we cannot speak to performance or validation. As the Pulse Physiology Engine developers and maintainers we are able to say that Pulse runs at 10-15x real time on our laptops and computers. It is also able to run faster than real-time on embedded systems. We also have detailed validation data on each of our systems available on the website under Methodology. These reports explain how our models work and provide parameter validation with references for each system. We update our documentation regularly to ensure it accurately reflects our current models and validation. You would have to reach out to HumMod and/or BioGears for the corresponding information for each of these engines.
I hope that is helpful and you are able to find the information you are looking for.
Thank you,
Rachel