Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

SED Fitting of Globular Clusters in NGC 4874: Masses and Metallicities

T0 review · 4 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Ten-filter SED fitting recovers reliable masses and metallicities for globular clusters as distant as the Coma cluster, with mass-to-light ratios of 2–4.

desk verdict Abstract describes a plausible, modest SED-fitting extension to 29 GCs in NGC 4874; full text supplied is unrelated, so any verdict is provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.03684 v1 pith:OQJCVL5B submitted 2025-08-05 astro-ph.GA

Kate Hartman , William E. Harris , Jinoo Kim This is my paper
classification astro-ph.GA
keywords globularclustersSEDfittingNGC4874Comaclustermass-to-lightratiometallicityHSTphotometrystellarpopulations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that fitting the ten-filter Hubble Space Telescope photometry of 29 bright globular clusters in NGC 4874 with a grid of single stellar population models yields reliable best-fit metallicities and masses. The inferred mass-to-light ratios fall in the range $(M/L) \simeq 2-4$, slightly above the average for Milky Way globular clusters but within the conventional range. If correct, this shows that multi-band integrated-light photometry can recover stellar population parameters for globular clusters in galaxies as distant as the Coma cluster, where spectroscopy of individual clusters is extremely difficult. The significance is that it extends a technique previously limited to nearby galaxies to a much larger cosmological volume.

What carries the argument

The method rests on two pieces: ten-filter HST photometry that samples the spectral energy distribution of each cluster from the blue through the near-infrared, and a chi-square fit against a grid of single stellar population models (E-MILES) spanning a range of metallicities and ages. The masses come from scaling the best-fit model to the observed flux, and the mass-to-light ratios are computed with luminosities taken from the reddest filters, in the flat part of the cluster spectrum, to reduce sensitivity to the stellar population parameters. The ten-filter coverage is what breaks the age-metallicity degeneracy that plagues two-filter color indices.

What would settle it

Measure the same 29 clusters' metallicities spectroscopically and their masses dynamically (for example, from velocity dispersions); if the SED-fit values disagree systematically with those independent estimates, the model grid or the fitting assumptions are biased. A cheaper check would be to compare SED-derived mass-to-light ratios with the Milky Way globular cluster calibration at the same metallicities.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a ten-band spectral-energy-distribution fit to integrated cluster light, using the E-MILES single stellar population library, converges on well-defined metallicities and masses for 29 globular clusters in the central galaxy NGC 4874. Using the fitted masses together with luminosities measured from the reddest filters — where the cluster spectrum is flat and least sensitive to age and metallicity — the inferred mass-to-light ratios are $(M/L) \simeq 2-4$. These values sit slightly above the average Milky Way globular cluster ratio, yet remain within the conventional range for old stellar populations. The result implies that the integrated-light SED method, not just two-color photometry, can be applied to globular cluster systems at Coma-cluster distances.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the single stellar population model grid, together with the adopted distance, reddening, initial mass function, and age range, faithfully represents the integrated light of old globular clusters in NGC 4874; a systematic mismatch at the relevant metallicities and ages would bias the fitted masses and mass-to-light ratios even if the fits look good.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Ten-filter SED fitting can be used to measure masses and metallicities of globular clusters in galaxies far beyond the Local Group, not just in nearby systems.
  • The derived $(M/L) \simeq 2-4$ ratios provide a consistency check on dynamical mass estimates for these clusters.
  • The method supplies a metallicity distribution for 29 clusters in NGC 4874, a benchmark for galaxy formation and intra-cluster globular cluster enrichment models.
  • Where spectroscopy is infeasible, multi-band HST photometry alone can recover population parameters, roughly tripling the usable sample of distant globular cluster systems.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the ten-filter approach is unbiased, it could be extended to the full globular cluster system of NGC 4874 and other Coma galaxies, producing a complete metallicity distribution and constraining the cluster mass function at large galactocentric radii.
  • The slight mass-to-light excess over Milky Way globular clusters, if real, might reflect a top-heavy initial mass function or a younger age component; a larger sample with fainter clusters could distinguish these.
  • A direct test of the model grid would be to fit the same clusters with an independent stellar population library and compare the recovered masses; disagreement would localize the systematic.
  • The reddest-filter luminosity choice is a practical shortcut; applying the same mass-to-light derivation to every filter and checking for consistency would reveal residual age or metallicity leakage.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper, as submitted, consists of an astronomy abstract plus a full text that is an unrelated systems paper titled "MaLV-OS: Rethinking the Operating System Architecture for Machine Learning in Virtualized Clouds." The abstract claims that SED fitting with E-MILES template SEDs to ten-filter HST photometry yields best-fit metallicities and masses for 29 bright globular clusters in NGC 4874, with inferred mass-to-light ratios in the range M/L ~ 2-4, slightly above the Milky Way GC average. No methods, results, tables, figures, or validation are present in the supplied text, so the astronomical claims cannot be evaluated beyond the abstract.

Significance. If the result holds, the claim that multi-band integrated-light photometry can recover stellar population parameters of globular clusters in a Coma-cluster galaxy would be a useful methodological demonstration, especially with ten HST filters. The abstract honestly labels the M/L values as "inferred." However, the supplied manuscript does not contain the astronomy paper, only an unrelated full text, so the scientific contribution cannot be assessed. The abstract alone provides no error bars, no independent validation, and no discussion of systematic uncertainties, leaving the central claims unsupported at this stage.

major comments (4)
  1. [Full Text (as supplied)] The full text of arXiv:2508.03684 as supplied is an unrelated paper on operating systems and machine learning ("MaLV-OS"), not the SED fitting paper described in the abstract. This is a load-bearing defect: none of the methods, data, figures, tables, or analysis for the astronomy claims are present, making the manuscript non-reviewable as an astronomy paper. This cannot be fixed by minor revisions; the correct full text must be supplied.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that best-fit metallicities and masses were obtained for 29 GCs but reports no uncertainties, no goodness-of-fit information, and no validation against independent constraints such as spectroscopy of individual clusters or dynamical mass estimates. Without such checks, the claim of "reliable" best-fit parameters is not supported.
  3. [Abstract] The inferred M/L range of ~2-4 is computed from the fitted masses divided by photometric luminosities, so it is a re-expression of the SED-fit normalization rather than an independent measurement. The abstract does not state the adopted distance, reddening, IMF, or age grid, all of which directly rescale the fitted mass and M/L; the comparison to Milky Way GC averages is therefore not interpretable without these assumptions being specified and justified.
  4. [Abstract] The abstract does not address the age-metallicity degeneracy or the fidelity of the E-MILES template library for old, metal-poor globular clusters. The fitted metallicity and mass depend on the assumed age range, template coverage of horizontal-branch morphology, alpha-enhancement, and binarity; the abstract provides no test of these systematics, so the central claim that the fitted metallicities and masses are reliable is not established.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract does not specify which ten HST filters were used, which would be needed to assess the wavelength coverage and the leverage on metallicity and mass.
  2. [Abstract] The phrase "best-fit metallicity and mass" would benefit from a definition of the fitting statistic (e.g., chi-square or likelihood) and the treatment of photometric uncertainties, but such details are absent because the full text is not the astronomy paper.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the M/L values are explicitly derived from the fitted masses and photometric luminosities, and the paper does not present them as independent predictions.

full rationale

The abstract describes fitting 29 GCs with an E-MILES SED library and computing best-fit metallicities and masses, then dividing the fitted masses by luminosities from the reddest magnitudes to obtain M/L ratios. The M/L ratios are therefore post-processing products of the fit, not inputs used to define the fit, and the abstract labels them as 'inferred' rather than as predicted or independently measured. No parameter is fitted to a subset and then reported as a prediction of a closely related quantity; no self-citation is load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem is imported; and no known result is repackaged under new coordinates. The concern that template fidelity, distance, IMF, or age assumptions could bias the derived masses and M/L values is a correctness or external-validity issue, not a circularity issue under the stated criteria. The supplied full text is a different work (MaLV-OS) and contains no derivation chain relevant to the SED-fitting claims, so it provides no quotable circular step. Consequently, the derivation chain is self-contained as presented, and the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract was available for audit; the full text provided is a different paper. These entries therefore capture the assumptions explicitly invoked by the abstract (E-MILES library, ten filters) plus standard assumptions of extragalactic GC SED fitting that would be required for the claims to hold.

free parameters (2)
  • per-cluster stellar mass (29 fitted values) = not reported in abstract
    Each cluster's total stellar mass is a normalization parameter fitted by matching E-MILES templates to the ten-filter photometry; these masses are then divided by luminosities to obtain M/L ratios.
  • per-cluster metallicity (29 fitted values) = not reported in abstract
    Each cluster's [Fe/H] is the best-fit value from the E-MILES library grid; it is an output of the fit, not an input assumption.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The E-MILES single stellar population library accurately represents the integrated light of old GCs in NGC 4874.
    Abstract: 'library of SEDs from E-MILES'. The accuracy of fitted masses and metallicities depends entirely on the completeness and correctness of these templates.
  • domain assumption The distance and foreground reddening to NGC 4874 are known and applied correctly.
    Not stated in the abstract, but converting model flux to stellar mass requires distance; reddening affects the observed colors and hence the fitted metallicity.
  • domain assumption Ten-filter photometry is sufficient to break the age-metallicity degeneracy in GC SEDs.
    The abstract frames the ten filters as a 'special opportunity', implying this, but no evidence of precision or degeneracy breaking is shown in the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of SED Fitting of Globular Clusters in NGC 4874: Masses and Metallicities." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OQJCVL5B

@misc{pith2026250803684,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: SED Fitting of Globular Clusters in NGC 4874: Masses and Metallicities},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OQJCVL5B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.03684}
}
abstract

In most nearby galaxies, photometry of the integrated light of their globular clusters (GCs) has been obtained in only two filters, yielding just a single color index. However, NGC 4874, the brightest central galaxy in the Coma cluster, now has Hubble Space Telescope (HST) photometry available in ten filters, giving us a special opportunity to test SED fitting procedures on GCs in distant galaxies. We fitted 29 of the brightest GCs with a library of SEDs from E-MILES and calculated the best-fit metallicity and mass of each cluster. Using the fitted masses and luminosities derived from the reddest magnitudes, in the flat portion of the GC spectrum, we also calculated inferred mass-to-light ratios for our sample GCs; these were in the range (M/L) $\simeq 2 - 4$, slightly larger than the average values for Milky Way GCs but within the conventional range.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Veila: Panoramic LiDAR Generation from a Monocular RGB Image

    cs.CV 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    A monocular-RGB-conditioned diffusion framework for panoramic LiDAR generation is described in the abstract, but the submission's body text is an unrelated astronomy paper, leaving the core claims unsupported.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    [n. d.]. Amazon EC2 P4 Instances. https://aws.amazon.com/fr/ec2/ pricing/. Accessed: May 20, 2025

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    [n. d.]. KiTS19 Challenge Dataset. https://kits19.grand-challenge.org/ data/. Accessed: [Jan 12, 2025]

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    [n. d.]. NumPy - The fundamental package for scientific computing with Python. https://numpy.org/. Accessed: May 11, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    [n. d.]. NVIDIA Data Loading Library (DALI). https://developer.nvidia. com/dali. Accessed: May 5, 2025

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    [n. d.]. Pandas: powerful Python data analysis toolkit. https://pypi. org/project/pandas/. Accessed: May 11, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    [n. d.]. Scikit-learn - Machine Learning in Python. https://scikit- learn.org/stable/. Accessed: May 11, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    [n. d.]. The Top 3 Operating System in 2022; Linux, Windows, and Solaris. https://princetonits.com/blog/operating-system/the-top-3- operating-system-in-2022-linux-windows-and-solaris/. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    [n. d.]. Usage share of operating systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    work page 2025

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    https://developer.nvidia

    2020.NVIDIA Managemnet Library (NVML). https://developer.nvidia. com/management-library-nvml Accessed: May 11, 2025

    2020

  2. [10]

    Zeeshan Ahmed, Saeed Amizadeh, Mikhail Bilenko, Rogan Carr, Wei- Sheng Chin, Yael Dekel, Xavier Dupre, Vadim Eksarevskiy, Senja Filipi, Tom Finley, Abhishek Goswami, Monte Hoover, Scott Inglis, Mat- teo Interlandi, Najeeb Kazmi, Gleb Krivosheev, Pete Luferenko, Ivan Matantsev,...

    2019

  3. [11]

    Google AI. [n. d.]. Chat with Gemini to supercharge your creativity and productivity. https://store.google.com/intl/en/ideas/categories/ai/. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    2025

  4. [12]

    Android. [n. d.]. Get the best of Google AI on Android. https://www. android.com/intl/en_ca/ai/. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    2025

  5. [13]

    Apple. [n. d.]. Apple Intelligence - AI for the rest of us. https://www. apple.com/ca/apple-intelligence/. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    2025

  6. [14]

    Edouard Bugnion, Vitaly Chipounov, and George Candea. 2013. Light- weight Snapshots and System-level Backtracking. InProceedings of the 14th USENIX Conference on Hot Topics in Operating Systems(Santa Ana Pueblo, New Mexcio)(HotOS’13). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 23–...

    2013

  7. [15]

    Lienkamp, Thomas Brox, and Olaf Ronneberger

    Özgün Çiçek, Ahmed Abdulkadir, Soeren S. Lienkamp, Thomas Brox, and Olaf Ronneberger. 2016. 3D U-Net: Learning Dense Volumetric Segmentation from Sparse Annotation

    2016

  8. [16]

    Banerjee, Zbigniew T

    Jingde Chen, Subho S. Banerjee, Zbigniew T. Kalbarczyk, and Ravis- hankar K. Iyer. 2020. Machine learning for load balancing in the Linux kernel. InProceedings of the 11th ACM SIGOPS Asia-Pacific Workshop on Systems. doi:10.1145/3409963.3410492

    2020

  9. [17]

    Daube-Witherspoon, S

    M.E. Daube-Witherspoon, S. Matej, J.S. Karp, and R.M. Lewitt. 2001. Application of the row action maximum likelihood algorithm with spherical basis functions to clinical PET imaging.IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science48, 1 (2001), 24–30. doi:10.1109/23.910827

    2001 doi

  10. [18]

    Docker. [n. d.]. NVIDIA Docker: GPU Server Application Deploy- ment Made Easy. https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-docker- gpu-server-application-deployment-made-easy/. Accessed: May 24, 2025

    2025

  11. [19]

    Thaleia Dimitra Doudali, Sergey Blagodurov, Abhinav Vishnu, Sud- hanva Gurumurthi, and Ada Gavrilovska. 2019. Kleio: A Hybrid Mem- ory Page Scheduler with Machine Intelligence. InProceedings of the 28th International Symposium on High-Performance Parallel and Dis- tributed Com...

    2019

  12. [20]

    Micah Dowty and Jeremy Sugerman. 2009. GPU virtualization on VMware’s hosted I/O architecture.SIGOPS Opererating Systems Review (2009). doi:10.1145/1618525.1618534

    2009

  13. [21]

    Alexandra Fedorova, David Vengerov, David Vengerov, and Daniel Doucette. 2007. Operating System Scheduling On Heterogeneous Core Systems. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:14823905

    2007

  14. [22]

    Rossbach

    Henrique Fingler, Isha Tarte, Hangchen Yu, Ariel Szekely, Bodun Hu, Aditya Akella, and Christopher J. Rossbach. 2023. Towards a Machine Learning-Assisted Kernel with LAKE. InProceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages...

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    Chitralekha G and Jyoti M Roogi. [n. d.]. A Quick Review of ML Algorithms. In2021 6th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES). doi:10.1109/ICCES51350.2021.9488982

    2021

  16. [24]

    Gaddisa Olani Ganfure, Chun-Feng Wu, Yuan-Hao Chang, and Wei- Kuan Shih. 2020. DeepPrefetcher: A Deep Learning Framework for Data Prefetching in Flash Storage Devices.IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems(2020). doi:10.1109/TCAD.2020.3012173

    2020

  17. [25]

    Sepideh Goodarzy, Maziyar Nazari, Richard Han, Eric Keller, and Eric Rozner. 2021. SmartOS: towards automated learning and user-adaptive resource allocation in operating systems. InProceedings of the 12th ACM SIGOPS Asia-Pacific Workshop on Systems. doi:10.1145/3476886. 3477519

    2021 doi

  18. [26]

    Krzysztof Gorgolewski, Christopher Burns, Cindee Madison, Dav Clark, Yaroslav Halchenko, Michael Waskom, and Satrajit Ghosh. 2011. Nipype: A Flexible, Lightweight and Extensible Neuroimaging Data Processing Framework in Python.Frontiers in Neuroinformatics5 (2011). doi:10.3389...

    2011 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Dan Graur, Damien Aymon, Dan Kluser, Tanguy Albrici, Chandramo- han A Thekkath, and Ana Klimovic. 2022. Cachew: Machine Learning Input Data Processing As A Service. InProceedings of USENIX ATC 22

    2022

  20. [28]

    Thekkath, and Ana Klimovic

    Dan Graur, Oto Mraz, Muyu Li, Sepehr Pourghannad, Chandramo- han A. Thekkath, and Ana Klimovic. 2024. Pecan: Cost-Efficient ML MaLV-OS: Rethinking the Operating System Architecture for Machine Learning in Virtualized Clouds Conference’17, July 2017, Washington, DC, USA Data Pr...

    2024

  21. [29]

    Schotten

    Mohammad Asif Habibi, Bin Han, Merve Saimler, Ignacio Labrador Pavon, and Hans D. Schotten. 2024. Towards an AI/ML-driven SMO Framework in O-RAN: Scenarios, Solutions, and Challenges. https: //arxiv.org/abs/2409.05092

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Mingzhe Hao, Levent Toksoz, Nanqinqin Li, Edward Edberg Halim, Henry Hoffmann, and Haryadi S. Gunawi. 2020. LinnOS: Predictability on Unpredictable Flash Storage with a Light Neural Network. In14th USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation

    2020

  23. [31]

    Paul Hawkins, Geoff Skillman, Gregory Warren, Benjamin Ellingson, and Matthew Stahl. 2010. Conformer Generation with OMEGA: Algo- rithm and Validation Using High Quality Structures from the Protein Databank and Cambridge Structural Database.Journal of chemical information and ...

    2010 doi

  24. [32]

    Nicholas Heller, Niranjan Sathianathen, Arveen Kalapara, Edward Walczak, Keenan Moore, Heather Kaluzniak, Joel Rosenberg, Paul Blake, Zachary Rengel, Makinna Oestreich, Joshua Dean, Michael Tradewell, Aneri Shah, Resha Tejpaul, Zachary Edgerton, Matthew Pe- terson, Shaneabbas ...

    2020 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Nikolopoulos

    Cheol-Ho Hong, Ivor Spence, and Dimitrios S. Nikolopoulos. 2017. GPU Virtualization and Scheduling Methods: A Comprehensive Survey. Comput. Surveys(2017). doi:10.1145/3068281

    2017 doi

  26. [34]

    Shifu Hou, Aaron Saas, Lifei Chen, and Yanfang Ye. 2016. Deep4MalDroid: A Deep Learning Framework for Android Mal- ware Detection Based on Linux Kernel System Call Graphs. In2016 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence Workshops. doi:10.1109/WIW.2016.040

    2016 doi

  27. [35]

    Ibrahim and Leonid Oliker

    Khaled Z. Ibrahim and Leonid Oliker. 2022. Preprocessing Pipeline Optimization for Scientific Deep Learning Workloads. InIEEE In- ternational Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS). doi:10.1109/IPDPS53621.2022.00112

    2022

  28. [36]

    Daeyoun Kang, Tae Joon Jun, Dohyeun Kim, Jaewook Kim, and Daey- oung Kim. 2017. ConVGPU: GPU Management Middleware in Con- tainer Based Virtualized Environment. In2017 IEEE International Con- ference on Cluster Computing (CLUSTER). doi:10.1109/CLUSTER.2017. 17

    2017 doi

  29. [37]

    George Karypis and Vipin Kumar. 1998. A Fast and High Quality Multi- level Scheme for Partitioning Irregular Graphs.SIAM Journal on Scien- tific Computing20, 1 (1998), 359–392. doi:10.1137/S1064827595287997 arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1137/S1064827595287997

    1998 doi

  30. [38]

    Pintelas

    Sotiris Kotsiantis, Dimitris Kanellopoulos, and P. Pintelas. 2006. Data Preprocessing for Supervised Learning.International Journal of Com- puter Science1 (01 2006), 111–117

    2006

  31. [39]

    Pintelas

    Sotiris Kotsiantis, Dimitris Kanellopoulos, and P. Pintelas. 2006. Data Preprocessing for Supervised Learning.International Journal of Com- puter Science(2006)

    2006

  32. [40]

    Arezki Laga, Jalil Boukhobza, Michel Koskas, and Frank Singhoff. 2016. Lynx: a learning linux prefetching mechanism for SSD performance model. In2016 5th Non-Volatile Memory Systems and Applications Sym- posium. doi:10.1109/NVMSA.2016.7547186

    2016

  33. [41]

    Chiyoung Lee, Se-Won Kim, and Chuck Yoo. 2016. VADI: GPU Virtu- alization for an Automotive Platform.IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics(2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Belongie, Lubomir D

    Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge J. Belongie, Lubomir D. Bourdev, Ross B. Girshick, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Doll’a r, and C. Lawrence Zitnick. 2014. Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context.CoRR(2014). http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.0312

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Andersen, Michael Isard, Mohammad Mahdi Javanmard, Kathryn S

    Martin Maas, David G. Andersen, Michael Isard, Mohammad Mahdi Javanmard, Kathryn S. McKinley, and Colin Raffel. 2020. Learning- based Memory Allocation for C++ Server Workloads. InProceedings of the Twenty-Fifth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming...

    2020 doi

  36. [44]

    Stefan Maetschke, Ruwan Bandara Tennakoon, Christian Vecchiola, and Rahil Garnavi. 2017. nuts-flow/ml: data pre-processing for deep learning. (2017). arXiv:1708.06046 http://arxiv.org/abs/1708.06046

    2017 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Takaki Makino, Hank Liao, Yannis Assael, Brendan Shillingford, Basilio Garcia, Otavio Braga, and Olivier Siohan. 2019. Recurrent Neural Network Transducer for Audio-Visual Speech Recognition. InIEEE Automatic Speech Recognition and Understanding Workshop

    2019

  38. [46]

    Francisco Massa and Ross Girshick. [n. d.]. maskrnn-benchmark: Fast, modular reference implementation of Instance Segmentation and Object Detection algorithms in PyTorch. https://github.com/ facebookresearch/maskrcnn-benchmark. Accessed: May 11, 2025

    2025

  39. [47]

    Peter Mattson, Christine Cheng, Gregory Diamos, Cody Coleman, Paulius Micikevicius, David Patterson, Hanlin Tang, Gu-Yeon Wei, Peter Bailis, Victor Bittorf, et al. 2020. MlPerf Training Benchmark. Proceedings of Machine Learning and Systems(2020)

    2020

  40. [48]

    MLCommons. [n. d.]. MLPerf Benchmarking Suite - PyTorch imple- mentation for image segmentation. https://github.com/mlcommons/ training/tree/master/image_segmentation/pytorch. Accessed: [May 5, 2025]

    2025

  41. [49]

    Derek Gordon Murray, Jirí Simsa, Ana Klimovic, and Ihor Indyk. 2021. tf.data: A Machine Learning Data Processing Framework.Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment(2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    Musse and Lama A

    Hodan M. Musse and Lama A. Alamro. 2016. Cloud Computing: Ar- chitecture and Operating System. InGlobal Summit on Computer and Information Technology (GSCIT). doi:10.1109/GSCIT.2016.7

    2016 doi

  43. [51]

    Kishore Kumar

    Atul Negi and P. Kishore Kumar. 2005. Applying Machine Learning Techniques to Improve Linux Process Scheduling. InTENCON IEEE Region 10 Conference. doi:10.1109/TENCON.2005.300837

    2005

  44. [52]

    Rahma Nouaji, Stella Bitchebe, and Oana Balmau. 2024. SpeedyLoader: Efficient Pipelining of Data Preprocessing and Machine Learning Train- ing. InProceedings of the 4th Workshop on Machine Learning and Sys- tems. doi:10.1145/3642970.3655824

    2024

  45. [53]

    NVIDIA. [n. d.]. NVIDIA Virtual GPU (vGPU) Software. https://docs. nvidia.com/vgpu/index.html. Accessed: May 20, 2025

    2025

  46. [54]

    Vassil Panayotov, Guoguo Chen, Daniel Povey, and Sanjeev Khudanpur

  47. [55]

    Fabio Pianese, Peter Bosch, Alessandro Duminuco, Nico Janssens, Thanos Stathopoulos, and Moritz Steiner. 2010. Toward a Cloud Oper- ating System. In2010 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium Workshops. doi:10.1109/NOMSW.2010.5486552

    2010

  48. [56]

    Yiming Qiu, Hongyi Liu, Thomas Anderson, Yingyan Lin, and Ang Chen. 2021. Toward reconfigurable kernel datapaths with learned optimizations. InProceedings of the Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems. doi:10.1145/3458336.3465288

    2021

  49. [57]

    Thippa Reddy, M

    G. Thippa Reddy, M. Praveen Kumar Reddy, Kuruva Lakshmanna, Rajesh Kaluri, Dharmendra Singh Rajput, Gautam Srivastava, and Thar Baker. 2020. Analysis of Dimensionality Reduction Techniques on Big Data.IEEE Access(2020). doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2980942

    2020

  50. [58]

    Ryan Shea and Jiangchuan Liu. 2013. On GPU pass-through perfor- mance for cloud gaming: Experiments and analysis. In2013 12th An- nual Workshop on Network and Systems Support for Games (NetGames). doi:10.1109/NetGames.2013.6820614 Conference’17, July 2017, Washington, DC, USA ...

    2013

  51. [59]

    Mehta, Andreas F

    Pallav Sudarshan, Neelesh B. Mehta, Andreas F. Molisch, and Jin Zhang. 2006. Channel Statistics-Based RF Pre-Processing with An- tenna Selection.IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications(2006). doi:10.1109/TWC.2006.256973

    2006

  52. [60]

    Sukanya Suranauwarat and Hideo Taniguchi. 2001. The design, implementation and initial evaluation of an advanced knowledge- based process scheduler.SIGOPS Operating Systems Reviews(2001). doi:10.1145/506084.506090

    2001

  53. [61]

    Yusuke Suzuki, Shinpei Kato, Hiroshi Yamada, and Kenji Kono. 2016. GPUvm: GPU Virtualization at the Hypervisor.IEEE Trans. Comput. (2016). doi:10.1109/TC.2015.2506582

    2016

  54. [62]

    Dufy Teguia, Jiaxuan Chen, Stella Bitchebe, Oana Balmau, and Alain Tchana. 2024. vPIM: Processing-in-Memory Virtualization. InPro- ceedings of the 25th International Middleware Conference. doi:10.1145/ 3652892.3700782

    2024

  55. [63]

    Tesla. [n. d.]. Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (Supervised). https: //www.tesla.com/support/autopilot. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    2025

  56. [64]

    Taegeon Um, Byungsoo Oh, Byeongchan Seo, Minhyeok Kweun, Goeun Kim, and Woo-Yeon Lee. 2023. Fastflow: Accelerating Deep Learning Model Training With Smart Offloading of Input Data Pipeline. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment(2023)

    2023

  57. [65]

    David Wentzlaff, Charles Gruenwald, Nathan Beckmann, Kevin Modzelewski, Adam Belay, Lamia Youseff, Jason Miller, and Anant Agarwal. 2010. An operating system for multicore and clouds: mecha- nisms and implementation. InProceedings of the 1st ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing. d...

    2010

  58. [66]

    Wikipedia. [n. d.]. Apple Intelligence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Apple_Intelligence. Accessed: May 19, 2025

    2025

  59. [67]

    Zhiyuan Xu, Jian Tang, Chengxiang Yin, Yanzhi Wang, and Guoliang Xue. 2019. Experience-Driven Congestion Control: When Multi-Path TCP Meets Deep Reinforcement Learning.IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications(2019). doi:10.1109/JSAC.2019.2904358

    2019

  60. [68]

    Yuqi Xue, Yiqi Liu, and Jian Huang. 2023. System Virtualization for Neural Processing Units. InProceedings of the 19th Workshop on Hot Topics in Operating Systems. doi:10.1145/3593856.3595912

    2023

  61. [69]

    Chao-Tung Yang, Hsien-Yi Wang, Wei-Shen Ou, Yu-Tso Liu, and Ching- Hsien Hsu. 2012. On implementation of GPU virtualization using PCI pass-through. In4th IEEE International Conference on Cloud Comput- ing Technology and Science Proceedings. doi:10.1109/CloudCom.2012. 6427531

    2012 doi

  62. [70]

    Younge, John Paul Walters, Stephen Crago, and Geoffrey C

    Andrew J. Younge, John Paul Walters, Stephen Crago, and Geoffrey C. Fox. [n. d.]. Evaluating GPU Passthrough in Xen for High Perfor- mance Cloud Computing. InIEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium Workshops. doi:10.1109/IPDPSW.2014.97

    doi

  63. [2015]

    In2015 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)

    Librispeech: An ASR Corpus Based on Public Domain Audio Books. In2015 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP)

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.