Improving Multiple-CMP Systems Using Token Coherence
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improvements in semiconductor technology now enable chip multiprocessors (CMPs). As many future computer systems will use one or more CMPs and support shared memory, such systems will have caches that must be kept coherent. Coherence is a particular challenge for multiple-CMP (M-CMP) systems. One approach is to use a hierarchical protocol that explicitly separates the intra-CMP coherence protocol from the inter-CMP protocol, but couples them hierarchically to maintain coherence. However, hierarchical protocols are complex, leading to subtle, difficult-to-verify race conditions. Furthermore, most previous hierarchical protocols use directories at one or both levels, incurring indirections - and thus extra latency - for sharing misses, which are common in commercial workloads. In contrast, this paper exploits the separation of correctness substrate and performance policy in the recently-proposed token coherence protocol to develop the first M-CMP coherence protocol that is flat for correctness, but hierarchical for performance. Via model checking studies, we show that flat correctness eases verification. Via simulation with micro-benchmarks, we make new protocol variants more robust under contention. Finally, via simulation with commercial workloads on a commercial operating system, we show that new protocol variants can be 10-50% faster than a hierarchical directory protocol.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it