Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the number of NUMA system's cache coherency protocols based on the IEEE Std. 1596-1992, Standard for Scalable Coherent Interface (SCI) Specification increases, it is important to review this complex protocol to determine if the protocol can be enhanced in any way. This research provides two realizable extensions to the standard SCI cache protocol. Both of these extensions lie in the basic confines of the SCI architectures. The first extension is a simplification to the SCI protocol in the area of prepending to a sharing list. Depending if the cache line is marked "Fresh" or "Gone", the flow of events is distinctly different. The guaranteed forward progress extension is a simplification to the SCI protocol in this area; making the act of prepending to an existing sharing list independent of whether the line is in the "Fresh" or "Gone" state. In addition, this extension eliminates the need for SCI command, as well as distributes the resource requirements of supplying data of a shared line equally among all nodes of the sharing list. The second extension addresses the time to purge (or invalidate) an SCI sharing list. This extension provides a realizable solution that allows the node being invalidated to acknowledge the request prior to the completion of the invalidation while maintaining the memory consistency model of the processors of the system. The resulting cache protocol was developed and implemented for Sequent Computer System Inc. NUMA-Q system. The cache protocol was run on systems ranging from eight to sixty four processors and provided between 7% and 20% reduction in time to invalidate an SCI sharing list.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".