Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) is the building block of modern main memory systems. DRAM cells must be periodically refreshed to prevent loss of data. These refresh operations waste energy and degrade system performance by interfering with memory accesses. The negative effects of DRAM refresh increase as DRAM device capacity increases. Existing DRAM devices refresh all cells at a rate determined by the leakiest cell in the device. However, most DRAM cells can retain data for significantly longer. Therefore, many of these refreshes are unnecessary. In this paper, we propose RAIDR (Retention-Aware Intelligent DRAM Refresh), a low-cost mechanism that can identify and skip unnecessary refreshes using knowledge of cell retention times. Our key idea is to group DRAM rows into retention time bins and apply a different refresh rate to each bin. As a result, rows containing leaky cells are refreshed as frequently as normal, while most rows are refreshed less frequently. RAIDR uses Bloom filters to efficiently implement retention time bins. RAIDR requires no modification to DRAM and minimal modification to the memory controller. In an 8-core system with 32 GB DRAM, RAIDR achieves a 74.6% refresh reduction, an average DRAM power reduction of 16.1%, and an average system performance improvement of 8.6% over existing systems, at a modest storage overhead of 1.25 KB in the memory controller. RAIDR's benefits are robust to variation in DRAM system configuration, and increase as memory capacity increases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.030 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".