MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786904362 · doi:10.1145/3158208

A Comparative Study of Predictable DRAM Controllers

2018· article· en· W2786904362 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Embedded Computing Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicReal-Time Systems Scheduling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsDramComputer scienceLatency (audio)Memory controllerBridge (graph theory)Controller (irrigation)State (computer science)Dynamic random-access memoryArbitrationEmbedded systemDistributed computingComputer hardwareTelecommunicationsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the research community has introduced several predictable dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) controller designs that provide improved worst-case timing guarantees for real-time embedded systems. The proposed controllers significantly differ in terms of arbitration, configuration, and simulation environment, making it difficult to assess the contribution of each approach. To bridge this gap, this article provides the first comprehensive evaluation of state-of-the-art predictable DRAM controllers. We propose a categorization of available controllers, and introduce an analytical performance model based on worst-case latency. We then conduct an extensive evaluation for all state-of-the-art controllers based on a common simulation platform, and discuss findings and recommendations.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.268 · 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