MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998791759 · doi:10.1145/2503210.2503243

Low-power, low-storage-overhead chipkill correct via multi-line error correction

2013· article· en· W1998791759 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 institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersDivision of Electrical, Communications and Cyber Systems
KeywordsError detection and correctionComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Reliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringLine (geometry)Power (physics)Embedded systemReal-time computingAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to their large memory capacities, many modern servers require chipkill correct, an advanced type of memory error detection and correction, to meet their reliability requirements. However, existing chipkill-correct solutions incur high power or storage overheads, or both because they use dedicated error-correction resources per codeword to perform error correction. This requires high overhead for correction and results in high overhead for error detection. We propose a novel chipkill-correct solution, multi-line error correction, that uses resources shared across multiple lines in memory for error correction to reduce the overhead of both error detection and correction. Our evaluations show that the proposed solution reduces memory power by a mean of 27%, and up to 38% with respect to commercial solutions, at a cost of 0.4% increase in storage overhead and minimal impact on reliability.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · 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