A parallel Breadth-First Search using shared memory level-synchronization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breadth-first search (BFS) stands as a cornerstone in graph exploration techniques, enabling systematic traversal of a provided graph. As the digital era continues to burgeon, there has been a marked upswing in the need to process vast graph-based data sets. To harness the power of such data effectively, it becomes imperative to use computational tools efficiently. Parallelizing BFS emerges as a pivotal strategy in this regard, leveraging the expansive capabilities of multiprocessor systems to maximize efficiency. This manuscript introduces a level-synchronous parallel BFS that is predicated on the shared-memory model. Recognizing the potential pitfalls of such an approach, especially regarding overhead induced by implicit barriers and critical sections, meticulous optimization techniques are infused into the model. These strategies are not mere afterthoughts; they are woven into the fabric of the design, ensuring smooth operations even when scaled. To validate the efficacy of this model, a rigorous assessment is carried out using the Graph500 benchmark. This offers insights into the performance scale of the parallel BFS algorithm, especially focusing on its speedup in relation to the number of operational threads. Concluding this exploration, the paper delineates prospective avenues for refining and further enhancing the proposed parallel implementation, aiming for even greater efficiencies in future endeavors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".