MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209648960 · doi:10.1145/3520484

Sparsity-Specific Code Optimization using Expression Trees

2022· article· en· W3209648960 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionAdvanced Micro DevicesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceParallel computingComputationCode (set theory)Kernel (algebra)GraphGraphicsGenerator (circuit theory)Computer graphicsSource codeSet (abstract data type)AlgorithmCode generationComputational scienceTheoretical computer scienceComputer graphics (images)Key (lock)MathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce a code generator that converts unoptimized C++ code operating on sparse data into vectorized and parallel CPU or GPU kernels. Our approach unrolls the computation into a massive expression graph, performs redundant expression elimination, grouping, and then generates an architecture-specific kernel to solve the same problem, assuming that the sparsity pattern is fixed, which is a common scenario in many applications in computer graphics and scientific computing. We show that our approach scales to large problems and can achieve speedups of two orders of magnitude on CPUs and three orders of magnitude on GPUs, compared to a set of manually optimized CPU baselines. To demonstrate the practical applicability of our approach, we employ it to optimize popular algorithms with applications to physical simulation and interactive mesh deformation.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.778
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.237 · 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