MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ATLAS offline software performance monitoring and optimization

2014· article· en· W2026232913 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

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlas (anatomy)Computer scienceSoftwareOperating systemReal-time computingBiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a complex multi-developer, multi-package software environment, such as the ATLAS offline Athena framework, tracking the performance of the code can be a non-trivial task in itself. In this paper we describe improvements in the instrumentation of ATLAS offline software that have given considerable insight into the performance of the code and helped to guide optimisation. Code can be instrumented firstly using the PAPI tool, which is a programing interface for accessing hardware performance counters. PAPI events can count floating point operations, cycles and instructions and cache accesses. Triggering PAPI to start/stop counting for each algorithm and processed event gives a good understanding of the whole algorithm level performance of ATLAS code. Further data can be obtained using pin, a dynamic binary instrumentation tool. Pintools can be used to obtain similar statistics as PAPI, but advantageously without requiring recompilation of the code. Fine grained routine and instruction level instrumentation is also possible. Pintools can additionally interrogate the arguments to functions, like those in linear algebra libraries, so that a detailed usage profile can be obtained. These tools have charaterised the extensive use of vector and matrix operations in ATLAS tracking. Currently, CLHEP is used here, which is not an optimal choice. To help evaluate replacement libraries a testbed has been setup allowing comparison of the performance of different linear algebra libraries (including CLHEP, Eigen and SMatrix/SVector). Results are then presented via the ATLAS Performance Management Board framework, which runs daily with the current development branch of the code and monitors reconstruction and Monte-Carlo jobs. This framework analyses the CPU and memory performance of algorithms and an overview of results are presented on a web page. These tools have provided the insight necessary to plan and implement performance enhancements in ATLAS code by identifying the most common operations, with the call parameters well understood, and allowing improvements to be quantified in detail.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.208 · 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