MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098214931 · doi:10.1002/spe.565

The design and implementation of a modular and extensible Java Virtual Machine

2004· article· en· W2098214931 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick Doyle, Carlos Cavanna, Tarek S. Abdelrahman

Bibliographic record

VenueSoftware Practice and Experience · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceOperating systemJavaModular designScalabilityVirtual machineReal time Java

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the design, implementation, and experimental evaluation of a modular and extensible Java™ Virtual Machine (JVM) infrastructure, called Jupiter. The infrastructure is intended to serve as a vehicle for our research on scalable JVM architectures for a cluster of PC workstations, with support for shared memory in software. Jupiter is constructed, using a building block architecture, out of many modules with small, simple interfaces. This flexible structure, similar to UNIX® shells that build complex command pipelines out of discrete programs, allows the rapid prototyping of our research ideas by confining changes in JVM design to a small number of modules. In spite of this flexibility, Jupiter delivers good performance. Experimental evaluation of the current implementation of Jupiter using the SPECjvm98 and the EPCC Java Grande single‐threaded and multithreaded benchmarks reflects competitive performance. Jupiter is on average about 2.5 times faster than Kaffe and about 2 times slower than the Sun Microsystems JDK (interpreter versions only). By providing a flexible JVM infrastructure that delivers competitive performance, we believe we have developed a framework that supports further research into JVM scalability. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoftware Practice and ExperienceSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207