MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092137580 · doi:10.1145/2506164.2506174

Multi-core systems modeling for formal verification of parallel algorithms

2013· article· en· W2092137580 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersPolytechnique Montréal
KeywordsComputer scienceCompilerScheduling (production processes)Synchronization (alternating current)Parallel computingArchitectureModel checkingDistributed computingProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling parallel algorithms at the architecture level enables exploring side-effects of the weakly ordered nature of modern processors. Formal verification of such models with model-checking can ensure that algorithm guarantees will hold even in the presence of the most aggressive compiler and processor optimizations. This paper proposes a virtual architecture to model the effects of such optimizations. It first presents the OoOmem framework to model out-of-order memory accesses. It then presents the OoOisched framework to model the effects of out-of-order instruction scheduling. These two frameworks are explained and tested using weaklyordered memory interaction scenarios known to be affected by weak ordering. Then, modeling of user-level RCU (Read- Copy Update) synchronization algorithms is presented. It uses the virtual architecture proposed to verify that the RCU guarantees are indeed respected.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.240 · 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