Improve alignment in tables.

[mpi-energy2.git] / Heter_paper.tex

diff --git a/Heter_paper.tex b/Heter_paper.tex
index 4c6df5569367f102b3bb80a7b7892f5195ae19be..dc87dc86b45aeef4d6aa99710c73df94ed429578 100644 (file)
--- a/Heter_paper.tex
+++ b/Heter_paper.tex
@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@
 \usepackage{algorithm}
 \usepackage{subfig}
 \usepackage{amsmath}
-\usepackage{multirow}
 \usepackage{url}
 \DeclareUrlCommand\email{\urlstyle{same}}
 
@@ -283,7 +282,7 @@ vector of scaling factors can be predicted using (\ref{eq:perf}).
  \textit  T_\textit{new} = 
  \max_{i=1,2,\dots,N} ({TcpOld_{i}} \cdot S_{i}) +  MinTcm 
 \end{equation}
-Where:\\
+Where:
 \begin{equation}
 \label{eq:perf2}
  MinTcm = \min_{i=1,2,\dots,N} (Tcm_i)
@@ -725,16 +724,16 @@ nodes were connected via an Ethernet network with 1 Gbit/s bandwidth.
     type          &GFLOPS     & Freq.    & Freq.        & Freq.          & power        & power \\
                   &           & GHz      & GHz          &GHz             &              &       \\
     \hline
-    1             &40         & 2.5      & 1.2          & 0.1            & 20~w         &4~w    \\
+    1             &40         & 2.5      & 1.2          & 0.1            & 20~W         &4~W    \\
          
     \hline
-    2             &50         & 2.66     & 1.6          & 0.133          & 25~w         &5~w    \\
+    2             &50         & 2.66     & 1.6          & 0.133          & 25~W         &5~W    \\
                   
     \hline
-    3             &60         & 2.9      & 1.2          & 0.1            & 30~w         &6~w    \\
+    3             &60         & 2.9      & 1.2          & 0.1            & 30~W         &6~W    \\
                   
     \hline
-    4             &70         & 3.4      & 1.6          & 0.133          & 35~w         &7~w    \\
+    4             &70         & 3.4      & 1.6          & 0.133          & 35~W         &7~W    \\
                   
     \hline
   \end{tabular}
@@ -764,7 +763,7 @@ be executed on $1, 4, 9, 16, 36, 64, 144$ nodes.
   \caption{Running NAS benchmarks on 4 nodes }
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program     & Execution     & Energy         & Energy      & Performance        & Distance      \\
     name       & time/s        & consumption/J  & saving\%    & degradation\%      &               \\
@@ -792,7 +791,7 @@ be executed on $1, 4, 9, 16, 36, 64, 144$ nodes.
   \caption{Running NAS benchmarks on 8 and 9 nodes }
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program    & Execution     & Energy         & Energy      & Performance        & Distance      \\
     name       & time/s        & consumption/J  & saving\%    & degradation\%      &               \\
@@ -820,7 +819,7 @@ be executed on $1, 4, 9, 16, 36, 64, 144$ nodes.
   \caption{Running NAS benchmarks on 16 nodes }
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program     & Execution     & Energy         & Energy      & Performance        & Distance      \\
     name       & time/s        & consumption/J  & saving\%    & degradation\%      &               \\
@@ -848,7 +847,7 @@ be executed on $1, 4, 9, 16, 36, 64, 144$ nodes.
   \caption{Running NAS benchmarks on 32 and 36 nodes }
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program    & Execution     & Energy         & Energy      & Performance        & Distance      \\
     name       & time/s        & consumption/J  & saving\%    & degradation\%      &               \\
@@ -876,7 +875,7 @@ be executed on $1, 4, 9, 16, 36, 64, 144$ nodes.
   \caption{Running NAS benchmarks on 64 nodes }
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program    & Execution     & Energy         & Energy      & Performance        & Distance      \\
     name       & time/s        & consumption/J  & saving\%    & degradation\%      &               \\
@@ -904,7 +903,7 @@ be executed on $1, 4, 9, 16, 36, 64, 144$ nodes.
   \caption{Running NAS benchmarks on 128 and 144 nodes }
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program    & Execution     & Energy         & Energy      & Performance        & Distance     \\
     name       & time/s        & consumption/J  & saving\%    & degradation\%      &              \\
@@ -1046,7 +1045,7 @@ degradation.
   \caption{The results of the 70\%-30\% power scenario}
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{6}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{6}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program    & Energy          & Energy      & Performance        & Distance     \\
     name       & consumption/J   & saving\%    & degradation\%      &              \\
@@ -1075,7 +1074,7 @@ degradation.
   \caption{The results of the 90\%-10\% power scenario}
   % title of Table
   \centering
-  \begin{tabular}{|*{6}{l|}}
+  \begin{tabular}{|*{6}{r|}}
     \hline
     Program    & Energy          & Energy      & Performance        & Distance     \\
     name       & consumption/J   & saving\%    & degradation\%      &              \\
@@ -1136,17 +1135,17 @@ degradation values while giving the same weight for both metrics.
 \begin{table}[!t]
  \caption{Comparing the proposed algorithm}
  \centering
-\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
+\begin{tabular}{|*{7}{r|}}
 \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{\multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Program \\ name\end{tabular}}} & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{Energy saving \%} & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{Perf.  degradation \%} & \multicolumn{2}{l|}{Distance} \\ \cline{3-8} 
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{}                                                                         & EDP             & MaxDist          & EDP            & MaxDist           & EDP          & MaxDist        \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{CG}                                                                       & 27.58           & 31.25            & 5.82           & 7.12              & 21.76        & 24.13          \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{MG}                                                                       & 29.49           & 33.78            & 3.74           & 6.41              & 25.75        & 27.37          \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{LU}                                                                       & 19.55           & 28.33            & 0.0            & 0.01              & 19.55        & 28.22          \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{EP}                                                                       & 28.40           & 27.04            & 4.29           & 0.49              & 24.11        & 26.55          \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{BT}                                                                       & 27.68           & 32.32            & 6.45           & 7.87              & 21.23        & 24.43          \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{SP}                                                                       & 20.52           & 24.73            & 5.21           & 2.78              & 15.31         & 21.95         \\ \hline
-\multicolumn{2}{|l|}{FT}                                                                       & 27.03           & 31.02            & 2.75           & 2.54              & 24.28        & 28.48           \\ \hline
+Program & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Energy saving \%} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Perf.  degradation \%} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Distance} \\ \cline{2-7} 
+name    & EDP             & MaxDist          & EDP            & MaxDist           & EDP          & MaxDist        \\ \hline
+CG      & 27.58           & 31.25            & 5.82           & 7.12              & 21.76        & 24.13          \\ \hline
+MG      & 29.49           & 33.78            & 3.74           & 6.41              & 25.75        & 27.37          \\ \hline
+LU      & 19.55           & 28.33            & 0.0            & 0.01              & 19.55        & 28.22          \\ \hline
+EP      & 28.40           & 27.04            & 4.29           & 0.49              & 24.11        & 26.55          \\ \hline
+BT      & 27.68           & 32.32            & 6.45           & 7.87              & 21.23        & 24.43          \\ \hline
+SP      & 20.52           & 24.73            & 5.21           & 2.78              & 15.31         & 21.95         \\ \hline
+FT      & 27.03           & 31.02            & 2.75           & 2.54              & 24.28        & 28.48           \\ \hline
 
 \end{tabular}
 \label{table:compare_EDP}