MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149265311 · doi:10.1109/icpp.2007.33

Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of Trellis-SDP for File-Level Data Parallelism

2007· article· en· W2149265311 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Parallel Processing · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed and Parallel Computing Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTrellis (graph)Parallel computingParallelism (grammar)Data parallelismSimple (philosophy)Programming paradigmOverlaySoftwareProgramming languageTheoretical computer scienceDistributed computingAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although data parallelism is a well-known computational model, there are few programming systems that are both easy to program (for simple applications) and able to work across administrative domains. For data sets (e.g., collections of image data) that are often inherently distributed, there is a need for a simple data-parallel programming system. We describe the design, implementation, and an evaluation of Trellis-SDP, a simple data-parallel programming system that facilitates the rapid development of data- intensive applications. Trellis-SDP is layered on top of the Trellis infrastructure, a software system for creating overlay metacomputers: user-level aggregations of computer systems. Trellis-SDP is based on file-level data parallelism and provides a Master-Worker programming framework in which the worker components can run self-contained, new or existing binary applications. We evaluate our programming system with a non-trivial seismic data processing application.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.267
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.130 · 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