MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062507172 · doi:10.1155/2001/195437

Parallel Programming Environment for OpenMP

2001· article· en· W2062507172 on OpenAlexfundno aff
In‐Sung Park, Michael Voss, Seon Wook Kim, Rudolf Eigenmann

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Programming · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoIntel CorporationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceDirectiveVisualizationSet (abstract data type)Parallel programming modelProgramming paradigmParallel computingInteractive programmingProgramming languageComputer architectureArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present our effort to provide a comprehensive parallel programming environment for the OpenMP parallel directive language. This environment includes a parallel programming methodology for the OpenMP programming model and a set of tools (Ursa Minor and InterPol) that support this methodology. Our toolset provides automated and interactive assistance to parallel programmers in time‐consuming tasks of the proposed methodology. The features provided by our tools include performance and program structure visualization, interactive optimization, support for performance modeling, and performance advising for finding and correcting performance problems. The presented evaluation demonstrates that our environment offers significant support in general parallel tuning efforts and that the toolset facilitates many common tasks in OpenMP parallel programming in an efficient manner.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.018

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations30
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ProgrammingSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207