MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037462607 · doi:10.1145/1082469.1082471

The STAMPede approach to thread-level speculation

2005· article· en· W2037462607 on OpenAlexaff
J. Gregory Steffan, Christopher B. Colohan, Antonia Zhai, Todd C. Mowry

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Computer Systems · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceExploitMultithreadingThread (computing)Cache coherenceMultiprocessingParallel computingCompilerSimultaneous multithreadingSpeculationSpeculative multithreadingWorkloadCacheComputer architectureCPU cacheEmbedded systemOperating systemCache algorithms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multithreaded processor architectures are becoming increasingly commonplace: many current and upcoming designs support chip multiprocessing, simultaneous multithreading, or both. While it is relatively straightforward to use these architectures to improve the throughput of a multithreaded or multiprogrammed workload, the real challenge is how to easily create parallel software to allow single programs to effectively exploit all of this raw performance potential. One promising technique for overcoming this problem is Thread-Level Speculation (TLS) , which enables the compiler to optimistically create parallel threads despite uncertainty as to whether those threads are actually independent. In this article, we propose and evaluate a design for supporting TLS that seamlessly scales both within a chip and beyond because it is a straightforward extension of write-back invalidation-based cache coherence (which itself scales both up and down). Our experimental results demonstrate that our scheme performs well on single-chip multiprocessors where the first level caches are either private or shared. For our private-cache design, the program performance of two of 13 general purpose applications studied improves by 86% and 56%, four others by more than 8%, and an average across all applications of 16%---confirming that TLS is a promising way to exploit the naturally-multithreaded processing resources of future computer systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations185
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Computer SystemsSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207