MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232499519 · doi:10.1109/pact.1997.643999

Locality analysis for parallel C programs

2002· article· en· W4232499519 on OpenAlexafffund
Yingchun Zhu, L.J. Hendren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceLocalityCompilerProgrammerParallel computingPointer (user interface)Programming languageMemory modelShared memoryComputer hardware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many parallel architectures support a memory model where some memory accesses are local, and thus inexpensive, while other memory accesses are remote, and potentially quite expensive. In order to achieve good parallel performance, it is often necessary to reduce the number of remote memory accesses. This can be done by the programmer, the compiler, or a combination of both. The overall goal is to minimize the work required by the programmer, and have the compiler automate the process as much as possible. The paper reports on compiler techniques for decreasing the number of remote memory accesses using locality analysis for a parallel dialect of C called EARTH-C. The locality analysis uses an algorithm inspired by type inference algorithms for fast points-to analysis. The algorithm estimates when an indirect reference via a pointer can be safely assumed to be a local access. The locality inference algorithm is also used to guide the automatic specialization of functions in order to take advantage of locality scientific to particular calling contexts. The locality analysis and automatic specialization has been implemented in the EARTH-C compiler which produces low level threaded code for the EARTH-C multithreaded architecture. Experimental results are presented for a set of benchmarks that operate on irregular, dynamically allocated data structures. The techniques give moderate to significant speedups and they do lessen the burden on the programmer.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207