MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234648926 · doi:10.1145/1273440.1250697

BulkSC

2007· article· en· W4234648926 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Luís Ceze, James Tuck, Pablo Montesinos, Josep Torrellas

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation - Québec
KeywordsComputer scienceConsistency (knowledge bases)Consistency modelSequential consistencyDecoupling (probability)Parallel computingWeak consistencySimple (philosophy)Strong consistencyDistributed computingComputer architectureData consistencyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While Sequential Consistency (SC) is the most intuitive memory consistency model and the one most programmers likely assume, current multiprocessors do not support it. Instead, they support more relaxed models that deliver high performance. SC implementations are considered either too slow or -- when they can match the performance of relaxed models -- too difficult to implement. In this paper, we propose Bulk Enforcement of SC (BulkSC), anovel way of providing SC that is simple to implement and offers performance comparable to Release Consistency (RC). The idea is to dynamically group sets of consecutive instructions into chunks that appear to execute atomically and in isolation. The hardware enforces SC at the coarse grain of chunks which, to the program, appears as providing SC at the individual memory access level. BulkSC keeps the implementation simple by largely decoupling memory consistency enforcement from processor structures. Moreover, it delivers high performance by enabling full memory access reordering and overlapping within chunks and across chunks. We describe a complete system architecture that supports BulkSC and show that it delivers performance comparable to RC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0340.011

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture NewsSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207