scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Charles E. Leiserson

Bio: Charles E. Leiserson is an academic researcher from Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The author has contributed to research in topics: Cilk & Scheduling (computing). The author has an hindex of 65, co-authored 185 publications receiving 49312 citations. Previous affiliations of Charles E. Leiserson include Vassar College & Carnegie Mellon University.


Papers
More filters
Proceedings ArticleDOI
21 Jul 2010
TL;DR: In this paper, a divide-and-conquerqueried algorithm for computing the minimal elements of a partially ordered finite set (poset) is proposed. But it is not cache-oblivious and it cannot be parallelized.
Abstract: Computing the minimal elements of a partially ordered finite set (poset) is a fundamental problem in combinatorics with numerous applications such as polynomial expression optimization, transversal hypergraph generation and redundant component removal, to name a few. We propose a divide-and-conquer algorithm which is not only cache-oblivious but also can be parallelized free of determinacy races. We have implemented it in Cilk++ targeting multicores. For our test problems of sufficiently large input size our code demonstrates a linear speedup on 32 cores.

8 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that if the computation with n processors starts with one processor having a complete k-ary tree of height h (and the remaining n − 1 processors having nothing), the maximum possible number of steals is ∑i=1n (k−1)ihi, and tight upper bounds on the number of thefts are obtained.
Abstract: Inspired by applications in parallel computing, we analyze the setting of work stealing in multithreaded computations. We obtain tight upper bounds on the number of steals when the computation can be modeled by rooted trees. In particular, we show that if the computation with n processors starts with one processor having a complete k-ary tree of height h (and the remaining n ? 1 processors having nothing), the maximum possible number of steals is ?i=1n(k?1)ihi${\sum }_{i=1}^{n}(k-1)^{i}\binom {h}{i}$.

6 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
26 Apr 2004
TL;DR: This work analyzes randomized backoff strategies using worst-case assumptions on the inputs to determine which backoff algorithms perform best in the worst case or on inputs, such as bursty inputs, that are not covered by the statistical models.
Abstract: Summary form only given. Backoff strategies have typically been analyzed by making statistical assumptions on the distribution of problem inputs. Although these analyses have provided valuable insights into the efficacy of various backoff strategies, they leave open the question as to which backoff algorithms perform best in the worst case or on inputs, such as bursty inputs, that are not covered by the statistical models. We analyze randomized backoff strategies using worst-case assumptions on the inputs.

6 citations


Cited by
More filters
Book
01 Jan 1996
TL;DR: A valuable reference for the novice as well as for the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the area of cryptography, this book provides easy and rapid access of information and includes more than 200 algorithms and protocols.
Abstract: From the Publisher: A valuable reference for the novice as well as for the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the area of cryptography, this book provides easy and rapid access of information and includes more than 200 algorithms and protocols; more than 200 tables and figures; more than 1,000 numbered definitions, facts, examples, notes, and remarks; and over 1,250 significant references, including brief comments on each paper.

13,597 citations

Proceedings Article
25 Jul 2004
TL;DR: Four different RouGE measures are introduced: ROUGE-N, ROUge-L, R OUGE-W, and ROUAGE-S included in the Rouge summarization evaluation package and their evaluations.
Abstract: ROUGE stands for Recall-Oriented Understudy for Gisting Evaluation. It includes measures to automatically determine the quality of a summary by comparing it to other (ideal) summaries created by humans. The measures count the number of overlapping units such as n-gram, word sequences, and word pairs between the computer-generated summary to be evaluated and the ideal summaries created by humans. This paper introduces four different ROUGE measures: ROUGE-N, ROUGE-L, ROUGE-W, and ROUGE-S included in the ROUGE summarization evaluation package and their evaluations. Three of them have been used in the Document Understanding Conference (DUC) 2004, a large-scale summarization evaluation sponsored by NIST.

9,293 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
26 Mar 2000
TL;DR: RADAR is presented, a radio-frequency (RF)-based system for locating and tracking users inside buildings that combines empirical measurements with signal propagation modeling to determine user location and thereby enable location-aware services and applications.
Abstract: The proliferation of mobile computing devices and local-area wireless networks has fostered a growing interest in location-aware systems and services. In this paper we present RADAR, a radio-frequency (RF)-based system for locating and tracking users inside buildings. RADAR operates by recording and processing signal strength information at multiple base stations positioned to provide overlapping coverage in the area of interest. It combines empirical measurements with signal propagation modeling to determine user location and thereby enable location-aware services and applications. We present experimental results that demonstrate the ability of RADAR to estimate user location with a high degree of accuracy.

8,667 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Apr 2012-Fly
TL;DR: It appears that the 5′ and 3′ UTRs are reservoirs for genetic variations that changes the termini of proteins during evolution of the Drosophila genus.
Abstract: We describe a new computer program, SnpEff, for rapidly categorizing the effects of variants in genome sequences. Once a genome is sequenced, SnpEff annotates variants based on their genomic locations and predicts coding effects. Annotated genomic locations include intronic, untranslated region, upstream, downstream, splice site, or intergenic regions. Coding effects such as synonymous or non-synonymous amino acid replacement, start codon gains or losses, stop codon gains or losses, or frame shifts can be predicted. Here the use of SnpEff is illustrated by annotating ~356,660 candidate SNPs in ~117 Mb unique sequences, representing a substitution rate of ~1/305 nucleotides, between the Drosophila melanogaster w1118; iso-2; iso-3 strain and the reference y1; cn1 bw1 sp1 strain. We show that ~15,842 SNPs are synonymous and ~4,467 SNPs are non-synonymous (N/S ~0.28). The remaining SNPs are in other categories, such as stop codon gains (38 SNPs), stop codon losses (8 SNPs), and start codon gains (297 SNPs) in...

8,017 citations