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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the effect of warp sizing and scheduling on performance and efficiency in GPUs. We propose Variable Warp Sizing (VWS) which improves the performance of divergent applications by using a small base warp size in the presence of control flow and memory divergence. When appropriate, our proposed technique groups sets of these smaller warps together by ganging their execution in the warp scheduler, improving performance and energy efficiency for regular applications. Warp ganging is necessary to prevent performance degradation on regular workloads due to memory convergence slip, which results from the inability of smaller warps to exploit the same intra-warp memory locality as larger warps. This paper explores the effect of warp sizing on control flow divergence, memory divergence, and locality. For an estimated 5% area cost, our ganged scheduling microarchitecture results in a simulated 35% performance improvement on divergent workloads by allowing smaller groups of threads to proceed independently, and eliminates the performance degradation due to memory convergence slip that is observed when convergent applications are executed with smaller warp sizes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it