MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136644108

Local-spin algorithms for variants of mutual exclusion using read and write operations

2011· dissertation· en· W2136644108 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Danek

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2011
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutual exclusionComputer scienceShared memoryAlgorithmParallel computingTheoretical computer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutual exclusion (ME) is used to coordinate access to shared resources by concurrent\nprocesses. We investigate several new N-process shared-memory algorithms for variants\nof ME, each of which uses only reads and writes, and is local-spin, i.e., has bounded\nremote memory reference (RMR) complexity. We study these algorithms under two\ndifferent shared-memory models: the distributed shared-memory (DSM) model, and the\ncache-coherent (CC) model. In particular, we present the first known algorithm for first-\ncome-first-served (FCFS) ME that has O(log N) RMR complexity in both the DSM and\nCC models, and uses only atomic reads and writes. Our algorithm is also adaptive to\npoint contention, i.e., the number of processes that are simultaneously active during a\npassage by some process. More precisely, the number of RMRs a process makes per\npassage in our algorithm is \\Theta(min(c, log N)), where c is the point contention. We also\npresent the first known FCFS abortable ME algorithm that is local-spin and uses only\natomic reads and writes. This algorithm has O(N) RMR complexity in both the DSM\nand CC models, and is in the form of a transformation from abortable ME to FCFS\nabortable ME. In conjunction with other results, this transformation also yields the\nfirst known local-spin group mutual exclusion algorithm that uses only atomic reads\nand writes. Additionally, we present the first known local-spin k-exclusion algorithms\nthat use only atomic reads and writes and tolerate up to k − 1 crash failures. These algorithms have RMR complexity O(N) in both the DSM and CC models. The simplest\nof these algorithms satisfies a new fairness property, called k-FCFS, that generalizes the\nFCFS fairness property for ME algorithms. A modification of this algorithm satisfies the\nstronger first-in-first-enabled (FIFE) fairness property. Finally, we present a modification\nto the FIFE k-exclusion algorithm that works with non-atomic reads and writes. The\nhigh-level structure of all our k-exclusion algorithms is inspired by Lamport’s famous\nBakery algorithm.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207