A dynamic diffusion optimization method for irregular finite element graph partitioning,” The
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. To efficiently execute a finite element application program on a distributed memory multicomputer, we need to distribute nodes of a finite element graph to processors of a distributed memory multicomputer as evenly as possible and minimize the communication cost of processors. This partitioning problem is known to be NP-complete. Therefore, many heuristics have been proposed to find satisfactory sub-optimal solutions. Based on these heuristics, many graph partitioners have been developed. Among them, Jostle, Metis, and Party are considered as the best graph partitioners available up-to-date. For these three graph partitioners, in order to minimize the total cut-edges, in general, they allow 3 % to 5 % load imbalance among processors. This is a tradeoff between the communication cost and the computation cost of the partitioning problem. In this paper, we propose an optimization method, the dynamic diffusion method (DDM), to balance the 3 % to 5 % load imbalance allowed by these three graph partitioners while minimizing the total cut-edges among partitioned modules. To evaluate the proposed method, we compare the performance of the dynamic diffusion method with the directed diffusion method and the multilevel diffusion method on an IBM SP2 parallel machine. Three 2D and two 3D irregular finite element graphs are used as test samples. For each test sample, 3 % and 5 % load imbalance situations are tested. From the experimental results, we have the following conclusions. (1) The
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".