Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
research-article

Targeting uncertainty in smart CPS by confidence-based logic

Published: 01 November 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Since Smart Cyber–Physical Systems (sCPS) are complex and decentralized systems of dynamically cooperating components, architecture-based adaptation is of high importance in their design. In this context, a key challenge is that they typically operate in uncertain environments. Thus, an inherent requirement in sCPS design is the need to deal with the uncertainty of data coming from the environment. Existing approaches often rely on the fact that an adequate model of the environment and/or base probabilities or a prior distribution of data are available. In this paper, we present a specific logic (CB logic), which, based on statistical testing, allows specifying transition guards in architecture-based adaptation without requiring knowledge of the base probabilities or prior knowledge about the data distribution. Applicable in state machines’ transition guards in general, CB logic provides a number of operators over time series that simplify the filtering, resampling, and statistics-backed comparisons of time series, making the application of multiple statistical procedures easy for non-experts. The viability of our approach is illustrated on a running example and a case study demonstrating how CB logic simplifies adaptation triggers. Moreover, a library with a Java and C ++ implementation of CB logic’s key operators is available on GitHub.

Highlights

Architecture-based adaptation of smart CPS operating in uncertain environments.
Confidence-based (CB) logic for transition guards in architectural adaptation.
No need of base probabilities + prior knowledge on data distribution in environment.
The key CB logic operators implemented in Java and C++ available at GitHub.

References

[1]
Al Ali R., Bures T., Gerostathopoulos I., Keznikl J., Plasil F., Architecture adaptation based on belief inaccuracy estimation, in: Proceedings of WICSA 2014, Sydney, Australia, 2014, pp. 87–90,.
[2]
Anaya Ivan.Dario.Paez., Simko V., Bourcier J., Plouzeau N., Jézéquel J., A prediction-driven adaptation approach for self-adaptive sensor networks, in: Proceedings of SEAMS 2014, Hyderabad, India, 2014, pp. 145–154,.
[3]
Anthony R.J., Pelc M., Byrski W., Context-aware reconfiguration of autonomic managers in real-time control applications, in: Proceeding of the 7th International Conference on Autonomic Computing, ICAC ’10, Washington, DC, USA, 2010, p. 73,.
[4]
Baresi L., Guinea S., Tamburrelli G., Towards decentralized self-adaptive component-based systems, in: Proceedings of SEAMS’08, Leipzig, Germany, 2008, pp. 57–64,.
[5]
Baresi L., Pasquale L., Live goals for adaptive service compositions, in: Proc. of SEAMS ’10, New York, NY, USA, 2010, pp. 114–123,.
[6]
Baresi L., Pasquale L., Spoletini P., Fuzzy goals for requirements-driven adaptation, in: Proc. of RE ’10, 2010, pp. 125–134,.
[7]
Beynon M., Curry B., Morgan P., The Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence: an alternative approach to multicriteria decision modelling, Omega 28 (1) (2000) 37–50,.
[8]
Brockwell P.J., Davis R.A. (Eds.), Introduction To Time Series and Forecasting, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2002.
[9]
Bures T., Gerostathopoulos I., Hnetynka P., Keznikl J., Kit M., Plasil F., DEECO: An ensemble-based component system, in: Proceedings of CBSE 2013, Vancouver, Canada, 2013, pp. 81–90,.
[10]
Bures T., Hnetynka P., Kofron J., Al Ali R., Skoda D., Statistical approach to architecture modes in smart cyber-physical systems, in: Proceedings of WICSA 2016, Venice, Italy, 2016, pp. 168–177,.
[11]
Cámara J., Garlan D., Kang W.G., Peng W., Schmerl B., Uncertainty in Self-Adaptive Systems Categories, Management, and Perspectives, Institute for Software Research School of Computer Science Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, CMU-ISR, 2017, pp. 17–110.
[12]
Cámara J., de Lemos R., Evaluation of resilience in self-adaptive systems using probabilistic model-checking, in: 2012 7th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems, SEAMS, 2012, pp. 53–62,.
[13]
Casanova, P., Garlan, D., Schmerl, B., Abreu, R., 2013. Diagnosing architectural run-time failures, in: Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems. pp. 103–112.
[14]
Casanova P., Schmerl B., Garlan D., Abreu R., Architecture-based run-time fault diagnosis, in: Software Architecture, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 261–277,.
[15]
Cheng S.-W., Garlan D., Stitch: A language for architecture-based self-adaptation, J. Syst. Softw. 85 (12) (2012) 2860–2875,.
[16]
Ciesinski F., Größer M., Baier C., Haverkort B.R., Hermanns H., Katoen J.-P., Siegle M. (Eds.), On Probabilistic Computation Tree Logic, in Validation of Stochastic Systems, Vol. 2925, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004, pp. 147–188.
[17]
Clarke T.A., Henzinger H., Veith E.M., Bloem R. (Eds.), Handbook of Model Checking, Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2018.
[18]
De Moura L., Bjø rner N., Z3: An efficient SMT solver, in: Proceedings of TACAS’08, Budapest, Hungary, 2008, pp. 337–340,.
[19]
Dempster A.P., Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping, Ann. Math. Stat. 38 (2) (1967) 325–339,.
[20]
Ding Z., Zhou Y., Zhou M., Modeling self-adaptive software systems by fuzzy rules and Petri nets, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 26 (2) (2018) 967–984,.
[21]
Esfahani N., Malek S., Uncertainty in self-adaptive software systems, in: Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems II, Springer, 2013, pp. 214–238.
[22]
Gerostathopoulos I., Bures T., Hnetynka P., Hujecek A., Plasil F., Skoda D., Strengthening adaptation in cyber-physical systems via meta-adaptation strategies, ACM Trans. Cyber-Phys. Syst. 1 (3) (2017) 1–25,.
[23]
Gerostathopoulos I., Škoda D., Plášil F., Bureš T., Knauss A., Tuning self-adaptation in cyber-physical systems through architectural homeostasis, J. Syst. Softw. (2019),.
[24]
Gordon J., Shortliffe E.H., The Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence, 1990, pp. 272–292.
[25]
Hinton A., Kwiatkowska M., Norman G., Parker D., PRISM: A Tool for Automatic Verification of Probabilistic Systems, in: Hermanns H., Palsberg J. (Eds.), Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. TACAS 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3920, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006,.
[26]
Hölzl M., Rauschmayer A., Wirsing M., Software engineering for ensembles, in: Wirsing M., Banâtre J.-P., Hölzl M., Rauschmayer A. (Eds.), Software-Intensive Systems and New Computing Paradigms, Springer, 2008, pp. 45–63.
[27]
Josang A., A logic for uncertain probabilities, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 9 (3) (2001) 279–311,.
[28]
Jøsang A., Subjective Logic: A Formalism for Reasoning under Uncertainty, Springer International Publishing, 2016.
[29]
Josang A., Generalising Bayes’ theorem in subjective logic, in: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems, MFI, Baden-Baden, Germany, 2016, pp. 462–469,.
[30]
Kephart J., Chess D., The vision of autonomic computing, Computer 36 (1) (2003) 41–50.
[31]
Lamsweerde A.V., Requirements engineering: from craft to discipline, in: Proc. of FSE ’08, 2008, pp. 238–249,.
[32]
Mahdavi-Hezavehi S., Avgeriou P., Weyns D., A classification framework of uncertainty in architecture-based self-adaptive systems with multiple quality requirements, in: Managing Trade-Offs in Adaptable Software Architectures, Elsevier, 2017, pp. 45–77.
[33]
Morin B., Barais O., Jezequel J.-M., Fleurey F., Solberg A., Models@ run time to support dynamic adaptation, Computer 42 (10) (2009) 44–51,.
[34]
Morin B., Fleurey F., Barais O., Taming heterogeneity and distribution in sCPS, in: Proceedings of SEsCPS 2015, Firenze, Italy, 2015, pp. 40–43,.
[35]
Narayanan D., Satyanarayanan M., Predictive resource management for wearable computing, in: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications and Services, San Francisco, California, 2003, pp. 113–128,.
[36]
Nilsson N.J., Probabilistic logic, Artificial Intelligence 28 (1) (1986) 71–87,.
[37]
Puterman M.L., Chapter 8 Markov Decision Processes, in Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 2, Elsevier, 1990, pp. 331–434.
[38]
Rojas I., Pomares H., Gonzalez J., Herrera L.J., Guillen A., Valenzuela O., Self-adaptive robot control using fuzzy logic, in: 9th IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control, 2006, 2006, pp. 687–691,.
[39]
Ross T.J., Fuzzy Logic with Engineering Applications, third ed., John Wiley, Chichester, U.K, 2010.
[40]
Ruchkin I., Schmerl B., Garlan D., Architectural abstractions for hybrid programs, in: Proceedings of CBSE 2015, Montreal, Canada, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 65–74,.
[41]
Somenzi F., Touri B., Trivedi A., Almost-sure reachability in stochastic multi-mode system, 2016, arXiv:1610.05412 [math].
[42]
Tran T.T.L., Peng L., Diao Y., McGregor A., Liu A., CLARO: modeling and processing uncertain data streams, VLDB J. 21 (5) (2012) 651–676,.
[43]
White C.C., White D.J., Markov Decision processes, European J. Oper. Res. 39 (1989) 1–16.
[44]
Wierman M.J., An Introduction To the Mathematics of Uncertainty, Creighton University, College of Arts and Sciences, 2010.
[45]
Yang Q., Lu J., Xing J., Tao X., Hu H., Zou Y., Fuzzy control-based software self-adaptation: A case study in mission critical systems, in: 2011 IEEE 35th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops, 2011, pp. 13–18,.
[46]
Zadeh L.A., The role of fuzzy logic in the management of uncertainty in expert systems, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 11 (1–3) (1983) 199–227,.
[47]
Zadeh L.A., Fuzzy logic, Computer 21 (4) (1988) 83–93,.

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Systems and Software
Journal of Systems and Software  Volume 181, Issue C
Nov 2021
331 pages

Publisher

Elsevier Science Inc.

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 November 2021

Author Tags

  1. Software architecture
  2. Adaptation
  3. Uncertainty
  4. Smart cyber–physical systems
  5. Statistical testing

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 17 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media