MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050229180 · doi:10.1115/imece2010-40232

Thermal-Aware Power Migration in Many-Core Processors

2010· article· en· W2050229180 on OpenAlexaff
Avinash Raghu, Saket Karajgikar, Dereje Agonafer, Bahgat Sammakia, Gamal Refai-Ahmed

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulti-core processorWorkloadPower demandJunction temperatureMany coreChipComputer scienceDrop (telecommunication)Core (optical fiber)Reliability (semiconductor)Power (physics)Single-coreThermalEmbedded systemParallel computingPower consumptionTelecommunicationsPhysicsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The demand for greater performance in applications involving high levels of parallelism and sequential computation, has led to an increase in design complexity, has rendered the single-core processor obsolete for such applications and resulted in more cores being put onto a single chip. While improving performance, this has lead to increased power densities and, consequently, increased die temperature. Also, the power distribution across the die surface is not uniform, resulting in hot spots. The increase in die temperature results in decreased performance and reliability and increased leakage currents and cooling costs. Spreading activity across a multi-core chip is increasingly being considered as a way to contain chip temperatures while minimally degrading performance. This paper investigates power migration, or “core hopping,” which involves dynamic allocation of workload among the cores on a many-core processor. This work numerically analyzed core hopping for different configurations of a many-core processor, and performed the migration based on both time of activity and temperature of individual cores. Based on the analysis, this work demonstrated a notable drop in junction temperature of about 8°C.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207