MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408199075 · doi:10.3390/electronics14051048

A Survey of Advancements in Scheduling Techniques for Efficient Deep Learning Computations on GPUs

2025· article· en· W4408199075 on OpenAlexaff
Rupinder Kaur, Arghavan Asad, Seham Al Abdul Wahid, Farah Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceExploitScheduling (production processes)Deep learningComputationComputer architectureLatency (audio)Efficient energy useDistributed computingParallel computingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This comprehensive survey explores recent advancements in scheduling techniques for efficient deep learning computations on GPUs. The article highlights challenges related to parallel thread execution, resource utilization, and memory latency in GPUs, which can lead to suboptimal performance. The surveyed research focuses on novel scheduling policies to improve memory latency tolerance, exploit parallelism, and enhance GPU resource utilization. Additionally, it explores the integration of prefetching mechanisms, fine-grained warp scheduling, and warp switching strategies to optimize deep learning computations. These techniques demonstrate significant improvements in throughput, memory bank parallelism, and latency reduction. The insights gained from this survey can guide researchers, system designers, and practitioners in developing more efficient and powerful deep learning systems on GPUs. Furthermore, potential future research directions include advanced scheduling techniques, energy efficiency considerations, and the integration of emerging computing technologies. Through continuous advancement in scheduling techniques, the full potential of GPUs can be unlocked for a wide range of applications and domains, including GPU-accelerated deep learning, task scheduling, resource management, memory optimization, and more.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207