MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2398713501 · doi:10.1109/saner.2016.118

Trace Files for Automatic Memory Management Systems

2016· article· en· W2398713501 on OpenAlexafffund
Md. Mazder Rahman, Konstantin Nasartschuk, Kenneth B. Kent, Gerhard W. Dueck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyNew Brunswick Innovation Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceTRACE (psycholinguistics)Benchmark (surveying)Memory managementVirtual memoryProcess (computing)Extended memoryEmbedded systemOperating systemSemiconductor memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Automated memory management is generally non-deterministic. Attempts to improve its performance require testing and simulation of basic memory management (MM) operations. Simulation of automated memory management usually involves running a virtual machine (VM) with benchmark applications. However, this process requires significant run-time. Moreover, there are few benchmarks available for programmers to test and validate their systems against. In this work, we record basic memory management operations of benchmark applications into trace files. These trace files can be used platform independently to evaluate systems off-line. Empirical results show that recording traces of memory management operations of applications into files requires large amounts of physical space. To aid developers, we also design and implement a trace synthesizer that creates basic memory operations dynamically for given specifications. The significance of trace files is shown experimentally by simulating and evaluating GC policies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207