MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242746803 · doi:10.1145/1555815.1555810

Achieving predictable performance through better memory controller placement in many-core CMPs

2009· article· en· W4242746803 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

VenueACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInterconnection Networks and Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemory controllerComputer scienceThread (computing)ChipMemory refreshInterconnectionRegistered memoryEmbedded systemParallel computingDistributed computingComputer hardwareSemiconductor memoryComputer memoryComputer networkOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the near term, Moore's law will continue to provide an increasing number of transistors and therefore an increasing number of on-chip cores. Limited pin bandwidth prevents the integration of a large number of memory controllers on-chip. With many cores, and few memory controllers, where to locate the memory controllers in the on-chip interconnection fabric becomes an important and as yet unexplored question. In this paper we show how the location of the memory controllers can reduce contention (hot spots) in the on-chip fabric and lower the variance in reference latency. This in turn provides predictable performance for memory-intensive applications regardless of the processing core on which a thread is scheduled. We explore the design space of on-chip fabrics to find optimal memory controller placement relative to different topologies (i.e. mesh and torus), routing algorithms, and workloads.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.717
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.224 · 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