Demand Paging Techniques for Flash Memory Using Compiler Post-Pass Optimizations
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we propose an application-specific demand paging mechanism for low-end embedded systems that have flash memory as secondary storage. These systems are not equipped with virtual memory. A small memory space called an execution buffer is used to page the code of an application. An application-specific page manager manages the buffer. The page manager is automatically generated by a compiler post-pass optimizer and combined with the application image. The post-pass optimizer analyzes the executable image and transforms function call/return instructions into calls to the page manager. As a result, each function in the code can be loaded into the memory on demand at runtime. To minimize the overhead incurred by the demand paging technique, code clustering algorithms are also presented. We evaluate our techniques with ten embedded applications, and our approach can reduce the code memory size by on average 39.5% with less than 10% performance degradation and on average 14% more energy consumption. Our demand paging technique provides embedded system designers with a trade-off control mechanism between the cost, performance, and energy efficiency in designing embedded systems. Embedded system designers can choose the code memory size depending on their cost, energy, and performance requirements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it