Numerical computing on the web: benchmarking for the future
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advances in execution environments for JavaScript and WebAssembly that run on a broad range of devices, from workstations and mobile phones to IoT devices, provide new opportunities for portable and web-based numerical computing. Indeed, numerous numerical libraries and applications are emerging on the web, including Tensorflow.js, JSMapReduce, and the NLG Protein Viewer. This paper evaluates the current performance of numerical computing on the web, including both JavaScript and WebAssembly, over a wide range of devices from workstations to IoT devices. We developed a new benchmarking approach, which allowed us to perform centralized benchmarking, including benchmarking on mobile and IoT devices. Using this approach we performed four performance studies using the Ostrich benchmark suite, a collection of numerical programs representing the numerical dwarf categories identified by Colella. We studied the performance evolution of JavaScript, the relative performance of WebAssembly, the performance of server-side Node.js, and a comprehensive performance showdown for a wide range of devices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".