Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) have become a competitive accelerator for applications outside the graphics domain, mainly driven by the improvements in GPU programmability. Although the Compute Unified Device Architecture (CUDA) is a simple C-like interface for programming NVIDIA GPUs, porting applications to CUDA remains a challenge to average programmers. In particular, CUDA places on the programmer the burden of packaging GPU code in separate functions, of explicitly managing data transfer between the host and GPU memories, and of manually optimizing the utilization of the GPU memory. Practical experience shows that the programmer needs to make significant code changes, often tedious and error-prone, before getting an optimized program. We have designed hiCUDA}, a high-level directive-based language for CUDA programming. It allows programmers to perform these tedious tasks in a simpler manner and directly to the sequential code, thus speeding up the porting process. In this paper, we describe the hiCUDA} directives as well as the design and implementation of a prototype compiler that translates a hiCUDA} program to a CUDA program. Our compiler is able to support real-world applications that span multiple procedures and use dynamically allocated arrays. Experiments using nine CUDA benchmarks show that the simplicity hiCUDA} provides comes at no expense to performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".