Towards A Formal Semantics For Autonomic Components

  • Marco Aldinucci
  • Emilio Tuosto


Autonomic management can improve the QoS provided by parallel/distributed applications. Within the CoreGRID Component Model, the autonomic management is tailored to the automatic – monitoring-driven – alteration of the component assembly and, therefore, is defined as the effect of (distributed)management code.

This work yields a semantics based on hypergraph rewriting suitable tomodel the dynamic evolution and non-functional aspects of Service Oriented Architectures and component-based autonomic applications. In this regard, our main goal is to provide a formal description of adaptation operations that are typically only informally specified. We advocate that our approach makes easier to raise the level of abstraction of management code in autonomic and adaptive applications.


Components adaptive applications autonomic computing grid semantics graph rewriting 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    M. Aldinucci, S. Campa, M. Danelutto, P. Dazzi, P. Kilpatrick, D. Laforenza, and N. Tonel-lotto. Behavioural skeletons for component autonomic management on grids. In M. Dane-lutto, P. Frangopoulou, and V. Getov, editors, Making Grids Work, CoreGRID. Springer, May 2008.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    M. Aldinucci, S. Campa, M. Danelutto, M. Vanneschi, P. Dazzi, D. Laforenza, N. Tonel-lotto, and P. Kilpatrick. Behavioural skeletons in GCM: autonomic management of grid components. In D. E. Baz, J. Bourgeois, and F. Spies, editors, Proc. of Intl. Euromicro PDP 2008: Parallel Distributed and network-based Processing, pages 54-63, Toulouse, France, Feb. 2008. IEEE.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Aldinucci and M. Danelutto. Algorithmic skeletons meeting grids. Parallel Computing, 32(7):449-462, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    G. Antoniu, H. Bouziane, L. Breuil, M. Jan, and C. P érez. Enabling transparent data sharing in component models. In 6th IEEE Intl. Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID), pages 430-433, Singapore, May 2006.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    L. Baduel, F. Baude, D. Caromel, A. Contes, F. Huet, M. Morel, and R. Quilici. Grid Com-puting: Software Environments and Tools, chapter Programming, Deploying, Composing, for the Grid. Springer, Jan. 2006.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    T. Barros, L. Henrio, and E. Madelaine. Behavioural models for hierarchical components. In P. Godefroid, editor, Model Checking Software, Proc. of the 12th Intl. SPIN Workshop, volume 3639 of LNCS, pages 154-168, San Francisco, CA, USA, Aug. 2005. Springer.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    CoreGRID NoE deliverable series, Institute on Programming Model. Deliverable D.PM.04 - Basic Features of the Grid Component Model (assessed), Feb. 2007.
  8. [8]
    M. Danelutto and G. Zoppi. Behavioural skeletons meeting services. In Proc. of ICCS: Intl. Conference on Computational Science, Workshop on Practical Aspects of High-level Parallel Programming, volume 5101 of LNCS, pages 146-153, Krakow, Poland, June 2008. Springer.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    P.-C. David and T. Ledoux. An aspect-oriented approach for developing self-adaptive fractal components. In W. L öwe and M. S üdholt, editors, Proc. of the 5th Intl Symposium Software on Composition (SC 2006), volume 4089 of LNCS, pages 82-97, Vienna, Austria, Mar. 2006. Springer.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    R. De Nicola, G. Ferrari, U. Montanari, R. Pugliese, and E. Tuosto. A formal basis for reasoning on programmable Qos. In Intl. Symposium on Verification - Theory and Practice - Honoring Z. Manna’s 64th Birthday, volume 2772 of LNCS. Springer, June 2003.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. Ferrari, D. Hirsch, I. Lanese, U. Montanari, and E. Tuosto. Synchronised hyperedge replacement as a model for service oriented computing. In F. de Boer, M. Bonsangue, S. Graf, and W. de Roever, editors, Formal Methods for Components and Objects: 4th Intl. Symposium, FMCO, volume 4111 of LNCS, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Nov. 2006. Springer. Revised Lectures.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    GridCOMP Project. Grid Programming with Components, An Advanced Component Platform for an Effective Invisible Grid, 2008.
  13. [13]
    JBoss rules home page., 2008.
  14. [14]
    K. Kennedy, M. Mazina, J. Mellor-Crummey, K. Cooper, L. Torczon, F. Berman, A. Chien, H. Dail, O. Sievert, D. Angulo, I. Foster, D. Gannon, L. Johnsson, C. Kesselman, R. Aydt, D. Reed, J. Dongarra, S. Vadhiyar, and R. Wolski. Toward a framework for preparing and executing adaptive Grid programs. In Proc. of NSF Next Generation Systems Program Workshop (IPDPS 2002), 2002.Google Scholar
  15. [15.
    J. O. Kephart and D. M. Chess. The vision of autonomic computing. IEEE Computer, 36(1):41-50, 2003.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    I. Lanese and E. Tuosto. Synchronized Hyperedge Replacement for Heterogeneous Sys- tems. In J. Jacquet and G. Picco, editors, International Conference on Coordination Models and Languages, volume 3454 of LNCS, pages 220 - 235. Springer, April 2005.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    ObjectWeb Consortium. The Fractal Component Model, Technical Specification, 2003.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    M. Parashar, H. Liu, Z. Li, V. Matossian, C. Schmidt, G. Zhang, and S. Hariri. AutoMate: Enabling autonomic applications on the Grid. Cluster Computing, 9(2):161-174, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
  20. [20]
    Sensoria Project. Software Engineering for Service-Oriented Overlay Computers, 2008.
  21. [21]
    Tuscany home page., 2008.
  22. [22]
    M. Vanneschi. The programming model of ASSIST, an environment for parallel and distributed portable applications. Parallel Computing, 28(12):1709-1732, Dec. 2002.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Aldinucci
    • 1
  • Emilio Tuosto
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of PisaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations