MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898048683 · doi:10.1145/3243176.3243179

ComP-net

2018· article· en· W2898048683 on OpenAlexaff
Michael LeBeane, Khaled Hamidouche, Brad Benton, Maurício Breternitz, Steven K. Reinhardt, Lizy K. John

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersFaculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de LisboaFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaU.S. Department of EnergyAdvanced Micro DevicesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceStencilScalabilityLatency (audio)Kernel (algebra)Energy consumptionCacheHost (biology)Parallel computingEfficient energy useCache coherenceDistributed computingCPU cacheOperating systemComputational scienceCache algorithmsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current state-of-the-art in GPU networking advocates a host-centric model that reduces performance and increases code complexity. Recently, researchers have explored several techniques for networking within a GPU kernel itself. These approaches, however, suffer from high latency, waste energy on the host, and are not scalable with larger/more GPUs on a node. In this work, we introduce Command Processor Networking (ComP-Net), which leverages the availability of scalar cores integrated on the GPU itself to provide high-performance intra-kernel networking. ComP-Net enables efficient synchronization between the Command Processors and Compute Units on the GPU through a line locking scheme implemented in the GPU's shared last-level cache. We illustrate that ComP-Net can improve application performance by up to 20% and provide up to 50% reduction in energy consumption vs. competing networking techniques across a Jacobi stencil, allreduce collective, and machine learning applications.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0880.042

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207