MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094383542

Scalable Parallel DFPN Search

2014· article· en· W3094383542 on OpenAlex
Jakub Pawlewicz, Ryan Hayward

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScalabilityHeuristicsParallel computingDomain (mathematical analysis)Transposition (logic)Parallel algorithmTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmArtificial intelligenceMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We present Scalable Parallel Depth-First Proof Number Search, a new shared-memory parallel version of depth-first proof number search. Based on the serial DFPN 1+ε method of Pawlewicz and Lew, SPDFPN searches effectively even as the transposition table becomes almost full, and so can solve large problems. SPDFPN uses two parameters and proof and disproof numbers in assigning jobs to threads. It uses no domain-specific knowledge or heuristics and so can be used in any domain. We tested SPDFPN on problems from the game of Hex. SPDFPN scales well: on a 24-core machine and a 4.2-hour single-thread task, parallel efficiency ranges from 0.8 on 4 threads to 0.74 on 16 threads. SPDFPN performs well on hard problems: it solved all previously intractable 9×9 Hex opening moves, with the hardest opening taking 111 days. It also solved one 10×10 Hex opening move, in 63 days. Previously, no computer or human had ever solved a 10×10 opening move. This is the state of the art in Hex solving. 1

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.246 · 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