MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171274268 · doi:10.1109/ipdps.2005.386

Runtime Empirical Selection of Loop Schedulers on Hyperthreaded SMPs

2005· article· en· W2171274268 on OpenAlexaff
Yun Zhang, Michael Voss

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceParallel computingThread (computing)Spec#Scheduling (production processes)MultiprocessingPOSIX ThreadsBenchmark (surveying)SpeedupMulti-core processorMemory hierarchyOperating systemCache

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hyperthreaded (HT) and simultaneous multithreaded (SMT) processors are now available in commodity workstations and servers. This technology is designed to increase throughput by executing multiple concurrent threads on a single physical processor. These multiple threads share the processor's functional units and on-chip memory hierarchy in an attempt to make better use of idle resources. Most OpenMP applications have been written assuming an symmetric multiprocessor (SMP), not an SMT, model. Threads executing on the same physical processor have interactions on data locality and resource sharing that do not occur on traditional SMPs. This work focuses on tuning the behavior of OpenMP applications executing on SMPs with SMT processors. We propose two adaptive loop schedulers that determine effective hierarchical schedulers for individual parallel loops. We compare the performance of our two proposed schedulers against several standard schedulers and the per-region adaptive scheduler proposed by Zhang et al. using the SPEC and NAS OpenMP benchmark suites. We show that both of our proposed schedulers outperform all other schedulers on average, and increase speedup on average by over 25% when all thread contexts are used.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207