MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411486321 · doi:10.1145/3695053.3731054

Magellan: A High-Performance Loop-Guided Prefetcher for Indirect Memory Access

2025· article· en· W4411486321 on OpenAlexaff
Gelin Fu, Tian Xia, Prashant J. Nair, Mieszko Lis, Pengju Ren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer architectureParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graph analytics and sparse linear algebra applications heavily rely on indirect memory access (IMA).IMAs are characterized by poor temporal and spatial locality, which causes frequent high-latency DRAM accesses.While dedicated hardware prefetchers for IMA have been explored, they target narrow access patterns and tend to introduce significant hardware complexity.Software prefetching offers a promising alternative, leveraging compiler analysis to prefetch indirection patterns.However, existing software prefetchers struggle with sparse applications due to limited loop iterations and complex IMA patterns across nested loops.We propose Magellan, a novel loop-guided software prefetcher designed to detect and schedule IMA prefetches efficiently.Magellan introduces two key innovations: (1) extracting dependence graphs across loop levels to detect complex IMA patterns and (2) capturing inner-outer loop semantics to prefetch for both current and future iterations.We evaluate Magellan on 14 memory-intensive benchmarks using real-world datasets from social networks and web graphs.Compared to the best existing IMA software prefetcher, Magellan reduces cache misses by 25% and dynamic instruction counts by 14% on average.This results in a 1.14 average speedup, with performance gains of up to 1.41.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207