MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965782179 · doi:10.1109/ipdpsw.2019.00103

AHEAD: A Tool for Projecting Next-Generation Hardware Enhancements on GPU-Accelerated Systems

2019· article· en· W2965782179 on OpenAlexafffund
Hazem A. Abdelhafez, Christopher Zimmer, Sudharshan S. Vazhkudai, Matei Ripeanu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersOffice of ScienceInstitute for Computing, Information and Cognitive SystemsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTitan (rocket family)SupercomputerComputer scienceProfiling (computer programming)Node (physics)Computer architecturePetascale computingExascale computingSummitParallel computingOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting with the Titan supercomputer (at the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, OLCF) in 2012, top supercomputers have Increasingly leveraged the performance of GPUs to support large-scale computational science. The current No. 1 machine, the 200 petaflop Summit system at OLCF, is a GPU-based machine. Accelerator-based architectures, however, add additional complexity due to node heterogeneity. To inform procurement decisions, supercomputing centers need the tools to quickly model the impact of changes of the node architectures on application performance. We present AHEAD, a profiling and modeling tool to quantify the impact of intra-node communication mechanism (e.g., PCI or NVLink) on application performance. Our experiments show average weighted relative errors of ~19% and ~23% for five CORAL-2 (a collaboration between multiple US Department of Energy, DOE, labs to procure Exascale systems) and 12 Rodinia benchmarks respectively, without running the applications on the target future node.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.777
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207