Exploiting Data-Parallelism on Multicore and SMT Systems for Implementing the Fractal Image Compressing Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a parallel modeling of a lossy image compression method based on the fractal theory and its evaluation over two versions of dual-core processors: with and without simultaneous multithreading (SMT) support. The idea is to observe the speedup on both configurations when changing application parameters and the number of threads at operating system level. Our target application is particularly relevant in the Big Data era. Huge amounts of data often need to be sent over low/medium bandwidth networks, and/or to be saved on devices with limited store capacity, motivating efficient image compression. Especially, the fractal compression presents a CPU-bound coding method known for offering higher indexes of file reduction through highly time-consuming calculus. The structure of the problem allowed us to explore data-parallelism by implementing an embarrassingly parallel version of the algorithm. Despite its simplicity, our modeling is useful for fully exploiting and evaluating the considered architectures. When comparing performance in both processors, the results demonstrated that the SMT-based one presented gains up to 29%. Moreover, they emphasized that a large number of threads does not always represent a reduction in application time. In average, the results showed a curve in which a strong time reduction is achieved when working with 4 and 8 threads when evaluating pure and SMT dual-core processors, respectively. The trend concerns a slow growing of the execution time when enlarging the number of threads due to both task granularity and threads management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".