IMPROVING SCHEDULING OF COMMUNICATION INTENSIVE PARALLEL APPLICATIONS ON HETEROGENEOUS COMPUTING ENVIRONMENTS
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a new model for the evaluation of the impacts of processing operations resulting from the communication among processes. This model quantifies the traffic volume imposed on the communication network by means of the latency parameters and the overhead. Such parameters represent the load that each process imposes over the network and the delay on CPU, as a consequence of the network operations. This delay is represented on the model by means of metric measurements slowdown. The equations that quantify the costs involved in the processing operation and message exchange are defined. In the same way, equations to determine the maximum network bandwidth are used in the decision-making scheduling. The proposed model uses a constant that delimitates the communication network maximum allowed usage, this constant defines two possible scheduling techniques: group scheduling or through communication network. Such techniques are incorporated to the DPWP policy, generating an extension of this policy. Experimental and simulation results confirm the performance enhancement of parallel applications under supervision of the extended DPWP policy, compared to the executions supervised by the original DPWP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it