Towards Meta-Adaptation Support with Reusable and Composable Adaptation Components

Abstract

Software systems today are increasingly used in changing environments and expected to adapt with variable adaptation concerns. This requirement demands a systematic approach to efficiently construct system global adaptation behaviour according to the dynamic adaptation requirements. This paper presents Transformer -a framework for adaptation behaviour composition support based on reusable and composable adaptation components. Rather than using one adaptation module for all possible contexts, Transformer constructs system global adaptation behaviour by contextually fusing adaptation plans from multiple adaptation components. Explicit conflict resolution is provided to handle possible conflicts raised in the fusion process. In addition to the description of the Transformer framework, this paper also presents its implementation and its application to a video conferencing system. Qualitative analysis and simulation results show that our framework exhibits significant advantage over traditional approaches in light of flexibility and reusability of the adaptation components with little performance overhead.

Classification and comparison of architecture evolution reuse knowledge—a systematic review

“…We derive our proposed framework from two well‐known reference models: the Object Management Group (OMG's) ADM method and the IBM MAPE‐K reference model , presented in Figure . ADM represents architectural modernisation and evolution at design‐time , whereas MAPE‐K loop supports runtime adaptations . Using established reference models and practices validates the adequacy of our classification and comparison framework.…”

“…The MAPE‐K reference model in Figure B is used to communicate the architectural aspects of autonomic systems. Although MAPE‐K does not entirely focus on architecture of dynamic software, it provides a reference model to monitor, analyse, plan and execute runtime adaptation of architectures . The MAPE‐K reference model relies on the following: Monitoring monitors the system and measure attributes related to architectural configurations and properties for possible runtime reconfigurations of architecture. Analysing analyses the measured runtime data and detects violations of the requirements. Planning generates a change plan for architectural reconfigurations. Execute enacts structural and behavioural changes to the running system based on the actions recommended by the plan function. Knowledge includes shared data such as topology information, metrics and policies for dynamic adaptation.…”

“…In contrast, architectural evolution refers to consequential changes in architectures usually implemented as dynamic or online modifications of architecture. Furthermore, in order to consider the needs for autonomic computing and self‐adaptive architectures , we must distinguish between design‐time maintenance and runtime evolution or adaptations . In the taxonomy of software change , the factors influencing evolution are the following: Time of evolution : To operate in a dynamic and open world , modern software systems need to evolve their architecture while maintaining system execution.…”

Modeling Collaborations in Adaptive Systems of Systems

“…Afterwards, a given framework validates the modeled configuration and generates an appropriate adaptation logic. Similar to a domain specific modeling language, Gui et al [92] provide a standardized component model, which encapsulates the adaptation strategy. Thereby, components can be connected, which forms the overall adaptation logic.…”

“…A concrete example of using declarative rules for the modeling of meta-adaptation is discussed in Section 5. 6.3. In contrast to the declarative approach, Gui et al [92] follow the component-based approach to encapsulate the adaptation logic in well-defined composable adaptation planners. The approach defines a component model, where each component contains a piece of an adaptation strategy together with some local knowledge.…”