Martina Maggio
Henry Hoffmann
Alessandro V. Papadopoulos
Jacopo Panerati
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Autonomic computing systems are capable of adapting their behavior and resources thousands of times a second to automatically decide the best way to accomplish a given goal despite changing environmental conditions and demands. Different decision mechanisms are considered in the literature, but in the vast majority of the cases a single technique is applied to a given instance of the problem. This article proposes a comparison of some state of the art approaches for decision making, applied to a self-optimizing autonomic system that allocates resources to a software application. A variety of decision mechanisms, from heuristics to control-theory and machine learning, are investigated. The results obtained with these solutions are compared by means of case studies using standard benchmarks. Our results indicate that the most suitable decision mechanism can vary depending on the specific test case but adaptive and model predictive control systems tend to produce good performance and may work best in a priori unknown situations.
- Ansel, J., ans Cy Chan, Y. L. W., Olszewski, M., Edelman, A., and Amarasinghe, S. 2011. Language and compiler support for auto-tuning variable-accuracy algorithms. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Åström, K. and Hägglund, T. 2005. Advanced PID Control. The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society (ISA), Research Triangle Park, NC.Google Scholar
- Bienia, C. 2011. Benchmarking modern multiprocessors. Ph.D. thesis, Princeton University. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bienia, C., Kumar, S., Singh, J. P., and Li, K. 2008. The PARSEC benchmark suite: Characterization and architectural implications. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Parallel Architectures and Compilation Techniques. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bitirgen, R., Ipek, E., and Martinez, J. 2008. Coordinated management of multiple interacting resources in chip multiprocessors: A machine learning approach. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture (MICRO 41). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 318--329. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bittanti, S. and Picci, G. 1996. Identification, Adaptation, Learning: The Science of Learning Models from Data. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
- Bodík, P., Griffith, R., Sutton, C., Fox, A., Jordan, M., and Patterson, D. 2009. Statistical machine learning makes automatic control practical for internet datacenters. In Proceedings of the Conference on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud’09). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, 12--17. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Breitgand, D., Henis, E., and Shehory, O. 2005. Automated and adaptive threshold setting: Enabling technology for autonomy and self-management. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Automatic Computing. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 204--215. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Camacho, E. and Bordons, C. 2004. Model Predictive Control. Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
- Chase, J., Anderson, D., Thakar, P., Vahdat, A., and Doyle, R. 2001. Managing energy and server resources in hosting centers. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP’01). ACM, New York, 103--116. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hellerstein, J., Diao, Y., Parekh, S., and Tilbury, D. 2004. Feedback Control of Computing Systems. Wiley. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hellerstein, J., Morrison, V., and Eilebrecht, E. 2009. Applying control theory in the real world: experience with building a controller for the .net thread pool. SIGMETRICS Perf. Eval. Rev. 37, 3, 38--42. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hellerstein, J. L. 2010. Why feedback implementations fail: The importance of systematic testing. In Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Feedback Control Implementation and Design in Computing Systems and Networks (FeBiD’10). ACM, New York, NY, 25--26. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hoffmann, H., Eastep, J., Santambrogio, M., Miller, J., and Agarwal, A. 2010. Application heartbeats: A generic interface for specifying program performance and goals in autonomous computing environments. In Proceeding of the 7th International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC’10). ACM, New York, 79--88. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hoffmann, H., Maggio, M., Santambrogio, M. D., Leva, A., and Agarwal, A. 2011. SEEC: A general and extensible framework for self-aware computing. Tech. rep. MIT-CSAIL-TR-2011-046, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- IBM. 2006. An architectural blueprint for autonomic computing. Tech. rep.Google Scholar
- Kephart, J. 2005. Research challenges of autonomic computing. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’05). ACM, New York, 15--22. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kephart, J. and Chess, D. 2003. The vision of autonomic computing. Computer 36, 41--50. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Liu, X., Zhu, X., Singhal, S., and Arlitt, M. 2005. Adaptive entitlement control of resource containers on shared servers. In Proceeding of the 9th IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management. 163--176.Google Scholar
- Ljung, L. 1998. System Identification: Theory for the User. Prentice Hall. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lu, C., Lu, Y., Abdelzaher, T., Stankovic, J., and Son, S. 2006. Feedback control architecture and design methodology for service delay guarantees in web servers. IEEE Trans. Parall. Distrib. Syst. 17, 7. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maggio, M., Hoffmann, H., Santambrogio, M. D., Agarwal, A., and Leva, A. 2010. Controlling software applications via resource allocation within the heartbeats framework. In Proceeding of the 49th International Conference on Decision and Control. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA.Google Scholar
- Maggio, M., Hoffmann, H., Santambrogio, M. D., Agarwal, A., and Leva, A. 2011. Decision making in autonomic computing systems: Comparison of approaches and techniques. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC’11). ACM, New York, 201--204. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martinez, J. and Ipek, E. 2009. Dynamic multicore resource management: A machine learning approach. IEEE Micro 29, 8--17. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nissen, S. 2005. Neural networks made simple. Software 2.0 2, 14--19.Google Scholar
- O’Dwyer, A. 2006. Handbook of PI and PID Controller Tuning Rules 2nd Ed. Imperial College Press.Google Scholar
- Pan, W., Mu, D., Wu, H., and Yao, L. 2008. Feedback control-based QoS guarantees in web application servers. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications. 328--334. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ramirez, A., Knoester, D., Cheng, B., and McKinley, P. 2009. Applying genetic algorithms to decision making in autonomic computing systems. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Autonomic Computing (ICAC’09). ACM, New York, 97--106. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sutton, R. and Barto, A. 1998. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press, 322. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tesauro, G. 2007. Reinforcement learning in autonomic computing: A manifesto and case studies. IEEE Internet Comput. 11, 22--30. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tesauro, G., Jong, N., Das, R., and Bennani, M. 2006. A hybrid reinforcement learning approach to autonomic resource allocation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 65--73. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tsai, C., Hsu, Y., Lin, C., and Lin, W. 2009. Review: Intrusion detection by machine learning: A review. Expert Syst. Appl. 36, 11994--12000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ulam, P., Goel, A., Jones, J., and Murdoch, W. 2005. Using model-based reflection to guide reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Reasoning, Representation and Learning in Computer Games. 1--6.Google Scholar
- Wildstrom, J., Witchel, E., and Mooney, R. 2005. Towards self-configuring hardware for distributed computer systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Automatic Computing. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 241--249. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zhang, R., Lu, C., Abdelzaher, T., and Stankovic, J. 2002. Controlware: A middleware architecture for feedback control of software performance. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Comparison of Decision-Making Strategies for Self-Optimization in Autonomic Computing Systems
Recommendations
Decision making in autonomic computing systems: comparison of approaches and techniques
ICAC '11: Proceedings of the 8th ACM international conference on Autonomic computingAutonomic computing systems adapt themselves thousands of times a second, to accomplish their goal despite changing environmental conditions and demands. The literature reports many decision mechanisms, but in most realizations a single one is applied. ...
Decision making process: typology, intelligence, and optimization
Decision making is concerned with evaluating and/or ranking possible alternatives of action. In this paper, we develop a model for the process of decision making. Understanding the decision process can provide insights into how humans make decisions, ...
Sustainable decision making: the role of decision support systems
Sustainable decision making stands for decision making which contributes to the transition to a sustainable society. It raises a number of challenging problems for which existing decision support systems (DSS) may not be equipped. The role of DSS in ...
Comments