Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Apache Spark has become one of the most popular engines for big data processing. Spark provides a platform‐independent, high‐abstraction programming paradigm for large‐scale data processing by leveraging the Java framework. Though it provides software portability across various machines, Java also limits the performance of distributed environments, such as Spark. While it may be unrealistic to rewrite platforms like Spark in a faster language, a more viable approach to mitigate its poor performance is to accelerate the computations while still working within the Java‐based framework. This paper demonstrates the feasibility of incorporating Field‐Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) acceleration into Spark and presents the performance benefits and bottlenecks of our FPGA‐accelerated Spark environment using a MapReduce implementation of the k‐means clustering algorithm, to show that acceleration is possible even when using a hardware platform that is not well optimized for performance. An important feature of our approach is that the use of FPGAs is completely transparent to the user through the use of library functions, which is a common way by which users access functions provided by Spark. Power users can further develop other computations using high‐level synthesis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
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".