MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324876502 · doi:10.5121/cseij.2015.5101

A Survey of Paradigms for Building and Designing Parallel Computing Machines

2015· article· en· W2324876502 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ahmed Faraz, Faiz ul haque Zeya, M. Kashif Kaleem

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science & Engineering An International Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Naval AcademyNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyCanadian Institute of Steel Construction
KeywordsComputer scienceData scienceComputer architecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we describe paradigms for building and designing parallel computing machines. Firstly we elaborate the uniqueness of MIMD model for the execution of diverse applications. Then we compare the General Purpose Architecture of Parallel Computers with Special Purpose Architecture of Parallel Computers in terms of cost, throughput and efficiency. Then we describe how Parallel Computer Architecture employs parallelism and concurrency through pipelining. Since Pipelining improves the performance of a machine by dividing an instruction into a number of stages, therefore we describe how the performance of a vector processor is enhanced by employing multi pipelining among its processing elements. Also we have elaborated the RISC architecture and Pipelining in RISC machines After comparing RISC computers with CISC computers we observe that although the high speed of RISC computers is very desirable but the significance of speed of a computer is dependent on implementation strategies. Only CPU clock speed is not the only parameter to move the system software from CISC to RISC computers but the other parameters should also be considered like instruction size or format, addressing modes, complexity of instructions and machine cycles required by instructions. Considering all parameters will give performance gain . We discuss Multiprocessor and Data Flow Machines in a concise manner. Then we discuss three SIMD (Single Instruction stream Multiple Data stream) machines which are DEC/MasPar MP-1, Systolic Processors and Wavefront array Processors. The DEC/MasPar MP-1 is a massively parallel SIMD array processor. A wide variety of number representations and arithmetic systems for computers can be implemented easily on the DEC/MasPar MP-1 system. The principal advantages of using such 6464 SIMD array of 4-bit processors for the implementation of a computer arithmetic laboratory arise out of its flexibility. After comparison of Systolic Processors with Wave front Processors we found that both of the Systolic Processors and Wave front Processors are fast and implemented in VLSI. The major drawback of Systolic Processors is the problem of availability of inputs when clock ticks because of propagation delays in connection buses. The Wave front Processors combine the Systolic Processor architecture with Data Flow machine architecture. Although the Wave front processors use asynchronous data flow computing structure, the timing in the interconnection buses, at input and at output is not problematic..

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 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)0.003
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.405
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Science & Engineering An International JournalSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207