Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering 2015
DOI: 10.1145/2786805.2786853
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Proactive self-adaptation under uncertainty: a probabilistic model checking approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
61
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 150 publications
(64 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
61
0
Order By: Relevance
“…fault-tolerate real-time scheduling [68]. As Gabriel et al claimed in [69]: "Self-adaptive systems tend to be reactive and myopic, adapting in response to changes without anticipating what the subsequent adaptation needs will be". This drawback is extremely dangerous, especially for safety critical CPS, because self-healing would not be triggered until a fault has been detected.…”
Section: The Relationship Between Correctness and Dependability Of Sementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…fault-tolerate real-time scheduling [68]. As Gabriel et al claimed in [69]: "Self-adaptive systems tend to be reactive and myopic, adapting in response to changes without anticipating what the subsequent adaptation needs will be". This drawback is extremely dangerous, especially for safety critical CPS, because self-healing would not be triggered until a fault has been detected.…”
Section: The Relationship Between Correctness and Dependability Of Sementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Meanwhile, most self-adaptation actions are taken after the target phenomenon has been observed, which implies that there is almost no time left, especially for critical system. Gabriel A.M. et al presented a proactive latency-aware, self-adaptation with the offline formal specifications of the adaptation tactics, a stochastic behavior model of the environment and a runtime probabilistic model checker [69]. Proactive adaptation should predict the context of system and environment in the future then make the best decision for adapting actions.…”
Section: Self-adaptability and Validationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several high-level frameworks and approaches based on probabilistic model checking have been proposed for self-adaptive systems recently, but with emphasis on different aspects of the adaptation, such as QoS management and optimization [4], adaptation decisions [20], verification with information of confidence intervals [3], runtime verification efficiency and sensitivity analysis [18], and proactive verification and adaptation latency [23]. None of those works addressed the problem of making a practical tradeoff similar to the one supported by IDMS.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second contribution of this paper is an application of IDMS to selfadaptive systems. Several high-level frameworks and approaches based on probabilistic model checking have been proposed to aid the design of self-adaptive systems, but with emphasis on different aspects of the adaptation [3,4,18,20,23]. However none of these works address the problem of making the aforementioned tradeoff in the adaptation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…G Babin et al [8] addressed the problem of the correct design of Web service compositions in case of failures and verifies the service function through the model checking techniques. Moreno G A et al [9] presented an approach for proactive latency-aware adaptation under uncertainty that uses probabilistic model checking for adaptation decisions. Chen M et al [11] proposed an automated method of directly verifying the combined functionality and nonfunctional requirements through the Web service composition semantics.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%