Analyzing Machine Learning Workloads Using a Detailed GPU Simulator
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) has recently emerged as an important application driving future architecture design. Traditionally, architecture research has used detailed simulators to model and measure the impact of proposed changes. However, current open-source, publicly available simulators lack support for running a full ML stack like PyTorch. High-confidence, cycle-accurate simulations are crucial for architecture research and without them, it is difficult to rapidly prototype new ideas. In this paper, we describe changes we made to GPGPU-Sim, a popular, widely used GPU simulator, to run ML applications that use cuDNN and PyTorch, two widely used frameworks for running Deep Neural Networks (DNNs). This work has the potential to enable significant microarchitectural research into GPUs for DNNs. Our results show that the modified simulator, which has been made publicly available with this paper <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sub> Source code available at https://github.com/gpgpu-sim/gpgpu-sim_distribution (dev branch), provides execution time results within 18% of real hardware. We further use it to study other ML workloads and demonstrate how the simulator identifies opportunities for architectural optimization that prior tools are unable to provide.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it