MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239826705 · doi:10.1109/micro.2016.7783714

MIMD synchronization on SIMT architectures

2016· article· en· W4239826705 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMIMDCompilerParallel computingControl flowSynchronization (alternating current)Programming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the single-instruction multiple-threads (SIMT) execution model, small groups of scalar threads operate in lockstep. Within each group, current SIMT hardware implementations serialize the execution of threads that follow different paths, and to ensure efficiency, revert to lockstep execution as soon as possible. These constraints must be considered when adapting algorithms that employ synchronization. A deadlock-free program on a multiple-instruction multiple-data (MIMD) architecture may deadlock on a SIMT machine. To avoid this, programmers need to restructure control flow with SIMT scheduling constraints in mind. This requires programmers to be familiar with the underlying SIMT hardware. In this paper, we propose a static analysis technique that detects SIMT deadlocks by inspecting the application control flow graph (CFG). We further propose a CFG transformation that avoids SIMT deadlocks when synchronization is local to a function. Both the analysis and the transformation algorithms are implemented as LLVM compiler passes. Finally, we propose an adaptive hardware reconvergence mechanism that supports MIMD synchronization without changing the application CFG, but which can leverage our compiler analysis to gain efficiency. The static detection has a false detection rate of only 4%-5%. The automated transformation has an average performance overhead of 8.2%-10.9% compared to manual transformation. Our hardware approach performs on par with the compiler transformation, however, it avoids synchronization scope limitations, static instruction and register overheads, and debuggability challenges that are present in the compiler only solution.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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