Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asymmetric multicore processors (AMP) consist of cores exposing the same instruction-set architecture (ISA) but varying in size, frequency, power consumption and performance. AMPs were shown to be more power efficient than conventional symmetric multicore processors, and it is therefore likely that future multicore systems will include cores of different types. AMPs derive their efficiency from core specialization: instruction streams can be assigned to run on the cores best suited to their demands for architectural resources. System efficiency is improved as a result. To perform effective matching of threads to cores, the thread scheduler must be asymmetry-aware; and while asymmetry-aware schedulers for operating systems are a well studied topic, asymmetry-awareness in hypervisors has not been addressed. A hypervisor must be asymmetry-aware to enable proper functioning of asymmetry-aware guest operating systems; otherwise they will be ineffective in virtual environments. Furthermore, a hypervisor must ensure that asymmetric cores are shared among multiple guests in a fair fashion or in accordance with their priorities. This work for the first time implements simple changes to the hypervisor scheduler, required to make it asymmetry-aware, and evaluates the benefits and overheads of these asymmetry-aware mechanisms. Our evaluation was performed using an open source hypervisor Xen on a real multicore system where asymmetry was emulated via CPU frequency scaling. We compared the asymmetry-aware hypervisor to default Xen. Our results indicate that asymmetry support can be implemented with low overheads, and resulting performance improvements can be significant, reaching up to 36% in our experiments. Most performance improvements are derived from the fact that an asymmetry-aware hypervisor ensures that the fast cores do not go idle before slow cores and from the fact that it maps virtual cores to physical cores for asymmetry-aware guests according to the guest's expectations. Other benefits from asymmetry awareness are fairer sharing of computing resources among VMs and more stable execution times.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.789 | 0.673 |
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".