MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751186152 · doi:10.1177/0037549717726595

Increasing the performance of a Discrete Event System Specification simulator by means of computational resource usage “activity” models

2017· article· en· W2751186152 on OpenAlexaff
Yentl Van Tendeloo, Hans Vangheluwe

Bibliographic record

VenueSIMULATION · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDEVSComputer scienceDiscrete event simulationRotation formalisms in three dimensionsBenchmark (surveying)Domain (mathematical analysis)Event (particle physics)Set (abstract data type)Formalism (music)SimulationDistributed computingModeling and simulationProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Domain-specific simulators often have an edge on general-purpose simulators in terms of performance. Their intricate knowledge of the domain allows them to aggressively optimize and take shortcuts. In contrast, simulators for more general formalisms, such as Discrete Event System Specification (DEVS), need to support a wider set of models. Their inability to use domain information prevents DEVS simulators from achieving as high performance as their domain-specific variants. To solve this problem, we introduce a way to enhance the simulation performance of DEVS models through the use of computational resource usage models, often termed “activity” models. These models augment general-purpose DEVS models with domain-specific information, which can be used by the simulator. We apply this information in the context of data structure optimization, load balancing, and model allocation. Activity-awareness is a non-invasive extension to the DEVS formalism, meaning that activity-augmented models remain perfectly valid for use in activity-unaware simulators. Similarly, models without activity can still be simulated by an activity-aware simulator. Our approach is validated by making PythonPDEVS, a Parallel DEVS simulator, activity-aware and evaluating the performance impact on a set of benchmark models.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSIMULATIONSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207