MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1938647016 · doi:10.1109/mwscas.1991.251978

A heterogeneous multiprocessor programming method with application to robotic control systems

2002· article· en· W1938647016 on OpenAlexaff
M.J. McKay, Muhammad Umar Farooq, C.M. Wortley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiprocessingComputer scienceParallel computingHomogeneousSymmetric multiprocessor systemDecompositionMultiprocessor schedulingRobotDistributed computingMathematical optimizationTheoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceEmbedded systemMathematicsJob shop schedulingRouting (electronic design automation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The testing of robotic control theory on robots has resulted in the design of robot control systems which are multiprocessor based. The authors describe a method by which a control system is implemented on a heterogeneous multiprocessor. The method has three parts: decomposition of the control algorithm into concurrent units of computation; converting the computational units into software tasks; and the allocation of the tasks to processors. The allocation procedure is recognized as a NP-complete problem. By using an appropriate model for the multiprocessor, it is possible to extend the method used to solve the allocation problem for homogeneous processors to the heterogeneous case. Extensions to the algorithms which calculate lower bounds on the completion time of partial allocations are proposed. These lower bounds are used in a branch and bound (BB) technique that has been shown to be effective at solving the allocation problem for homogeneous processors.>

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207