MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1595504854 · doi:10.1109/ipdps.2015.63

Stratified Sampling for Even Workload Partitioning Applied to IDA* and Delaunay Algorithms

2015· article· en· W1595504854 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkloadDelaunay triangulationPartition (number theory)AlgorithmDistributed computingParallel computingOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents Workload Partitioning and Scheduling (WPS), a novel algorithm for evenly partitioning the computational workload of large implicitly-defined work-list-based applications on distributed/shared-memory systems. In WPS, a stratified sampling technique estimates the number of work items that will be processed in each step of the target application. Then WPS uses this estimation to evenly partition and distribute the computational workload. An empirical evaluation on large applications -- Iterative-Deepening A* (IDA*) applied to (4 × 4)- and (5 × 5)-Sliding-Tile Puzzles, Delaunay Mesh Generation, and Delaunay Mesh Refinement -- shows that WPS is applicable to a range of applications. A coordination between WPS and existing work-stealing schedulers for intra-node load balancing yields additional speedups in the range of 18% to 40% compared to that achieved with the existing work-stealing schedulers alone. Such a coordination also outperforms an existing workload-partitioning scheme intended specifically for IDA* algorithms by 17% to 36%.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.216 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it