Faster remainder by direct computation: Applications to compilers and software libraries
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
Summary On common processors, integer multiplication is many times faster than integer division. Dividing a numerator n by a divisor d is mathematically equivalent to multiplication by the inverse of the divisor ( n / d = n ∗1/ d ). If the divisor is known in advance, or if repeated integer divisions will be performed with the same divisor, it can be beneficial to substitute a less costly multiplication for an expensive division. Currently, the remainder of the division by a constant is computed from the quotient by a multiplication and a subtraction. However, if just the remainder is desired and the quotient is unneeded, this may be suboptimal. We present a generally applicable algorithm to compute the remainder more directly. Specifically, we use the fractional portion of the product of the numerator and the inverse of the divisor. On this basis, we also present a new and simpler divisibility algorithm to detect nonzero remainders. We also derive new tight bounds on the precision required when representing the inverse of the divisor. Furthermore, we present simple C implementations that beat the optimized code produced by state‐of‐the‐art C compilers on recent x64 processors (eg, Intel Skylake and AMD Ryzen), sometimes by more than 25%. On all tested platforms, including 64‐bit ARM and POWER8, our divisibility test functions are faster than state‐of‐the‐art Granlund‐Montgomery divisibility test functions, sometimes by more than 50%.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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