MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792146644 · doi:10.1002/spe.2567

Hardware trace reconstruction of runtime compiled code

2018· article· en· W2792146644 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

VenueSoftware Practice and Experience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTRACE (psycholinguistics)ExecutableTracingCode (set theory)Kernel (algebra)SoftwareLinux kernelOperating systemGranularityOverhead (engineering)Source codeJust-in-time compilationParallel computingEmbedded systemProgramming languageVirtual machine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Hardware tracing has emerged as a low‐cost technique to analyze systems at a very fine granularity, thus mitigating the need for software‐only trace approaches for performance analysis. State‐of‐the‐art trace hardware on modern Intel and ARM processors allows recording change‐of‐flow instructions in executable binaries, such as branches, for off‐line reconstruction. This conventional userspace–based trace reconstruction, however, is not robust enough in the common scenarios where runtime code is being generated, compiled, and executed. We therefore propose a novel kernel‐assisted mechanism called FlowJIT to reconstruct hardware traces with a low overhead of around 1.3 μ s per code page modification event. We further show the efficacy or our technique with the help of 2 illustrative usecases that cover the JIT compiled code scenario and a same‐page instruction modification scenario. Our implementation has been open sourced as a patch for the Linux kernel.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.269 · 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