Code Generation for Room Acoustics Simulations with Complex Boundary Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The software and hardware landscape of high performance computing is expanding faster than computational scientists can take advantage of new frameworks and platforms. In an ideal world, simulation codes would be written once in a high-level manner and achieve high-performance anywhere, but the reality is more complicated. Currently, high-level solutions lack support for sophisticated physical models across different parallel backends. Existing solutions with appropriate support are low-level and, therefore, tied to a specific hardware target. We present an approach that tackles this problem with a modularized separation of concerns: a middle layer separates the management of generating low-level optimized code from a high-level programmable layer. In this paper, we describe how our contributions to this hardware-agnostic, middle-layer language provide functionality for complex room acoustics simulations, a type of Finite Difference Time Domain (FDTD) simulation using stencils which is representative of many other 3D wave models. We show that we are able to develop performance-portable codes for these types of models which leads to performance on par with tuned hand-written implementations. Furthermore, we show how this approach is used to develop both host and device side code for multi-kernel applications, as is required for room acoustics simulations with complex boundaries.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".