MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293024962 · doi:10.1145/3489517.3530610

Optimizing parallel PREM compilation over nested loop structures

2022· article· en· W4293024962 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 59th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceParallel computingLoop tilingNested loop joinBenchmark (surveying)Kernel (algebra)SuiteThread (computing)Loop (graph theory)Scheduling (production processes)Operating systemCompiler

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider automatic parallelization of a computational kernel executed according to the PRedictable Execution Model (PREM), where each thread is divided into execution and memory phases. We target a scratchpad-based architecture, where memory phases are executed by a dedicated DMA component. We employ data analysis and loop tiling to split the kernel execution into segments, and schedule them based on a DAG representation of data and execution dependencies. Our main observation is that properly selecting tile sizes is key to optimize the makespan of the kernel. We thus propose a heuristic that efficiently searches for optimized tile size and core assignments over deeply nested loops, and demonstrate its applicability and performance compared to the state-of-the-art in PREM compilation using the PolyBench-NN benchmark suite.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.221 · 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