Abstract
Within classical MAPE-K control-loop structures for adaptive systems, knowledge gathered from monitoring the system and its environment is used to guide adaptation decisions at runtime. There are several approaches to enrich this knowledge base to improve the planning of adaptations. We consider a method where probabilistic model checking (PMC) is used at design time to compute results for various short-term objectives, such as the expected energy consumption, expected throughput, or probability of success. The variety PMC-results yield the basis for defining decision policies (PMC-based strategies) that operate at runtime and serve as heuristics to optimize for a given long-term objective. The main goal is to apply a robust decision making method that can deal with different kinds of uncertainty at runtime. In this paper, we thoroughly examine, quantify, and evaluate the potential of this approach with the help of an experimental study on an adaptive hardware platform, where the global objective addresses the trade-off between energy consumption and performance. The focus of this study is on the robustness of PMC-based strategies and their ability to dynamically manage situations, where the system at runtime operates under conditions that deviate from the (idealized) assumptions made in the preceding offline analysis.
The authors are supported by the DFG through the TRR 248 (see https://perspicuous-computing.science, project ID 389792660), the Cluster of Excellence EXC 2050/1 (CeTI, project ID 390696704, as part of Germany’s Excellence Strategy), and the Research Training Groups QuantLA (GRK 1763) and RoSI (GRK 1907) and the DFG-project BA-1679/11-1.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
See [3] for details on MDPs, schedulers, and PCTL\(^*\)-model checking.
- 2.
This abstract number and the respective distributions could also be used to characterize the computational weight of larger tasks, e.g., by the number of its subtasks.
- 3.
Alternative measures for utility could for example address latency.
- 4.
We simply write \(\boldsymbol{\mathfrak {S}} _{{\textbf {Util}}} \) when the probability bound P equals 1.
- 5.
The concrete model can be found on https://tud.link/8036.
- 6.
Further information can be found in https://tud.link/8036.
References
Arega, F.M., Haehnel, M., Dargie, W.: Dynamic power management in a heterogeneous processor architecture. In: Knoop, J., Karl, W., Schulz, M., Inoue, K., Pionteck, T. (eds.) ARCS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10172, pp. 248–260. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54999-6_19
Baier, C., Daum, M., Dubslaff, C., Klein, J., Klüppelholz, S.: Energy-utility quantiles. In: Badger, J.M., Rozier, K.Y. (eds.) NFM 2014. LNCS, vol. 8430, pp. 285–299. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06200-6_24
Baier, C., Katoen, J.-P.: Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)
Calinescu, R., Ghezzi, C., Kwiatkowska, M.Z., Mirandola, R.: Self-adaptive software needs quantitative verification at runtime. Commun. ACM 55(9), 69–77 (2012)
Calinescu, R., Grunske, L., Kwiatkowska, M.Z., Mirandola, R., Tamburrelli, G.: Dynamic QoS management and optimization in service-based systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 37(3), 387–409 (2011)
Cámara, J., de Lemos, R.: Evaluation of resilience in self-adaptive systems using probabilistic model-checking. In: 7th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems, SEAMS 2012, Zurich, Switzerland, 4–5 June 2012, pp. 53–62. IEEE (2012)
Chrszon, P., Dubslaff, C., Klüppelholz, S., Baier, C.: ProFeat: feature-oriented engineering for family-based probabilistic model checking. Formal Aspects Comput. 30(1), 45–75 (2018)
Filieri, A., Ghezzi, C., Tamburrelli, G.: Run-time efficient probabilistic model checking. In: Taylor, R.N., Gall, H.C., Medvidovic, N., (eds.) Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2011, Waikiki, Honolulu, HI, USA, 21–28 May 2011, pp. 341–350. ACM (2011)
Filieri, A., Tamburrelli, G., Ghezzi, C.: Supporting self-adaptation via quantitative verification and sensitivity analysis at run time. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 42(1), 75–99 (2016)
Forejt, V., Kwiatkowska, M., Parker, D., Qu, H., Ujma, M.: Incremental runtime verification of probabilistic systems. In: Qadeer, S., Tasiran, S. (eds.) RV 2012. LNCS, vol. 7687, pp. 314–319. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35632-2_30
Güdemann, M., Ortmeier, F., Reif, W.: Safety and dependability analysis of self-adaptive systems. In: Second International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation (isola 2006), pp. 177–184 (2006)
Ghezzi, C., Pinto, L.S., Spoletini, P., Tamburrelli, G.: Managing non-functional uncertainty via model-driven adaptivity. In: Notkin, D., Cheng, B.H.C., Pohl, K., (eds.) 35th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2013, San Francisco, CA, USA, 18–26 May 2013, pp. 33–42. IEEE (2013)
Hachicha, M., Halima, R.B., Kacem, A.H.: Formal verification approaches of self-adaptive systems: a survey. In: Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference KES-2019, Budapest, Hungary, 4–6 September 2019, vol. 159 of Procedia Computer Science, pp. 1853–1862. Elsevier (2019)
Johnson, K., Calinescu, R., Kikuchi, S.: An incremental verification framework for component-based software systems. In: CBSE 2013, Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Component Based Software Engineering, part of Comparch 2013, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 17–21 June 2013, pp. 33–42. ACM (2013)
Kissinger, T., Habich, D., Lehner, W.: Adaptive energy-control for in-memory database systems. In: Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD Conference 2018, Houston, TX, USA, 10–15 June 2018, pp. 351–364. ACM (2018)
Kwiatkowska, M., Norman, G., Parker, D.: PRISM 4.0: verification of probabilistic real-time systems. In: Gopalakrishnan, G., Qadeer, S. (eds.) CAV 2011. LNCS, vol. 6806, pp. 585–591. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22110-1_47
Leucker, M., Schallhart, C.: A brief account of runtime verification. J. Logic Algebraic Program. 78(5), 293–303 (2009)
Lochau, M., Mennicke, S., Baller, H., Ribbeck, L.: Incremental model checking of delta-oriented software product lines. J. Logical Algebraic Methods Program. 85(1), 245–267 (2016)
Nia, M.A., Kargahi, M., Faghih, F.: Probabilistic approximation of runtime quantitative verification in self-adaptive systems. Microprocess. Microsyst. 72, 102943 (2020)
Rinast, J.: An online model-checking framework for timed automata. PhD thesis, Hamburg University of Technology (2015)
Weyns, D., Iftikhar, M.U., De La Iglesia, D.G., Ahmad, T.: A survey of formal methods in self-adaptive systems. In: Fifth International C* Conference on Computer Science & Software Engineering, C3S2E 2012, Montreal, QC, Canada, 27–29 June 2012, pp. 67–79. ACM (2012)
Zhao, Y.: Online Model Checking Mechanisms and Its Applications. PhD thesis, Universität Paderborn (2016)
Zhao, Y., Rammig, F.: Online model checking for dependable real-time systems. In: 2012 IEEE 15th International Symposium on Object/Component/Service-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing, pp. 154–161 (2012). ISSN: 2375–5261
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Korn, M., Chrszon, P., Klüppelholz, S., Baier, C., Wunderlich, S. (2023). Effectiveness of Pre-computed Knowledge in Self-adaptation - A Robustness Study. In: Gilly, K., Thomas, N. (eds) Computer Performance Engineering. EPEW 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13659. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25049-1_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25049-1_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-25048-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-25049-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)