François Tessier's Avatar

François Tessier

@hephtaicie

Research Scientist at Inria Rennes 🇫🇷. #HPC, I/O, Storage. Recent focus on #SKA 🔭. French-Swiss, former ANL 🇺🇸 and @cscsch 🇨🇭. Father of one.

350
Followers
537
Following
71
Posts
17.10.2023
Joined
Posts Following

Latest posts by François Tessier @hephtaicie

Bravo pour les 1.5M ! C'est amplement mérite :-)
Est-ce que tu peux nous raconter un peu ce que tu fais autour de mini-Reachy chez HF/Pollen?

09.03.2026 12:59 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

C'est officiel, cette année il y aura donc plus de 240 candidatures au concours Chargé·e de Recherche Inria pour seulement 6 postes (Plus d'une vingtaine de postes avant 2017).

Une catastrophe.

Colère pour ces jeunes chercheur·euses.

04.03.2026 08:36 👍 3 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0
Post image

📢 ISPDC 2026: Call for Papers, Posters, and Talks! 📢

I am happy to announce the 25th International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Computing (ISPDC 2026) (July 1-3, Hamburg, Germany)!

Submissions are due March 23, 2026 (AoE).

Further info: indico.desy.de/e/ispdc2026

#HPC #supercomputing

23.01.2026 14:37 👍 1 🔁 3 💬 0 📌 0

Est-il prévu une option payante pour supprimer la pub intempestive à chaque lancement ?

03.12.2025 13:50 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
7th Workshop on Extreme-Scale Storage and Analysis
Held in conjunction with IPDPS 2026, New Orleans, LA, USA

Paper submission deadline: January 23, 2026
Acceptance notification: February 25, 2026
Camera-ready deadline: March 6, 2026
Workshop date: May 26, 2026

7th Workshop on Extreme-Scale Storage and Analysis Held in conjunction with IPDPS 2026, New Orleans, LA, USA Paper submission deadline: January 23, 2026 Acceptance notification: February 25, 2026 Camera-ready deadline: March 6, 2026 Workshop date: May 26, 2026

📢 Call for Papers: 7th International Workshop on Extreme-Scale #Storage and #Analysis (ESSA 2026), held in conjunction with IPDPS (New Orleans, May 2026)!
More info here: sites.google.com/view/essa-2026
#HPC #Cloud #IPDPS

03.12.2025 13:10 👍 1 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
Video thumbnail

It wasn't deep. It didn't have much to say. But Xiao Xiao inspired millions to try Flash animation for themselves.

A Beijing artist made this series -- and turned stick fights into a phenomenon. We're exploring why and how he did it:
animationobsessive.substack.com/p/when-stick...

03.11.2025 19:27 👍 2499 🔁 861 💬 35 📌 128
Preview
Les agences de programmes Depuis 2017, la France a cherché à développer une nouvelle modalité de financement de la recherche en déployant des programmes de « recherche dirigée », au sein des programmes d’investissements d’aven...

La cour des comptes publie son rapport sur les agences de programme.

20.11.2025 09:32 👍 5 🔁 3 💬 1 📌 0
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below.

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.

A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.

A figure detailing the drain on researcher time.

1. The four-fold drain

1.2 Time
The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce,
with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure
1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material
has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs,
grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for
profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time.
The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million
unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of
peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting
widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the
authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many
review demands.
Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of
scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in
‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow
progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to
volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier,
local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with
limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging
with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks
intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.

A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.

A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below:

1. The four-fold drain
1.1 Money
Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for
whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who
created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis,
which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024
alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit
margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher
(Elsevier) always over 37%.
Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most
consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial
difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor &
Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American
researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The
Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3
billion in that year.

A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.

The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised
scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers
first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour
resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.

The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.

We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...

11.11.2025 11:52 👍 643 🔁 453 💬 8 📌 66
Preview
The Future of Storage for HPC and AI The AI arms race has made “GPU” and “gigawatt” household words, and for good reason: What’s happening with the scale of compute is unprecedented. But what about the underlying storage […]

Part 1 of the special HPCwire series about the future of #storage for #HPC and #AI lays out the current state of storage for AI and HPC and touches on some of the broad challenges that organizations are facing.

www.hpcwire.com/2025/10/13/t...

17.10.2025 15:42 👍 3 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 1

That's a lot! Maybe some papers could fit in other tracks. For HiPC, we reassigned a bunch of Apps papers (most of them to the AI/ML track).

10.10.2025 17:59 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Preview
Global climate simulations achieve 1.25 km resolution—team nominated for Climate Gordon Bell Prize | CSCS For the first time, scientists have run global coupled climate simulations at a resolution of just 1.25 kilometres. Using CSCS’s “Alps” supercomputer, the team including researchers from ETH Zürich…

Cool and impactful project led by the MPI-M: coupled simulation of the full Earth system in 1.25km resolution. Unprecedented complexity, fidelity, and performance at 82.5 simulated days per day. Accelerated by DaCe on GH200 - next generation #HPC for #climate science is here!

02.10.2025 05:00 👍 8 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 3
Jean Zay 4 : Accélérer l'IA I Reportage CNRS
Jean Zay 4 : Accélérer l'IA I Reportage CNRS YouTube video by CNRS

126 millions de milliards d’opérations en virgule flottante par seconde : c’est la capacité du supercalculateur Jean Zay 4 depuis mai 2025.
Une puissance énorme entièrement au service de la science.

Reportage @cnrs.fr :

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Jdj...

26.09.2025 08:00 👍 64 🔁 20 💬 3 📌 0
benchmarking There are two ways to approach benchmarking. System-level capability: This tells you the best- and worst-case performance you can get out of the system regardless of whatever workload (or mix of workl...

I wrote up some notes on how to approach I/O and storage benchmarks in RFPs. I normally don't post here about updates to my digital garden, but I think this page is tidy and useful.

www.glennklockwood.com/garden/bench...

#HPC

25.07.2025 17:33 👍 7 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
Post image

📢 [FINAL] Call for Papers for the REX-IO 2025 Workshop! 📢

REX-IO 2025 is still accepting submissions (short & full papers) and your high-quality work can make a big difference!

Final deadline: July 25, 2025 11:59PM AoE. 🤩 📜 🦖

More information: sites.google.com/view/rexio/

#HPC #supercomputing

21.07.2025 20:16 👍 3 🔁 4 💬 0 📌 0
Preview
Glenn Lockwood Joins VAST with Eye on Next-Gen AI Infrastructure Strategy July 18, 2025 — Editor’s Note: Glenn Lockwood, known for his work on Azure’s large-scale AI supercomputers and the Perlmutter supercomputer’s all-NVMe Lustre system, announced earlier this month he wa...

Glenn Lockwood Joins VAST with Eye on Next-Gen AI Infrastructure Strategy
ow.ly/flLQ50Ws29T #HPC #HPCwire

18.07.2025 18:29 👍 5 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0

La vie devant soi, de Romain Gary ?

12.07.2025 08:29 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Post image

A global power outage during an ESSA workshop is not enough to stop us from sharing our work on I/O and Storage! #IPDPS25

04.06.2025 14:47 👍 6 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Post image

📢 [CFP] REX-IO 2025 Workshop at IEEE Cluster Conference 2025!

I'm happy to announce the 5th Workshop on Re-envisioning Extreme-Scale I/O for Emerging Hybrid HPC Workloads!

Submissions are due July 9, 2025 (11:59PM AoE). 🤩 📜 🦖

Further info: sites.google.com/view/rexio/

#HPC #supercomputing

20.05.2025 13:19 👍 7 🔁 5 💬 0 📌 0

🆕Comment simuler des phénomènes naturels complexes sur ordinateur pour les rendre compréhensifs et les étudier ?🔬

Au centre #Inria de l’ @univbordeaux.bsky.social : #modélisation, #data et #HPC s’unissent dans un #continuum scientifique puissant.

🔎Sur inria.fr : www.inria.fr/fr/modelisat...

19.05.2025 14:57 👍 1 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
Post image

Au Poste, c’est vous. Sans vous, c’est silence radio. Aujourd’hui, nous avons besoin de vous pour notre chaine YouTube. Moins de 5000 followers manquent pour franchir un cap, trouver des appuis, tenir la ligne, et remplir les conditions pour demandes d'aides au CNC -> www.youtube.com/@au_poste?su...

04.05.2025 07:01 👍 97 🔁 99 💬 1 📌 9

Ah ! My bad. J'ai lu un mot sur deux 😬

22.04.2025 08:14 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

Tu es sûr ? C'est down pour mes collègues et moi depuis 9h ce matin. Tous les services en inria.fr sont inaccessibles.

22.04.2025 08:07 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0

Yes, depuis au moins 9h ce matin...

22.04.2025 08:07 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0

Definitely something useful! We are using it for monitoring python-based components of a radio-astronomy processing pipeline for SKA. We'll try the new version very soon!

12.03.2025 17:12 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Using Darshan with non-MPI applications (e.g., AI/ML frameworks) – Darshan

Darshan now supports I/O profiling for (non-MPI) machine learning frameworks, and a new blog post explains how: https://www.mcs.anl.gov/research/projects/darshan/2025/03/11/using-darshan-with-non-mpi-applications-e-g-ai-ml-frameworks/

#HPC

12.03.2025 16:34 👍 7 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0
Post image

Opération 50000 abonnés Youtube lancée: il nous manque 12.000 followers pour prétendre à traquer quelques menues aides financières ici ou là. Vous êtes 15000 ici à nous suivre sur BSKY. On serait tellement pas loin... youtube.com/@au_poste Merci de vous abonner à notre canal (gratuit)

09.03.2025 08:00 👍 219 🔁 183 💬 46 📌 19

We're all wondering what is in the middle column which has been hidden 👀

14.02.2025 08:16 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Welcome! Website for IEEE Cluster 2025. The latest news is also shown in Twitter/ieeecluster

🚀 𝐈𝐄𝐄𝐄 𝐂𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓 – 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐏𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬! 📢
Submission Deadline: April 25, 2025

📍 Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
📅 Dates: September 2-5, 2025

📢 The CFP is open! Submit your paper by April 25, 2025: clustercomp.org/2025/papers/

08.02.2025 06:06 👍 5 🔁 5 💬 0 📌 5

J'ai juste terminé le premier livre du premier cycle je crois. Je m'y perds un peu dans les différents découpages des éditions. Merci pour le conseil ! Je vais faire ça alors.

03.02.2025 11:05 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0