Improving the user experience of the rCUDA remote GPU virtualization framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Graphics processing units (GPUs) are being increasingly embraced by the high‐performance computing community as an effective way to reduce execution time by accelerating parts of their applications. remote CUDA (rCUDA) was recently introduced as a software solution to address the high acquisition costs and energy consumption of GPUs that constrain further adoption of this technology. Specifically, rCUDA is a middleware that allows a reduced number of GPUs to be transparently shared among the nodes in a cluster. Although the initial prototype versions of rCUDA demonstrated its functionality, they also revealed concerns with respect to usability, performance, and support for new CUDA features. In response, in this paper, we present a new rCUDA version that (1) improves usability by including a new component that allows an automatic transformation of any CUDA source code so that it conforms to the needs of the rCUDA framework, (2) consistently features low overhead when using remote GPUs thanks to an improved new communication architecture, and (3) supports multithreaded applications and CUDA libraries. As a result, for any CUDA‐compatible program, rCUDA now allows the use of remote GPUs within a cluster with low overhead, so that a single application running in one node can use all GPUs available across the cluster, thereby extending the single‐node capability of CUDA. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".