A distributed implementation of sequential consistency with multi-object operations
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
Sequential consistency is a consistency criterion for concurrent objects stating that the execution of a multiprocess program is correct if it could have been produced by executing the program on a mono-processor system, preserving the order of the operations of each individual process. Several protocols implementing sequential consistency on top of asynchronous distributed systems have been proposed. They assume that the processes access the shared objects through basic read and write operations. We consider the case where the processes can invoke multiobject operations which can read or write several objects in a single operation atomically. It proposes a particularly simple protocol that guarantees sequentially consistent executions in such a context. The previous sequential consistency protocols, in addition to considering only unary operations, assume either full replication or a central manager storing copies of all the objects. In contrast, the proposed protocol has the noteworthy feature that each object has a separate manager. Interestingly, this provides the protocol with a versatility dimension that allows deriving simple protocols providing sequential consistency or atomic consistency when each operation is on a single object.
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 | 0.000 | 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