MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110195531 · doi:10.1109/ispass.2010.5452013

Demystifying GPU microarchitecture through microbenchmarking

2010· article· en· W2110195531 on OpenAlexaff
Henry Wong, Misel-Myrto Papadopoulou, Maryam Sadooghi-Alvandi, Andreas Moshovos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCUDAComputer scienceSpeedupParallel computingSuiteGraphicsMicroarchitectureGeneral-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsArchitectureAbstractionCorrectnessComputer architectureCoprocessorComputationComputer graphics (images)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphics processors (GPU) offer the promise of more than an order of magnitude speedup over conventional processors for certain non-graphics computations. Because the GPU is often presented as a C-like abstraction (e.g., Nvidia's CUDA), little is known about the characteristics of the GPU's architecture beyond what the manufacturer has documented. This work develops a microbechmark suite and measures the CUDA-visible architectural characteristics of the Nvidia GT200 (GTX280) GPU. Various undisclosed characteristics of the processing elements and the memory hierarchies are measured. This analysis exposes undocumented features that impact program performance and correctness. These measurements can be useful for improving performance optimization, analysis, and modeling on this architecture and offer additional insight on the decisions made in developing this GPU.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations447
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207