Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Hugo Brunie
dblp:232/6504
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-5875-4660ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 first-author · 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
2 papers |
High-performance computing · 100% | |
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Compilers and program optimization · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Deep learning architectures and training · 100% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Computational science and engineering · 100% |
Topics — the 6 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
High-performance computing › performance optimization
auto-tuning |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023 |
High-performance computing › tensor computation
convolution |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023 |
High-performance computing
performance optimization |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023 |
High-performance computing
tensor computation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023 |
Compilers and program optimization › approximate computing
precision tuning |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Tuning floating-point precision using dynamic program information and temporal locality · SC 2020 |
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
convolution |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
random sampling · 1.3loop transformation · 1.3temporal locality exploitation · 1.3search space refinement · 1.3dynamic program analysis · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You ThinkabstractA wide range of scientific and machine learning applications depend on highly optimized implementations of tensor computations. Exploiting the full capacity of a given processor architecture remains a challenging task, due to the complexity of the microarchitectural features that come into play when seeking near-peak performance. Among the state-of-the-art techniques for loop transformations for performance optimization, AutoScheduler [Zheng et al. 2020a ] tends to outperform other systems. It often yields higher performance as compared to vendor libraries, but takes a large number of runs to converge, while also involving a complex training environment. In this article, we define a structured configuration space that enables much faster convergence to high-performance code versions, using only random sampling of candidates. We focus on two-dimensional convolutions on CPUs. Compared to state-of-the-art libraries, our structured search space enables higher performance for typical tensor shapes encountered in convolution stages in deep learning pipelines. Compared to auto-tuning code generators like AutoScheduler, it prunes the search space while increasing the density of efficient implementations. We analyze the impact on convergence speed and performance distribution, on two Intel x86 processors and one ARM AArch64 processor. We match or outperform the performance of the state-of-the-art oneDNN library and TVM’s AutoScheduler, while reducing the autotuning effort by at least an order of magnitude. Nicolas Tollenaere, Guillaume Iooss, Stéphane Pouget, Hugo Brunie, Christophe Guillon, Albert Cohen 0001, P. Sadayappan, Fabrice Rastello |
ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. | 4 |
| 2020 | Tuning floating-point precision using dynamic program information and temporal localityabstractWe present a methodology for precision tuning of full applications. These techniques must select a search space composed of either variables or instructions and provide a scalable search strategy. In full application settings one cannot assume compiler support for practical reasons. Thus, an additional important challenge is enabling code refactoring. We argue for an instruction-based search space and we show: 1) how to exploit dynamic program information based on call stacks; and 2) how to exploit the iterative nature of scientific codes, combined with temporal locality. We applied the methodology to tune the implementation of scientific codes written in a combination of Python, CUDA, C++ and Fortran, tuning calls to math exp library functions. The iterative search refinement always reduces the search complexity and the number of steps to solution. Dynamic program information increases search efficacy. Using this approach, we obtain application runtime performance improvements up to 27%. Hugo Brunie, Costin Iancu, Khaled Z. Ibrahim, Philip Brisk, Brandon Cook 0001 |
SC | 1 |