MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809954131 · doi:10.1109/isit.2018.8437473

Hierarchical Coded Computation

2018· preprint· en· W2809954131 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicStochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputationErasureMatrix multiplicationAlgorithmErasure codeMultiplication (music)Partition (number theory)Matrix (chemical analysis)Coding (social sciences)Theoretical computer scienceDecoding methodsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coded computation is a method to mitigate “stragglers” in distributed computing systems through the use of error correction coding that has lately received significant attention. First used in vector-matrix multiplication, the range of application was later extended to include matrix-matrix multiplication, heterogeneous networks, convolution, and approximate computing. A drawback to previous results is they completely ignore work completed by stragglers. While stragglers are slower compute nodes, in many settings the amount of work completed by stragglers can be non-negligible. Thus, in this work, we propose a hierarchical coded computation method that exploits the work completed by all compute nodes. We partition each node's computation into layers of sub-computations such that each layer can be treated as (distinct) erasure channel. We then design different erasure codes for each layer so that all layers have the same failure exponent. We propose design guidelines to optimize parameters of such codes. Numerical results show the proposed scheme has an improvement of a factor of 1.5 in the expected finishing time compared to previous work.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.262 · 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