MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ConCCL: Optimizing ML Concurrent Computation and Communication with GPU DMA Engines

2025· article· en· W4412987079 on OpenAlexaff
Anirudha Agrawal, Shaizeen Aga, Suchita Pati, Mahzabeen Islam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicParallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceParallel computingComputationComputational scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concurrent computation and communication (C3) is a pervasive paradigm in ML and other domains, making its performance optimization crucial. In this paper, we carefully characterize C3 in ML on GPUs, which are most widely deployed for ML training and inference. We observe that while C3 leads to performance uplifts, the uplifts are far lower than ideal speedups (serial computation and communication versus maximum of computation or communication; all times from isolated executions). That is, C3 on average achieves only 21 % of ideal speedup. This is so, due to known challenges of compute and memory interference between concurrent GPU kernels (that is, sharing of GPU's compute units, caches and HBM). To attain better performance for C3, first, we evaluate dual strategies of schedule prioritization and careful resource partitioning of compute units on GPUs to push performance attained with C3 (on average 42 % of ideal speedup). We also provide heuristics that can guide a runtime while employing these strategies. To further enhance$\mathbf{C 3}$performance, we propose to mitigate C3 interference by offloading communication tasks to the GPU's DMA engines. To this end, we build concurrent communication collectives (ConCCL) proof-of-concepts that harness DMA engines for communication. We show how ConCCL considerably closes the gap between realized and ideal speedup for C3 (on average 72 % of ideal speedup is realized, up to$1.67 \times$speedup). Overall, our work makes a strong case for GPU DMA engine advancements to better support C3 on GPUs.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207