MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547589727 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2016.7726757

Object layout optimization in the JVM based on affinity

2016· article· en· W2547589727 on OpenAlexafffund
Taees Eimouri, Kenneth B. Kent, Aleksandar Micić, Karl Taylor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)University of New Brunswick
FundersAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyNew Brunswick Innovation Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceJavaCacheOperating systemLocalityObject (grammar)Parallel computingIBMArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improving spatial locality has a great impact on improving cache performance by reducing the number of cache misses. Object model optimization is one way to improve the locality of references inside particular objects. This paper extends the object layout optimization study by focusing on the internal layout of Java objects in applications running on the Java Virtual Machine (JVM). In this research, the IBM JVM is modified to be able to organize fields inside Java objects based on their access frequency and access order. Our results show reductions in the number of cache misses in the 20% range and an almost 40% speed up in some benchmarks.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
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 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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207