MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285060868 · doi:10.1109/mm.2022.3176529

Compiling for the IBM Matrix Engine for Enterprise Workloads

2022· article· en· W4285060868 on OpenAlexaff
João P. L. de Carvalho, José E. Moreira, José Nelson Amaral

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Micro · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceOperandMatrix multiplicationIBMParallel computingCode (set theory)SIMDMatrix (chemical analysis)Product (mathematics)Set (abstract data type)Computer architectureOperating systemProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The matrix-multiply assist (MMA) facility is the latest addition to IBM’s power instruction set architecture and first shipped in the recently introduced POWER10 processor. MMA is designed to accelerate matrix–matrix operations, such as matrix multiplication and convolution, using instructions that compute the outer product of vector-register operands. Outer product computations have been used for decades in linear algebra libraries to deliver high-performance implementations of matrix operations. Such libraries use conventional single-instruction–multiple-data (SIMD) instructions to emulate outer product operations. MMA in POWER10 is the first hardware with direct support for outer product operations released in the market. MMA operates with the widest diversity of data types compared to any accelerator design currently announced. Unleashing the high-performance enabled by MMA requires careful code generation. Two key considerations for optimal MMA code performance are 1) the choice of accumulation layout when maximizing the using the accumulators and 2) the selection of matrix access order. This article shows that over 92% of peak performance in POWER10 with MMA can be achieved when the code generation makes the right choices.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.140

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.034

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.264 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE MicroSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207