RISC-V Vectorization Coverage for HPC: A TSVC-Based Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The RISC-V Vector Extension (RVV) introduces scalable, vector-length agnostic operations with strong potential for high-performance computing (HPC). This paper presents a TSVC-based instruction coverage analysis of RVV to evaluate current compiler auto-vectorization support. We compile TSVC with GNU and LLVM under both vector-length agnostic (VLA) and vector-length specific (VLS) modes and analyze the emitted instructions against the RVV 1.0 specification. Our results quantify instruction usage across key groups, identify missed instructions, and classify the causes of failed vectorization, including compiler backend limitations, absent use cases in TSVC, and nontrivial or unsupported patterns. We also highlight TSVC’s limitations, including ambiguous kernel vectorizability and missing representations of modern HPC-relevant patterns. Finally, we suggest directions for enhancing benchmark suites to better reflect RVV capabilities and guide compiler development for HPC workloads.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".