MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157158468 · doi:10.5555/2485288.2485455

Characterizing the performance benefits of fused CPU/GPU systems using FusionSim

2013· article· en· W2157158468 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

VenueDesign, Automation, and Test in Europe · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeedupComputer scienceParallel computingOverhead (engineering)ComputationSoftwareSupercomputerSimple (philosophy)General-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsPerformance improvementCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Computer engineeringAlgorithmGraphicsOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use FusionSim to characterize the performance of the Rodinia benchmarks on fused and discrete systems. We demonstrate that the speed-up due to fusion is highly correlated with the input data size. We demonstrate that for benchmarks that benefit most from fusion, a 9.72x speed up is possible for small problem sizes. This speedup reduces to 1.84x with medium or large problem sizes. We study a simple, software-managed coherence solution for the fused system. We find that it imposes a minor performance overhead of 2% for most benchmarks and as high as 5% for some. Finally, we develop an analytical model for the performance benefit that is to be expected from fusion for applications with a simple communication and computation pattern and show that FusionSim follows the predicted performance trend.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.327

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.199 · 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