Diego Perez-Palacin
ABSTRACT
The complexity of modern software systems has grown enormously in the past years with users always demanding for new features and better quality of service. Besides, software is often embedded in dynamic contexts, where requirements, environment assumptions, and usage profiles continuously change. As an answer to this need, it has been proposed the usage of self-adaptive systems. Self-adaptation endows a system with the capability to accommodate its execution to different contexts in order to achieve continuous satisfaction of requirements. Often, self-adaptation process also makes use of runtime model evaluations to decide the changes in the system. However, even at runtime, context information that can be managed by the system is not complete or accurate; i.e, it is still subject to some uncertainties. This work motivates the need for the consideration of the concept of uncertainty in the model-based evaluation as a primary actor, classifies the avowed uncertainties of self-adaptive systems, and illustrates examples of how different types of uncertainties are present in the modeling of system characteristics for availability requirement satisfaction.
- P. G. Armour. The five orders of ignorance. Commun. ACM, 43(10):17--20, Oct. 2000. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. Bakkaloglu, J. J. Wylie, C. Wang, and G. R. Ganger. On correlated failures in survivable storage systems. Technical Report Carnegie Mellon University-CS-02--129, Carnegie Mellon University, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Balsamo, A. D. Marco, P. Inverardi, and M. Simeoni. Model-based performance prediction in software development: A survey. IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, 30(5):295--310, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Beck and G. van Straten. Uncertainty and forecasting of water quality. Springer-Verlag, 1983.Google ScholarCross Ref
- W. J. Bolosky, J. R. Douceur, D. Ely, and M. Theimer. Feasibility of a serverless distributed file system deployed on an existing set of desktop PCs. In Proc. SIGMETRICS, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Calinescu, C. Ghezzi, M. Z. Kwiatkowska, and R. Mirandola. Self-adaptive software needs quantitative verification at runtime. Commun. ACM, 55(9):69--77, 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S.-W. Cheng and D. Garlan. Handling uncertainty in autonomic systems. In Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Living with Uncertainties (IWLU’07), Atlanta, GA, USA, 2007.Google Scholar
- L. Cheung, L. Golubchik, N. Medvidovic, and G. Sukhatme. Identifying and addressing uncertainty in architecture-level software reliability modeling. In Int. Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium. IPDPS 2007, pages 1--6, 2007.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. Cortellessa, A. D. Marco, and P. Inverardi. Model-Based Software Performance Analysis. Springer, 2011. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Devaraj, K. Mishra, and K. S. Trivedi. Uncertainty propagation in analytic availability models. In Proc. of the Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems, SRDS '10, pages 121--130, Washington, DC, USA, 2010. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Esfahani, E. Kouroshfar, and S. Malek. Taming uncertainty in self-adaptive software. In Proc. of ESEC/FSE '11, pages 234--244, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Esfahani and S. Malek. Uncertainty in self-adaptive software systems. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems II, volume 7475 of LNCS, pages 214--238. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Esfahani, S. Malek, and K. Razavi. Guidearch: guiding the exploration of architectural solution space under uncertainty. In Proc. of the International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE '13, pages 43--52, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2013. IEEE Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Esfahani, K. Razavi, and S. Malek. Dealing with uncertainty in early software architecture. In Proc. International Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering, FSE '12, pages 21:1--21:4, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Fiondella and S. Gokhale. Software reliability with architectural uncertainties. In Int. Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, IPDPS 2008, pages 1--5, 2008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Funtowicz and J. Ravetz. Uncertainty and Quality in Science for Policy. Springer, 1990.Google Scholar
- D. Garlan. Software engineering in an uncertain world. In Future of Software Engineering Research workshop, FoSER '10, pages 125--128, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. F. Gauss, C. H. Davis, and M. of America Project. Theory of the motion of the heavenly bodies moving about the sun in conic sections. Boston,Little, Brown and company, 1809. http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/19023.Google Scholar
- K. Goseva-Popstojanova and S. Kamavaram. Assessing uncertainty in reliability of component-based software systems. In Proc. of the 14th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering, ISSRE '03, pages 307--, Washington, DC, USA, 2003. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Goseva-Popstojanova and S. Kamavaram. Software reliability estimation under certainty: generalization of the method of moments. In Proc. of International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering, pages 209--218, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Guha, N. Daswani, and R. Jain. An Experimental Study of the Skype Peer-to-Peer VoIP System. In Proc. of the International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS '06), Santa Barbara, CA, 2006.Google Scholar
- J. C. Helton, J. D. Johnson, W. Oberkampf, and C. J. Sallaberry. Representation of analysis results involving aleatory and epistemic uncertainty. Int. J. General Systems, (6):605--646, 2010.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. B. Kadane and N. A. Lazar. Methods and criteria for model selection. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 99(465):279--290, 2004.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Kephart and D. Chess. The vision of autonomic computing. Computer, 36(1):41--50, 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- I. Meedeniya, A. Aleti, and L. Grunske. Architecture-driven reliability optimization with uncertain model parameters. J. of Systems and Software, 85(10):2340--2355, Oct. 2012. Google ScholarDigital Library
- I. Meedeniya, I. Moser, A. Aleti, and L. Grunske. Architecture-based reliability evaluation under uncertainty. In Proc. of the international conference on Quality of Software Architectures, QoSA'11, pages 85--94, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Pang, J. Hendricks, A. Akella, B. Maggs, R. D. Prisco, and S. Seshan. Availability, usage, and deployment characteristics of the domain name system. In Proc. IMC, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. C. Refsgaard, J. P. van der Sluijs, J. Brown, and P. van der Keur. A framework for dealing with uncertainty due to model structure error. Advances in Water Resources, 29(11):1586 -- 1597, 2006.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. C. Refsgaard, J. P. van der Sluijs, A. L. Højberg, and P. A. Vanrolleghem. Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process - a framework and guidance. Environ. Model. Softw., 22(11):1543--1556, Nov. 2007. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Stribling. Planetlab all pairs ping. http://infospect.planet-lab.org/pings.Google Scholar
- M. Strong, J. E. Oakley, and J. Chilcott. Managing structural uncertainty in health economic decision models: a discrepancy approach. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics), 61(1):25--45, 2012.Google Scholar
- C. Trubiani, I. Meedeniya, V. Cortellessa, A. Aleti, and L. Grunske. Model-based performance analysis of software architectures under uncertainty. In Proc. of the international conference on Quality of Software Architectures, QoSA '13, pages 69--78, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- W. Walker, P. HarremoŚs, J. Romans, J. van der Sluus, M. van Asselt, P. Janssen, and M. Krauss. Defining uncertainty. a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integrated Assessment, 4(1):5--17, 2003.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Whittle, P. Sawyer, N. Bencomo, B. H. C. Cheng, and J.-M. Bruel. Relax: A language to address uncertainty in self-adaptive systems requirement. Requir. Eng., 15(2):177--196, June 2010. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Yin, M. Smith, and K. Trivedi. Uncertainty analysis in reliability modeling. In Proc. of Reliability and Maintainability Symposium, 2001, pages 229--234, 2001.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Uncertainties in the modeling of self-adaptive systems: a taxonomy and an example of availability evaluation
Recommendations
Uncertainty in Self-adaptive Systems: A Research Community Perspective
One of the primary drivers for self-adaptation is ensuring that systems achieve their goals regardless of the uncertainties they face during operation. Nevertheless, the concept of uncertainty in self-adaptive systems is still insufficiently understood. ...
Taming uncertainty in self-adaptive software
ESEC/FSE '11: Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European conference on Foundations of software engineeringSelf-adaptation endows a software system with the ability to satisfy certain objectives by automatically modifying its behavior. While many promising approaches for the construction of self-adaptive software systems have been developed, the majority of ...
RELAX: a language to address uncertainty in self-adaptive systems requirement
RE'09 Special Issue; Guest Editor:Kevin T RyanSelf-adaptive systems have the capability to autonomously modify their behavior at run-time in response to changes in their environment. Self-adaptation is particularly necessary for applications that must run continuously, even under adverse conditions ...
Comments