MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Energy-Efficient Energy Analytics Using a General Purpose Graphics Processing Unit

2020· article· en· W3138924132 on OpenAlexaff
Sagnik De, Wojciech Golab

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnergy consumptionGraphics processing unitSmart meterRaw dataCentral processing unitEfficient energy useElectricity meterData analysisGraphicsBig dataData processingReal-time computingDatabaseElectricityPower (physics)Data miningComputer hardwareOperating systemEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smart meters allow energy providers to monitor their customers' power consumption. This fine-grained data stream generates many data points, which hides broader trends in power consumption and makes it difficult for energy providers to make decisions regarding a specific customer or a subset of customers. Since the raw power data has little direct use, various algorithms have been proposed to lower the dimensionality of data, discover trends, study relationships between different features of collected data, and summarize data. These analytical techniques make the data more palatable to the end user. Analyzing smart meter data is computationally intensive as there is a large number of households connected to one energy provider, and each household generates years of data at hourly intervals. To speed up the analysis, clusters of commodity computers have been used. Ironically, such clusters consume substantial energy - studies have shown that about 10% of the world-wide supply of electrical power is consumed by the computing infrastructure. In this paper, we describe the use of a graphics processing unit (GPU) to analyze smart meter data, and compare its performance with a conventional multi-core CPU. We discuss the technical challenges in programming a GPU effectively to process smart meter data, and demonstrate experimentally that this choice of implementation enables substantial improvements in terms of both running time and energy-efficiency as compared to the multi-core CPU.

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 score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207