MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159176014 · doi:10.1145/2611563

Coordination of Independent Loops in Self-Adaptive Systems

2014· article· en· W2159176014 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

VenueACM Transactions on Reconfigurable Technology and Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceControl reconfigurationParsecBenchmark (surveying)SuiteFrequency scalingDistributed computingVariety (cybernetics)Code (set theory)Embedded systemArtificial intelligenceProgramming languagePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, the same piece of code should run on different architectures, providing performance guarantees in a variety of environments and situations. To this end, designers often integrate existing systems with ad-hoc adaptive strategies able to tune specific parameters that impact performance or energy—for example, frequency scaling. However, these strategies interfere with one another and unpredictable performance degradation may occur due to the interaction between different entities. In this article, we propose a software approach to reconfiguration when different strategies, called loops , are encapsulated in the system and are available to be activated. Our solution to loop coordination is based on machine learning and it selects a policy for the activation of loops inside of a system without prior knowledge. We implemented our solution on top of GNU/Linux and evaluated it with a significant subset of the PARSEC benchmark suite.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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