A Composable Model for Analyzing Locality of Multi-threaded Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a multi-threaded execution, threads may negatively interfere when their private data contends for shared cache or positively interact when the data brought in by one thread is used by other threads. This paper presents a model of such cache behavior to predict locality without exhaustive simulation and provide insight into trends. The new model extends prior work that assumes no data sharing and uniform thread interleaving. Based on a single pass over an interleaved execution trace, we compute a set of per-thread statistics that includes the effect of thread interleaving and data sharing. The per-thread statistics is then composed to predict performance for all cache sizes, either for sub-clusters of threads or for futuristic environments with a larger number of similar threads. We evaluate and validate our model against exhaustive simulation using a server application running on a quad-core machine and productivity, multimedia and gaming applications running on a dual-core machine. The results indicate that our model is accurate and relies on incorporating both irregular thread interleaving and data sharing to achieve this accuracy. In addition, it identifies and separates individual factors affecting locality and scalability and hence opens new possibilities in performance tuning, program scheduling, and hardware cache design for concurrent applications. 1.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".