MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124664738 · doi:10.1145/2669364

Mechanistic Modeling of Architectural Vulnerability Factor

2015· article· en· W2124664738 on OpenAlexaff
Arun Arvind Nair, Stijn Eyerman, Jian Chen, Lizy K. John, Lieven Eeckhout

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Computer Systems · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersVlaamse regeringFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceMicroarchitectureWorkloadReliability (semiconductor)Vulnerability (computing)SuperscalarReliability engineeringProcess (computing)Parametric statisticsComputer architecturePower (physics)Embedded systemParallel computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliability to soft errors is a significant design challenge in modern microprocessors owing to an exponential increase in the number of transistors on chip and the reduction in operating voltages with each process generation. Architectural Vulnerability Factor (AVF) modeling using microarchitectural simulators enables architects to make informed performance, power, and reliability tradeoffs. However, such simulators are time-consuming and do not reveal the microarchitectural mechanisms that influence AVF. In this article, we present an accurate first-order mechanistic analytical model to compute AVF, developed using the first principles of an out-of-order superscalar execution. This model provides insight into the fundamental interactions between the workload and microarchitecture that together influence AVF. We use the model to perform design space exploration, parametric sweeps, and workload characterization for AVF.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.240
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on Computer SystemsSame topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207