Latent Idiom Recognition for a Minimalist Functional Array Language Using Equality Saturation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accelerating programs is typically done by recognizing code idioms matching high-performance libraries or hardware interfaces. However, recognizing such idioms automatically is challenging. The idiom recognition machinery is difficult to write and requires expert knowledge. In addition, slight variations in the input program might hide the idiom and defeat the recognizer. This paper advocates for the use of a minimalist functional array language supporting a small, but expressive, set of operators. The minimalist design leads to a tiny sets of rewrite rules, which encode the language semantics. Crucially, the same minimalist language is also used to encode idioms. This removes the need for hand-crafted analysis passes, or for having to learn a complex domain-specific language to define the idioms. Coupled with equality saturation, this approach is able to match the core functions from the BLAS and PyTorch libraries on a set of computational kernels. Compared to reference C kernel implementations, the approach produces a geometric mean speedup of 1.46× for C programs using BLAS, when generating such programs from the high-level minimalist language.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".