Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A formal approach to adaptive software: continuous assurance of non-functional requirements

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Formal Aspects of Computing

Abstract

Modern software systems are increasingly requested to be adaptive to changes in the environment in which they are embedded. Moreover, adaptation often needs to be performed automatically, through self-managed reactions enacted by the application at run time. Off-line, human-driven changes should be requested only if self-adaptation cannot be achieved successfully. To support this kind of autonomic behavior, software systems must be empowered by a rich run-time support that can monitor the relevant phenomena of the surrounding environment to detect changes, analyze the data collected to understand the possible consequences of changes, reason about the ability of the application to continue to provide the required service, and finally react if an adaptation is needed. This paper focuses on non-functional requirements, which constitute an essential component of the quality that modern software systems need to exhibit. Although the proposed approach is quite general, it is mainly exemplified in the paper in the context of service-oriented systems, where the quality of service (QoS) is regulated by contractual obligations between the application provider and its clients. We analyze the case where an application, exported as a service, is built as a composition of other services. Non-functional requirements—such as reliability and performance—heavily depend on the environment in which the application is embedded. Thus changes in the environment may ultimately adversely affect QoS satisfaction. We illustrate an approach and support tools that enable a holistic view of the design and run-time management of adaptive software systems. The approach is based on formal (probabilistic) models that are used at design time to reason about dependability of the application in quantitative terms. Models continue to exist at run time to enable continuous verification and detection of changes that require adaptation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alves A, Arkin A, Askary S, Bloch B, Curbera F, Goland Y, Kartha N, Sterling, König D, Mehta V, Thatte S, van der Rijn D, Yendluri P, Yiu A (2006) Web services business process execution language version 2.0. OASIS Committee Draft, May 2006

  2. Avizienis A, Laprie J-C, Randell B, Landwehr CE (2004) Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Trans Dependable Sec Comput 1(1): 11–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Abreu J, Mazzanti F, Fiadeiro JL, Gnesi S (2009) A model-checking approach for service component architectures. In: FMOODS/FORTE, pp 219–224

  4. Blair G, Bencomo N, France RB (2009) Models@run.time. Computer 42(10): 22–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Burdy L, Cheon Y, Cok DR, Ernst MD, Kiniry JR, Leavens GT, Rustan K, Leino M, Poll E (2005) An overview of jml tools and applications. Int J Softw Tools Technol Transf 7: 212–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Barnett M, DeLine R, Fähndrich M, Jacobs B, Rustan K, Leino M, Schulte W, Venter H (2005) The spec# programming system: challenges and directions. In: VSTTE, pp 144–152

  7. Baresi L, Di Nitto E, Ghezzi C (2006) Toward open-world software: issue and challenges. Computer 39(10): 36–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bertolino A, Emmerich W, Inverardi P, Issarny V, Liotopoulos FK, Plaza P (2008) Plastic: providing lightweight & adaptable service technology for pervasive information & communication. In: ASE Workshops, pp 65–70

  9. Bézivin J (2006) Model driven engineering: an emerging technical space. In: Generative and Transformational Techniques in Software Engineering (GTTSE). LNCS, vol 4143. Springer, Berlin, pp 36–64

  10. Baier C, Haverkort B, Hermanns H, Katoen J-P (2003) Model-checking algorithms for continuous-time markov chains. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 29: 524–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Baier C, Katoen J-P (2008) Principles of Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Belady LA, Lehman MM (1976) A model of large program development. IBM Syst J 15(3): 225–252

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. BPEL. http://www.oasis-open.org/

  14. Calinescu R (2009) General-purpose autonomic computing. In: Zhang Y, Yang LT, Denko MK (eds) Autonomic computing and networking. Springer, US, pp 3–30

  15. Cheng BHC, de Lemos R, Giese H, Inverardi P, Magee J (eds) (2009) Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems [outcome of a Dagstuhl Seminar], Lecture Notes in Computer Science. vol 5525. Springer, Berlin

  16. Cavallaro L, Di Nitto E, Pelliccione P, Pradella M, Tivoli M (2010) Synthesizing adapters for conversational web-services from their wsdl interface. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems, SEAMS ’10. ACM, New York, pp 104–113

  17. Calinescu R, Grunske L, Kwiatkowska M, Mirandola R, Tamburrelli G Dynamic qos management and optimisation in service-based systems. IEEE Trans Softw Eng (to appear)

  18. Czarnecki K, Helsen S (2006) Feature-based survey of model transformation approaches. IBM Syst J 45(3): 621–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cheung RC (1980) A user-oriented software reliability model. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 6(2): 118–125

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Calinescu R, Kwiatkowska M (2009) Using quantitative analysis to implement autonomic it systems. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2009), pp 100–110

  21. Di Nitto E, Ghezzi C, Metzger A, Papazoglou M, Pohl K (2008) A journey to highly dynamic, self-adaptive service-based applications. Autom Softw Eng 15(3-4): 313–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Epifani I, Ghezzi C, Mirandola R, Tamburrelli G (2009) Model evolution by run-time adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Software Engineering, IEEE Computer Society, pp 111–121

  23. Epifani I, Ghezzi C, Tamburrelli G (2010) Change-point detection for black-box services. In: Proceedings of the eighteenth ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, FSE ’10. ACM, New York, pp 227–236

  24. Fähndrich M, Barnett M, Logozzo F (2010) Embedded contract languages. In: SAC, pp 2103–2110

  25. Filieri A, Ghezzi C, Tamburrelli G (2011) Run-time efficient probabilistic model checking. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Software Engineering (to appear)

  26. Gelman A (2004) Bayesian data analysis. CRC press, West Palm Beach

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Gallotti S, Ghezzi C, Mirandola R, Tamburrelli G (2008) Quality prediction of service compositions through probabilistic model checking. In: QoSA ’08: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures, Karlsruhe, Germany

  28. Ghezzi C, Motta A, Panzica La Manna V, Tamburrelli G (2010) Qos driven dynamic binding in-the-many. In: Sixth International Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures, QoSA 2010

  29. Goseva-Popstojanova K, Trivedi KS (2001) Architecture-based approach to reliability assessment of software systems. Perform Eval 45(2-3): 179–204

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Grunske L (2008) Specification patterns for probabilistic quality properties. In: Robby (ed) ICSE. ACM, pp 31–40

  31. Ghezzi C, Tamburrelli G (2009) Reasoning on Non-Functional Requirements for Integrated Services. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Requirements Engineering Conference. IEEE Computer Society, pp 69–78

  32. Ghezzi C, Tamburrelli G (2009) Predicting performance properties for open systems with KAMI. In: QoSA ’09: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on the Quality of Software Architectures. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 70–85

  33. Guide MU (1998) The mathworks. Inc., Natick, MA, 5

  34. Hellerstein JL (2004) Self-managing systems: a control theory foundation. In: Local Computer Networks, vol 0. Annual IEEE Conference, pp 708–708

  35. Hahn E, Hermanns H, Zhang L (2009) Probabilistic reachability for parametric markov models. In: Model Checking Software, pp 88–106

  36. Hinton A, Kwiatkowska M, Norman G, Parker D (2006) Prism: A tool for automatic verification of probabilistic systems. In: Proc. 12th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems (TACAS+06), vol 3920, pp 441–444

  37. Huebscher MC, McCann JA (2008) A survey of autonomic computing—degrees, models, and applications. ACM Comput Surv 40(3):1–28. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1380585

  38. Immonen A, Niemela E (2008) Survey of reliability and availability prediction methods from the viewpoint of software architecture. Softw Syst Model 7(1): 49–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Jackson M, Zave P (1995) Deriving specifications from requirements: an example. In: ICSE ’95: Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Software engineering. ACM, New York, pp 15–24

  40. Kephart JO, Chess DM (2003) The vision of autonomic computing. COMPUTER, pp 41–50

  41. Katoen J-P, Kwiatkowska M, Norman G, Parker D (2001) Faster and symbolic ctmc model checking. In: de Alfaro L, Gilmore S (eds) Process Algebra and Probabilistic Methods. Performance Modelling and Verification, vol 2165. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, pp 23–38

  42. Kramer J, Magee J (1990) The evolving philosophers problem: dynamic change management. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 16: 1293–1306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Kramer J, Magee J (2007) Self-managed systems: an architectural challenge. In: Future of Software Engineering, pp 259–268

  44. Kwiatkowska M, Norman G, Parker D (2004) Prism 2.0: a tool for probabilistic model checking. In: Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, 2004. QEST 2004. Proceedings. First International Conference, pp 322–323

  45. Kwiatkowska MZ, Norman G, Parker D (2007) Stochastic model checking. In: SFM, pp 220–270

  46. Kwiatkowska M, Parker D, Qu H (2011) Incremental quantitative verificat ion for markov decision processes. (unpublished—submitted for publication)

  47. Kihl M, Robertsson A, Andersson M, Wittenmark B (2007) Control-theoretic analysis of admission control mechanisms for web server systems. World Wide Web J Springer 11(1-2008):93–116

    Google Scholar 

  48. Kozine IO, Utkin LV (2002) Interval-valued finite markov chains. Reliab Comput 8:97–113

    Google Scholar 

  49. Katoen J-P, Zapreev IS, Hahn EM, Hermanns H, Jansen DN (2010) The ins and outs of the probabilistic model checker mrmc. In: Performance Evaluation, Corrected Proof:–2010 (in Press)

  50. Lehman MM, Belady LA (eds) (1985) Program evolution: processes of software change. Academic Press, London

  51. Lehman MM (1980) On understanding laws, evolution, and conservation in the large-program life cycle. J Syst Softw 1: 213–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Leucker M, Schallhart C (2009) A brief account of runtime verification. J Log Algebr Program 78(5): 293–303

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  53. Meyer B (2007) Contract-driven development. In: FASE

  54. Maggio M, Hoffmann H, Santambrogio MD, Agarwal A, Leva A (2010) Controlling software applications via resource allocation within the heartbeats framework. In: CDC, pp 3736–3741

  55. Ng KW, Tian GL, Tang ML (2011) Dirichlet and Related Distributions: Theory, Methods and Applications. Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics. Wiley, New York

  56. OpenID. http://www.openid.com

  57. Pezze M, Young M (2005) Software testing and analysis: process, principles and techniques. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ross SM (1996) Stochastic processes. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  59. Skene J, Lamanna DD, Emmerich W (2004) Precise service level agreements. In: Proc. of 26th Intl. Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). IEEE Press, USA, pp 179–188

  60. Salehie M, Tahvildari L (2009) Self-adaptive software: landscape and research challenges. TAAS 4(2):1–42. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1516533.1516538

    Google Scholar 

  61. ter Beek MH, Fantechi A, Gnesi S, Mazzanti F (2007) An action/state-based model-checking approach for the analysis of communication protocols for service-oriented applications. In: FMICS, pp 133–148

  62. Vandewoude Y, Ebraert P, Berbers Y, D’Hondt T (2007) Tranquility: a low disruptive alternative to quiescence for ensuring safe dynamic updates. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 33(12):856–868

    Google Scholar 

  63. van Lamsweerde A (2009) Requirements engineering: from System goals to UML models to software specifications. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  64. WSDL. http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc

  65. Zhang J, Cheng BHC (2006) Model-based development of dynamically adaptive software. In: ICSE, ACM, New York, pp 371–380

  66. Zave P, Jackson M (1997) Four dark corners of requirements engineering. ACM Trans Softw Eng Methodol 6(1): 1–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. DEI, Politecnico di Milano, DeepSE Group, Piazza L. da Vinci, 32, 20133, Milan, Italy

    Antonio Filieri, Carlo Ghezzi & Giordano Tamburrelli

Authors
  1. Antonio Filieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carlo Ghezzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giordano Tamburrelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonio Filieri.

Additional information

José Fiadero, Stefania Gnesi and Tom Maibaum

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Filieri, A., Ghezzi, C. & Tamburrelli, G. A formal approach to adaptive software: continuous assurance of non-functional requirements. Form Asp Comp 24, 163–186 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-011-0207-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-011-0207-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation