and Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de l’Université Laval,
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The future of high-performance computing is aligning itself towards the efficient use of highly parallel computing environments. One application where the use of massive parallelism comes in-stinctively is Monte Carlo simulations, where a large number of independent events have to be simulated. At the core of the Monte Carlo simulation lies the Random Number Generator (RNG). In this paper, the massively parallel implementation of a collection of pseudo-random number gen-erators on a graphics processing unit (GPU) is presented. The results of the GPU implementation, in terms of samples/s, effective bandwidth and operations per second, are presented. A compar-ison with other implementations on different hardware platforms, in terms of samples/s, power efficiency and cost-benefit, is also presented. Random numbers generation throughput of up to ≈18MSamples/s have been achieved on the graphics hardware used. Efficient hardware utilization, in terms of operations per second, has reached ≈98 % of the possible integer operation throughput.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 it