MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092212481 · doi:10.1109/hpca.2015.7056027

Heterogeneous memory architectures: A HW/SW approach for mixing die-stacked and off-package memories

2015· article· en· W2092212481 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDramEmbedded systemLeverage (statistics)Computer architectureSoftwareOverlayMemory managementInterleaved memoryComputer hardwareOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Die-stacked DRAM is a technology that will soon be integrated in high-performance systems. Recent studies have focused on hardware caching techniques to make use of the stacked memory, but these approaches require complex changes to the processor and also cannot leverage the stacked memory to increase the system's overall memory capacity. In this work, we explore the challenges of exposing the stacked DRAM as part of the system's physical address space. This non-uniform access memory (NUMA) styled approach greatly simplifies the hardware and increases the physical memory capacity of the system, but pushes the burden of managing the heterogeneous memory architecture (HMA) to the software layers. We first explore simple (and somewhat impractical) schemes to manage the HMA, and then refine the mechanisms to address a variety of hardware and software implementation challenges. In the end, we present an HMA approach with low hardware and software impact that can dynamically tune itself to different application scenarios, achieving performance even better than the (impractical-to-implement) baseline approaches.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.232 · 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