MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153703965 · doi:10.1145/1242531.1242549

Computational and storage power optimizations for the O-GEHL branch predictor

2007· article· en· W2153703965 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBranch predictorComputer scienceComputationComputational complexity theoryLatency (audio)Power consumptionPower (physics)Energy consumptionEfficient energy useParallel computingAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, highly accurate branch predictors have been proposed primarily for high performance processors. Unfortunately such predictors are extremely energy consuming and in some cases not practical as they come with excessive prediction latency. One example of such predictors is the O-GEHL predictor. To achieve high accuracy, O-GEHL relies on large tables and extensive computations and requires high energy and long prediction delay.In this work we propose power optimization techniques that aim at reducing both computational complexity and storage size for the O-GEHL predictor. We show that by eliminating unnecessary data from computations, we can reduce both predictor's energy consumption and delay. Moreover, we apply information theory findings to remove redundant storage, without any significant accuracy penalty. We reduce the dynamic and static power dissipated in the computational parts of the predictor by up to 74% and 65% respectively. Meantime we improve performance by up to 12% as we make faster prediction possible.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · 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