Efficient Program Tracing and Monitoring Through Power Consumption — With a Little Help from the Compiler
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring correctness and enforcing security are growing concerns given the complexity of modern connected devices and safety-critical systems. A promising approach is non-intrusive runtime monitoring through reconstruction of program execution traces from power consumption measurements. This can be used for verification, validation, debugging, and security purposes. In this paper, we propose a framework for increasing the effectiveness of power-based program tracing techniques. These systems determine the most likely block of source code that produced an observed power trace (CPU power consumption as a function of time). Our framework maximizes distinguishability between power traces for different code blocks. To this end, we provide a special compiler optimization stage that reorders intermediate representation (IR) and determines the reorderings that lead to power traces with highest distances between each other, thus reducing the probability of misclassification. Our work includes an experimental evaluation, using LLVM for an ARM architecture. Experimental results confirm the effectiveness of our technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it