MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Thanos: High-Performance CPU-GPU Based Balanced Graph Partitioning Using Cross-Decomposition

2020· article· en· W3013345876 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dae Hee Kim, Rakesh Nagi, Deming Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVLSI and FPGA Design Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
KeywordsGraph partitionComputer scienceParallel computingSpeedupGraph bandwidthGraphStrength of a graphComputationTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmVoltage graphLine graph

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As graphs become larger and more complex, it is becoming nearly impossible to process them without graph partitioning. Graph partitioning creates many subgraphs which can be processed in parallel thus delivering high-speed computation results. However, graph partitioning is a difficult task. In this work, we introduce Thanos, a fast graph partitioning tool which uses the cross-decomposition algorithm that iteratively partitions a graph. It also produces balanced loads of partitions. The algorithm is well suited for parallel GPU programming which leads to fast and high-quality graph partitioning solutions. Experimental results show that we have achieved 30× speedup and 35% better edge cut reduction compared to the CPU version of the popular graph partitioner, METIS, on average.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.610

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVLSI and FPGA Design TechniquesFrench-language works237,207