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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most systems that support speculative parallelization, like hardware transactional memory (HTM), do not support nested parallelism. This sacrifices substantial parallelism and precludes composing parallel algorithms. And the few HTMs that do support nested parallelism focus on parallelizing at the coarsest (shallowest) levels, incurring large overheads that squander most of their potential. We present FRACTAL, a new execution model that supports unordered and timestamp-ordered nested parallelism. FRACTAL lets programmers seamlessly compose speculative parallel algorithms, and lets the architecture exploit parallelism at all levels. FRACTAL can parallelize a broader range of applications than prior speculative execution models. We design a FRACTAL implementation that extends the Swarm architecture and focuses on parallelizing at the finest (deepest) levels. Our approach sidesteps the issues of nested parallel HTMs and uncovers abundant fine-grain parallelism. As a result, FRACTAL outperforms prior speculative architectures by up to 88x at 256 cores.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it