MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281916312 · doi:10.1145/3470496.3527421

Hydra

2022· article· en· W4281916312 on OpenAlexafffund
Moinuddin K. Qureshi, Aditya Rohan, Gururaj Saileshwar, Prashant J. Nair

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDramComputer scienceScalabilityStatic random-access memoryUniversal memoryMetadataDynamic random-access memoryMemory controllerRandom access memoryCAS latencyEmbedded systemParallel computingComputer hardwareOperating systemMemory managementSemiconductor memory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DRAM systems continue to be plagued by the Row-Hammer (RH) security vulnerability. The threshold number of row activations (TRH) required to induce RH has reduced rapidly from 139K in 2014 to 4.8K in 2020, and TRH is expected to reduce further, making RH even more severe for future DRAM. Therefore, solutions for mitigating RH should be effective not only at current TRH but also at future TRH. In this paper, we investigate the mitigation of RH at ultra-low thresholds (500 and below). At such thresholds, state-of-the-art solutions, which rely on SRAM or CAM for tracking row activations, incur impractical storage overheads (340KB or more per rank at TRH of 500), making such solutions unappealing for commercial adoption. Alternative solutions, which store per-row metadata in the addressable DRAM space, incur significant slowdown (25% on average) due to extra memory accesses, even in the presence of metadata caches. Our goal is to develop scalable RH mitigation while incurring low SRAM and performance overheads.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1680.104

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity and Verification in ComputingFrench-language works237,207