Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Nicolas Tollenaere

dblp:239/4390 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0002-5072-4109ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 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
2 papers
High-performance computing · 70% Embedded and real-time systems · 13% Performance modeling and evaluation · 13%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Compilers and program optimization · 100%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Deep learning architectures and training · 100%

Topics — the 8 heaviest of 9, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
High-performance computing › performance optimization
auto-tuning
0.712023
Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023
High-performance computing › tensor computation
convolution
0.712023
Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023
High-performance computing
performance optimization
0.712023
Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023
High-performance computing
tensor computation
0.712023
Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023
Embedded and real-time systems › real-time scheduling
complexity analysis
0.512021
IOOpt: automatic derivation of I/O complexity bounds for affine programs · PLDI 2021
Performance modeling and evaluation › storage performance modeling
i/o complexity
0.512021
IOOpt: automatic derivation of I/O complexity bounds for affine programs · PLDI 2021
Machine learning › Deep learning architectures and training
convolution
0.212023
Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think · ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2023
Memory systems
data movement
0.112021
IOOpt: automatic derivation of I/O complexity bounds for affine programs · PLDI 2021

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

random sampling · 1.3loop transformation · 1.3polyhedral analysis · 1.0affine analysis · 1.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2023 Autotuning Convolutions Is Easier Than You Think
abstract
A 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.1
2021 IOOpt: automatic derivation of I/O complexity bounds for affine programs
abstract
Evaluating the complexity of an algorithm is an important step when developing applications, as it impacts both its time and energy performance. Computational complexity, which is the number of dynamic operations regardless of the execution order, is easy to characterize for affine programs. Data movement (or, I/O) complexity is more complex to evaluate as it refers, when considering all possible valid schedules, to the minimum required number of I/O between a slow (e.g. main memory) and a fast (e.g. local scratchpad) storage location.
Auguste Olivry, Guillaume Iooss, Nicolas Tollenaere, Atanas Rountev, P. Sadayappan, Fabrice Rastello
PLDI3