GPUDet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nondeterminism is a key challenge in developing multithreaded applications. Even with the same input, each execution of a multithreaded program may produce a different output. This behavior complicates debugging and limits one's ability to test for correctness. This non-reproducibility situation is aggravated on massively parallel architectures like graphics processing units (GPUs) with thousands of concurrent threads. We believe providing a deterministic environment to ease debugging and testing of GPU applications is essential to enable a broader class of software to use GPUs. Many hardware and software techniques have been proposed for providing determinism on general-purpose multi-core processors. However, these techniques are designed for small numbers of threads. Scaling them to thousands of threads on a GPU is a major challenge. This paper proposes a scalable hardware mechanism, GPUDet, to provide determinism in GPU architectures. In this paper we characterize the existing deterministic and nondeterministic aspects of current GPU execution models, and we use these observations to inform GPUDet's design. For example, GPUDet leverages the inherent determinism of the SIMD hardware in GPUs to provide determinism within a wavefront at no cost. GPUDet also exploits the Z-Buffer Unit, an existing GPU hardware unit for graphics rendering, to allow parallel out-of-order memory writes to produce a deterministic output. Other optimizations in GPUDet include deterministic parallel execution of atomic operations and a workgroup-aware algorithm that eliminates unnecessary global synchronizations. Our simulation results indicate that GPUDet incurs only 2X slowdown on average over a baseline nondeterministic architecture, with runtime overheads as low as 4% for compute-bound applications, despite running GPU kernels with thousands of threads. We also characterize the sources of overhead for deterministic execution on GPUs to provide insights for further optimizations.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".