Shared memory programming for large scale machines
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
This paper describes the design and implementation of a scalable run-time system and an optimizing compiler for Unified Parallel C (UPC). An experimental evaluation on BlueGene/L®, a distributed-memory machine, demonstrates that the combination of the compiler with the runtime system produces programs with performance comparable to that of efficient MPI programs and good performance scalability up to hundreds of thousands of processors.Our runtime system design solves the problem of maintaining shared object consistency efficiently in a distributed memory machine. Our compiler infrastructure simplifies the code generated for parallel loops in UPC through the elimination of affinity tests, eliminates several levels of indirection for accesses to segments of shared arrays that the compiler can prove to be local, and implements remote update operations through a lower-cost asynchronous message. The performance evaluation uses three well-known benchmarks --- HPC RandomAccess, HPC STREAM and NAS CG --- to obtain scaling and absolute performance numbers for these benchmarks on up to 131072 processors, the full BlueGene/L machine. These results were used to win the HPC Challenge Competition at SC05 in Seattle WA, demonstrating that PGAS languages support both productivity and performance.
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