MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2635077637 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2017.7946808

DCM: A Python-based middleware for parallel processing applications on small scale devices

2017· article· en· W2635077637 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Lescisin, Qusay H. Mahmoud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSpeedupPython (programming language)Parallel computingProgramming paradigmSoftwareMiddleware (distributed applications)Distributed computingData-intensive computingSupercomputerSource lines of codeProgramming languageGrid computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parallel programming has been an active area of research in computer science and software engineering for many years. Parallel programming should ideally provide a linear speedup to computational problems. In reality, this is rarely the case. While there are some algorithms that cannot be parallelized, many that can, still fail to provide the ideal linear speedup. For algorithms that can benefit from parallelization, it is often much more difficult to develop the parallel code than it is to write a sequential, single-threaded program. The existence of this gap between ideal parallel computing and parallel computing on real hardware and software has caused many developers to create new solutions in an attempt to move real parallel computing closer to its idealized model. While many of these solutions provide a great performance benefit on large-scale systems, they often lag behind when deployed on small-scale systems. In this paper, we introduce the design and implementation of DCM (Distributed Computing Middleware) - a Python-based middleware for writing parallel processing applications for execution on clusters of small-scale devices. Evaluation results show the feasibility of DCM. Our middleware and its test cases are publicly available on GitHub.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207