MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243187110 · doi:10.1145/1327312.1327316

Investigating cache energy and latency break-even points in high performance processors

2007· article· en· W4243187110 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 · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCacheCache algorithmsComputer scienceCache pollutionSmart CacheCache invalidationCache coloringParallel computingLatency (audio)Page cacheMESI protocolEfficient energy useCPU cacheTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work we study how cache complexity impacts energy and performance in high performance processors. Moreover, we estimate cache energy budget for two high performance processors. We calculate energy and latency break-even points for realistic and ideal cache organizations for different applications. We show that design efforts made to reduce cache miss rate are only justifiable from the energy and performance point of view only if the associated latency and energy overhead remain below the calculated break-even points. Furthermore, we show that, for the processors and applications studied here, the instruction cache has a lower latency break-even point compared to the data cache. However, investing energy in the data cache is likely to result in better energy efficiency compared to the instruction cache. We also study alternative cache configurations for different processors and investigate if such alternatives would improve energy efficiency.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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