MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967680640 · doi:10.1145/2370816.2370908

Using combined profiling to decide when thread level speculation is profitable

2012· article· en· W1967680640 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
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProfiling (computer programming)CompilerParallel computingThread (computing)Static analysisSpeculative multithreadingOperating systemProgramming languageSpeculative executionSpeculationMultithreading

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thread Level Speculation (TLS) speculatively executes parts of a program in parallel. Statically determined may dependences between store-load pairs prevent the compiler from speculatively executing parts of programs (e.g loop iterations or functions). If a compiler can determine that the probability of a may dependence occurring at runtime is low, then it can use TLS to execute the loop in parallel. This research will develop a may dependence profiling framework that is able to capture the effect of different inputs on the dependence behaviour of the program during runtime, using a technique called Combined Profiling (CP) [1]. The dependence profiling will be made efficient using the output from static analysis. TLS code generation strategies will be implemented in a version of the LLVM compiler that will generate code for the hardware support for TLS in the IBM BlueGene/Q (BG/Q) machine.

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)0.000
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.830
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.199 · 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