Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Daero Kim
dblp:196/1591
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Memory systems · 56% Cloud and datacenter computing · 28% Energy-efficient computing · 17% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cloud and datacenter computing › resource management
datacenter memory management |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Agile-DRAM: Agile Trade-Offs in Memory Capacity, Latency, and Energy for Data Centers · HPCA 2024 |
Memory systems
DRAM |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Agile-DRAM: Agile Trade-Offs in Memory Capacity, Latency, and Energy for Data Centers · HPCA 2024 |
Memory systems › DRAM
DRAM architecture |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Agile-DRAM: Agile Trade-Offs in Memory Capacity, Latency, and Energy for Data Centers · HPCA 2024 |
Energy-efficient computing › power management › memory power management
DRAM power reduction |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Agile-DRAM: Agile Trade-Offs in Memory Capacity, Latency, and Energy for Data Centers · HPCA 2024 |
Energy-efficient computing
power management |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Agile-DRAM: Agile Trade-Offs in Memory Capacity, Latency, and Energy for Data Centers · HPCA 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
runtime mode transition · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Carbon-Aware and Fault-Tolerant Migration of Deep Learning Workloads in the Geo-Distributed CloudabstractRecently, many deep learning models have been trained in geographically distributed data centers. The carbon emissions produced by training the models may pose a significant threat to climate change like increasing temperatures. Existing studies have a hardship in shifting the workload of training models to a data center with low carbon emissions. So, they fail to ensure low emissions of the workload during training, especially when long-term workloads like Large Language Models (LLMs) are trained. To cope with this problem, we propose a method that shifts the workload to a cloud with low carbon emissions while enduring a lack of computational resources. Specifically, we define a task scheduler that includes states and their transitions to migrate mini-batches dynamically. Next, we present a fault-tolerant control that optimizes a GPU frequency to adapt to workload variations of training models while guaranteeing its power consumption. Last, we conducted exhaustive experiments using real-world data in terms of carbon emissions, transfer time, and power consumption compared to state-of-the-art methods. Jeonghyeon Park, Daero Kim, Jiseon Kim, Jungkyu Han, Sejin Chun |
CLOUD | 2 |
| 2024 | Agile-DRAM: Agile Trade-Offs in Memory Capacity, Latency, and Energy for Data CentersabstractData centers frequently face significant memory under-utilization due to factors such as infrastructure overprovisioning, inefficient workload scheduling, and limited server configurations. This paper introduces Agile-DRAM, a novel DRAM architecture that addresses this issue by flexibly converting the under-utilized memory capacity into enhanced latency performance and reduced power consumption. Through minor modifications to the conventional DRAM architecture, Agile-DRAM supports multiple operational modes: low-latency, lowpower, and the default max-capacity mode. Notably, Agile-DRAM facilitates agile transitions between these modes in response to workload fluctuations in data centers at runtime. Evaluation results demonstrate that the low-latency mode can boost singlecore execution speed by up to 25.8% and diminish energy usage by up to 22.4%. Similarly, the low-power mode can reduce DRAM standby and self-refresh power by 31.6% and 85.7%, respectively. Jaeyoon Lee, Wonyeong Jung, Dongwhee Kim, Daero Kim, Junseung Lee, Jungrae Kim |
HPCA | 4 |