PAPI: Exploiting Dynamic Parallelism in Large Language Model Decoding with a Processing-In-Memory-Enabled Computing System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are widely used for natural language understanding and text generation. An LLM model relies on a time-consuming step called LLM decoding to generate output tokens. Several prior works focus on improving the performance of LLM decoding using parallelism techniques, such as batching and speculative decoding. State-of-the-art LLM decoding has both compute-bound and memory-bound kernels. Some prior works statically identify and map these different kernels to a heterogeneous architecture consisting of both processing-in-memory (PIM) units and computation-centric accelerators (e.g., GPUs). We observe that characteristics of LLM decoding kernels (e.g., whether or not a kernel is memory-bound) can change dynamically due to parameter changes to meet user and/or system demands, making (1) static kernel mapping to PIM units and computation-centric accelerators suboptimal, and (2) one-size-fits-all approach of designing PIM units inefficient due to a large degree of heterogeneity even in memory-bound kernels.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".