A Hybrid Analytical DRAM Performance Model
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
As process technology scales, the number of transistors that can fit in a unit area has increased exponentially. Processor throughput, memory storage, and memory throughput have all been increasing at an exponential pace. As such, DRAM has become an ever-tightening bottleneck for applications with irregular memory access patterns. Computer architects in industry sometimes use ad hoc analytical modeling techniques in lieu of cycle-accurate performance simulation to identify critical design points. Moreover, analytical models can provide clear mathematical relationships for how system performance is affected by individual microarchitectural parameters, something that may be difficult to obtain with a detailed performance simulator. Modern DRAM controllers rely on Out-of-Order scheduling policies to increase row access locality and decrease the overheads of timing constraint delays. This paper proposes a hybrid analytical DRAM performance model that uses memory address traces to predict the DRAM efficiency of a DRAM system when using such a memory scheduling policy. To stress our model, we use a massively multithreaded architecture based upon contemporary GPUs to generate our memory address trace. We test our techniques on a set of real CUDA applications and find our hybrid analytical model predicts the DRAM efficiency to within 15.2% absolute error when arithmetically averaged across all applications.
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 | 0.001 | 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