MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055897498 · doi:10.1145/2304576.2304615

Locality & utility co-optimization for practical capacity management of shared last level caches

2012· article· en· W2055897498 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLeukemia and Lymphoma Society of CanadaUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLocalityComputer scienceCacheOverhead (engineering)CPU cacheLocality of referenceParallel computingFalse sharingDistributed computingBridging (networking)Cache algorithmsComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shared last-level caches (SLLCs) on chip-multiprocessors play an important role in bridging the performance gap between processing cores and main memory. Although there are already many proposals targeted at overcoming the weaknesses of the least-recently-used (LRU) replacement policy by optimizing either locality or utility for heterogeneous workloads, very few of them are suitable for practical SLLC designs due to their large overhead of log associativity bits per cache line for re-reference interval prediction. The two recently proposed practical replacement policies, TA-DRRIP and SHiP, have significantly reduced the overhead by relying on just 2 bits per line for prediction, but they are oriented towards managing locality only, missing the opportunity provided by utility optimization.

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)0.001
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.873
Threshold uncertainty score0.451

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.175 · 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