Implementation and Tuning of Batched Cholesky Factorization and Solve for NVIDIA GPUs
Open accessAbstract
Many problems in engineering and scientific computing require the solution of a large number of small systems of linear equations. Due to their high processing power, Graphics Processing Units became an attractive target for this class of problems, and routines based on the LU and the QR factorization have been provided by NVIDIA in the cuBLAS library. This work addresses the situation where the systems of equations are symmetric positive definite. The paper describes the implementation and tuning of the kernels for the Cholesky factorization and the forward and backward substitution. Targeted workloads involve the solution of thousands of linear systems of the same size, where the focus is on matrix dimensions from 5 by 5 to 100 by 100. Due to the lack of a cuBLAS Cholesky factorization, execution rates of cuBLAS LU and cuBLAS QR are used for comparison against the proposed Cholesky factorization in this work. Execution rates of forward and backward substitution routines are compared to equivalent cuBLAS routines. Comparisons against optimized multicore implementations are also presented. Superior performance is reached in all cases.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
When the baseline omits TF32, any LLM-generated kernel that merely invokes cuBLAS appears to achieve dramatic speedup.
“When the baseline omits this universally-available optimization, any LLM-generated kernel that merely invokes cuBLAS (Anzt et al., 2014;Kurzak et al., 2016) (NVIDIA's highly-optimized library for matrix operations, which PyTorch calls internally) appears to achieve dramatic speedup.”
From KernelBench-Verified: Do LLM-Generated Kernels Actually Beat PyTorch? (2026) · cites this paper as Kurzak et al., 2016
Cited by
Sorted by citations
KernelBench-Verified: Do LLM-Generated Kernels Actually Beat PyTorch?
Zhang, Y., Yu, P., Wang, J., Max, Fan, Reed, J., Mirhoseini, A., & Su, W. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2607.16241
- Authors
- Kurzak, J., Anzt, H., Gates, M., & Dongarra, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems
- Published
- 2016-07-01
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2036-2048
- ISSN
- 1045-9219 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2410272182
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 12.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Bench-testing Environment for Automated Software Tuning (BEAST) (#SHF-1320603)
- National Science Foundation
- Department of Energy (#DE-SC0010042)
- NVIDIA Corporation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Matrix Theory and Algorithms
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Numerical Methods and Algorithms
- Keywords
- NVIDIA GPUs, cuBLAS, symmetric positive definite linear systems, forward and backward substitution, performance comparison
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review