Scale-Free Graph Processing on a NUMA Machine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern shared-memory systems embrace the NUMA architecture which has proven to be more scalable than the SMP architecture. In many ways, a NUMA system resembles a shared-nothing distributed system: physically distinct processing units and memory regions. Memory accesses to remote NUMA domains are more expensive than local accesses. This poses the opportunity to transfer the know-how and design of distributed graph processing to develop shared-memory graph processing solutions optimized for NUMA systems. To this end, we explore if a distributed-memory like middleware that makes graph partitioning and communication between partitions explicit, can improve the performance on a NUMA system. We design and implement a NUMA aware graph processing framework that embraces design philosophies of distributed graph processing system: in particular explicit partitioning and inter-partition communication, and at the same time exploits optimization opportunities specific to single-node systems. We demonstrate up to 13.9x speedup over a state-of-the-art NUMA-aware framework, Polymer and up to 3.7x scalability on a four-socket NUMA machine using graphs with tens of billions of edges.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".