Self-aware Computing Systems: Related Concepts and Research Areas



Self-aware computing systems exhibit a number of characteristics (e.g., autonomy, social ability, and proactivity) which have already been studied in different research areas, such as artificial intelligence, organic computing, or autonomic and self-adaptive systems. This chapter provides an overview of strongly related concepts and areas of study from the perspective of self-aware computing systems.


Cloud Computing Software Engineer Multiagent System Relate Concept Situation Awareness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



The authors thank Lukas Esterle, Kurt Geihs, Philippe Lalanda, Peter Lewis, and Andrea Zisman for the useful feedback provided during the elaboration of this chapter.


  1. 1.
    31st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2009. IEEE, 2009.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jesper Andersson, Luciano Baresi, Nelly Bencomo, Rogério de Lemos, Alessandra Gorla, Paola Inverardi, and Thomas Vogel. Software engineering processes for self-adaptive systems. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems II - International Seminar, Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, October 24-29, 2010 Revised Selected and Invited Papers, pages 51–75, 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dan Ariely. Predictably irrational the hidden forces that shape our decisions. Harper Collins, New York, 2010.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Ross Ashby. Principles of the self-organizing system. In Principles of SelfOrganization: Transactions of the University of Illinois Symposium.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Autili, P. Inverardi, and M. Tivoli. Automated synthesis of service choreographies. Software, IEEE, 32(1):50–57, Jan 2015.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. Banbury and S. Tremblay. A cognitive approach to situation awareness: Theory and application. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing, 2004.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luciano Baresi and Carlo Ghezzi. The disappearing boundary between development-time and run-time. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Future of Software Engineering Research, FoSER 2010, at the 18th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, 2010, pages 17–22, 2010.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    K.L. Bellman and C. Landauer. A web of reflection processes may help to de-conflict and integrate simultaneous self-optimization. In SAOS 2014: The 2nd International Workshop on Self-optimisation in Organic and Autonomic Computing Systems.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    K.L. Bellman and C. Landauer. Towards an integration science. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 249(1):3–31, 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    K.L. Bellman, C. Landauer, and P.R. Nelson. Developing mechanisms for determining “good enough” in sort systems. In Second IEEE Workshop on Self-Organizing Real Time Systems, 2011.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K.L. Bellman, C. Landauer, and P.R. Nelson. chapter System Engineering for Organic Computing: The Challenge of Shared Design and Control between OC Systems and their Human Engineers, pages 25–80. Understanding Complex Systems Series. Springer, 2008.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nelly Bencomo, Amel Bennaceur, Paul Grace, Gordon S. Blair, and Valérie Issarny. The role of models@run.time in supporting on-the-fly interoperability. Computing, 95(3):167–190, 2013.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jeff Bilmes, Krste Asanovicy, Chee-Whye Chinz, and Jim Demmel. Optimizing matrix multiply using PHiPAC: a portable, high-performance, ANSI C coding methodology. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Super Computing, pages 340–347. ACM, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    G. Blair, N. Bencomo, and R.B. France. Models@ run.time. Computer, 42(10):22–27, Oct 2009.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rodney A. Brooks. Cambrian Intelligence: The Early History of the New AI. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yuriy Brun, Giovanna Di Marzo Serugendo, Cristina Gacek, Holger Giese, Holger Kienle, Marin Litoiu, Hausi Müller, Mauro Pezzè, and Mary Shaw. Engineering Self-Adaptive Systems through Feedback Loops. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems, 2009.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Radu Calinescu, Lars Grunske, Marta Z. Kwiatkowska, Raffaela Mirandola, and Giordano Tamburrelli. Dynamic qos management and optimization in service-based systems. IEEE Trans. Software Eng., 37(3):387–409, 2011.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Betty H.C. Cheng et al. Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems: A Research Roadmap. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems. Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shang-Wen Cheng, VaheV. Poladian, David Garlan, and Bradley Schmerl. Improving architecture-based self-adaptation through resource prediction. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems. Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Michel Cotsaftis. From System Complexity to Emergent Properties, chapter What Makes a System Complex? - An Approach to Self Organization and Emergence, pages 49–99. Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rogério de Lemos et al. Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems: A second Research Roadmap. In Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems II. Springer, 2013.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Simon Dobson, Spyros Denazis, Antonio Fernández, Dominique Gaïti, Erol Gelenbe, Fabio Massacci, Paddy Nixon, Fabrice Saffre, Nikita Schmidt, and Franco Zambonelli. A survey of autonomic communications. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems, 1(2):223–259, 2006.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vidulich M. Vogel E. Dominguez, C. and G. McMillan. Situation awareness: Papers and annotated bibliography. Armstrong Laboratory, Human System Center, ref. AL/CF-TR-1994-0085, 1994.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    M.R. Endsley. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1):32–64, 1995.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M.R. Endsley. The role of situation awareness in naturalistic decision making. 1997.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M.R. Endsley. Situation awareness: Progress and directions. 2004.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ilenia Epifani, Carlo Ghezzi, Raffaela Mirandola, and Giordano Tamburrelli. Model evolution by run-time parameter adaptation. In 31st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2009 [1], pages 111–121.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    European Commission. Digital Agenda for Europe - Future Internet Research and Experimentation (FIRE) initiative, 2015.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    M.L. Fracker. Measures of situation awareness: Review and future directions (report no. al-tr-1991-0128), 1991b. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Armstrong Laboratories.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Robert B. France and Bernhard Rumpe. Model-driven development of complex software: A research roadmap. In International Conference on Software Engineering, ISCE 2007, Workshop on the Future of Software Engineering, FOSE 2007, May 23-25, 2007, Minneapolis, MN, USA, pages 37–54, 2007.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cristina Gacek, Holger Giese, and Ethan Hadar. Friends or Foes? – A Conceptual Analysis of Self-Adaptation and IT Change Management. In Proc. of the ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems (SEAMS 2008), pages 121–128. ACM, May 2008.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    David Garlan, Shang-Wen Cheng, An-Cheng Huang, Bradley R. Schmerl, and Peter Steenkiste. Rainbow: Architecture-based self-adaptation with reusable infrastructure. IEEE Computer, 37(10):46–54, 2004.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chang-chieh Hang and P. Parks. Comparative studies of model reference adaptive control systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 18(5):419–428, October 1973.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Julia Hielscher, Raman Kazhamiakin, Andreas Metzger, and Marco Pistore. A framework for proactive self-adaptation of service-based applications based on online testing. In Towards a Service-Based Internet. Springer, 2008.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Paul Horn. Autonomic Computing: IBM’s Perspective on the State of Information Technology. Technical report, 2001.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Paola Inverardi and Massimo Tivoli. The future of software: Adaptation and dependability. In Software Engineering, International Summer Schools, ISSSE 2006-2008, Salerno, Italy, Revised Tutorial Lectures, pages 1–31, 2008.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rolf Isermann, Karl-Heinz Lachmann, and Drago Matko. Adaptive Control Systems. Prentice Hall International series in systems and control engineering. Prentice Hall, New York, 1992. ISBN 0-13-005414-3.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Valerie Issarny, Nikolaos Georgantas, Sara Hachem, Apostolos Zarras, Panos Vassiliadist, Marco Autili, MarcoAurlio Gerosa, and AmiraBen Hamida. Service-oriented middleware for the future internet: state of the art and research directions. Journal of Internet Services and Applications, 2(1):23–45, 2011.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Daniel Kahneman. Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, 2011.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gorazd Karer and Igor Skrjanc, 2012.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jeffrey O. Kephart and David M. Chess. The vision of autonomic computing. Computer, 36(1):41–50, 2003.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Jeffrey O. Kephart and Jonathan Lenchner. A symbiotic cognitive computing perspective on autonomic computing. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Autonomic Computing, pages 109–114. IEEE Computer Society, 2015.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Moon B Klein, G. and R.R. Hoffman. Making sense of sensemaking 1: Alternative perspectives. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(4):70–73, 2006.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Jeff Kramer and Jeff Magee. Self-Managed Systems: an Architectural Challenge. In FOSE ’07: 2007 Future of Software Engineering, 2007.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    C. Landauer. Infrastructure for studying infrastructure. In ESOS 2013: Workshop on Embedded Self-Organizing Systems.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    C. Landauer and K.L. Bellman. Generic programming, partial evaluation, and a new programming paradigm.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    C. Landauer and K.L. Bellman. Self-modeling systems.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wenchao Li, Dorsa Sadigh, S.Shankar Sastry, and SanjitA. Seshia. Synthesis for human-in-the-loop control systems. In Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems. Springer, 2014.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    J. C. R. Licklider. Man-machine symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-1:4–11, March 1960.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mieczyslaw Kokar M. and M. R. Endsley. Situation awareness and cognitive modeling. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 27(3):91–96, 2012.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    P. Maes and D. Nardi (eds.). Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection. 1986.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Matthew Marge and Alexander I. Rudnicky. Towards evaluating recovery strategies for situated grounding problems in human-robot dialogue. In IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, IEEE RO-MAN 2013, pages 340–341. IEEE, 2013.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Peter M. Mell and Timothy Grance. Sp 800-145. the nist definition of cloud computing. Technical report, Gaithersburg, MD, United States, 2011.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    A. Morajko, P. Caymes-Scutari, T. Margalef, and E. Luque. MATE: Monitoring, analysis and tuning environment for parallel/distributed applications. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 19(11):1517–1531, 2007.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Gabriel A. Moreno, Javier Cámara, David Garlan, and Bradley R. Schmerl. Proactive self-adaptation under uncertainty: a probabilistic model checking approach. In Proceedings of the 2015 10th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, ESEC/FSE 2015, pages 1–12, 2015.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Brice Morin, Olivier Barais, Grégory Nain, and Jean-Marc Jézéquel. Taming dynamically adaptive systems using models and aspects. In 31st International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2009[1], pages 122–132.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Brice Morin, Franck Fleurey, Nelly Bencomo, Jean-Marc Jézéquel, Arnor Solberg, Vegard Dehlen, and Gordon S. Blair. An aspect-oriented and model-driven approach for managing dynamic variability. In Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, 11th International Conference, MoDELS 2008, pages 782–796, 2008.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Christian Müller-Schloer, Hartmut Schmeck, and Theo Ungerer, editors. Organic Computing - A Paradigm Shift for Complex Systems. Springer, 2011.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    B.E. Ulicny M.M. Kokar and J.J. Moskal. Ontological structures for higher levels of distributed fusion. 2012.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hyacinth S. Nwana. Software agents: an overview. Knowledge Eng. Review, 11(3):205–244, 1996.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Jakob Ostergaard. Discrete optimization of the sparse QR factorization., Oct 1998.
  62. 62.
    Mike P. Papazoglou, Paolo Traverso, Schahram Dustdar, and Frank Leymann. Service-oriented computing: State of the art and research challenges. IEEE Computer, 40(11), 2007.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Manish Parashar and Salim Hariri. Autonomic computing: An overview. In Unconventional Programming Paradigms. Springer, 2005.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Markus Püschel, José M. F. Moura, Jeremy Johnson, David Padua, Manuela Veloso, Bryan Singer, Jianxin Xiong, Franz Franchetti, Aca Gacic, Yevgen Voronenko, Kang Chen, Robert W. Johnson, and Nicholas Rizzolo. SPIRAL: Code generation for DSP transforms. Proceedings of the IEEE, special issue on “Program Generation, Optimization, and Adaptation”, 93(2):232– 275, 2005.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    R. Ribler, J. Vetter, H. Simitci, Huseyin Simitci, and Daniel A. Reed. Autopilot: Adaptive control of distributed applications. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE Symposium on High-Performance Distributed Computing, pages 172–179, 1998.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Stephanie Rosenthal, Joydeep Biswas, and Manuela M. Veloso. An effective personal mobile robot agent through symbiotic human-robot interaction. In Wiebe van der Hoek, Gal A. Kaminka, Yves Lespérance, Michael Luck, and Sandip Sen, editors, 9th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2010), pages 915–922. IFAAMAS, 2010.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Stephanie Rosenthal, Sarjoun Skaff, Manuela M. Veloso, Dan Bohus, and Eric Horvitz. Execution memory for grounding and coordination. In Hideaki Kuzuoka, Vanessa Evers, Michita Imai, and Jodi Forlizzi, editors, ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2013, pages 213–214. IEEE/ACM, 2013.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Stephanie Rosenthal, Manuela M. Veloso, and Anind K. Dey. Task behavior and interaction planning for a mobile service robot that occasionally requires help. In Automated Action Planning for Autonomous Mobile Robots, Papers from the 2011 AAAI Workshop, volume WS-11-09 of AAAI Workshops. AAAI, 2011.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Stuart J. Russell and Peter Norvig. Artificial Intelligence - A Modern Approach (3. internat. ed.). Pearson Education, 2010.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Mazeiar Salehie and Ladan Tahvildari. Self-adaptive software: Landscape and research challenges. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst., 4(2):1–42, 2009.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Peter Sawyer, Nelly Bencomo, Jon Whittle, Emmanuel Letier, and Anthony Finkelstein. Requirements-aware systems: A research agenda for RE for self-adaptive systems. In RE 2010, 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, pages 95–103, 2010.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Dale E. Seborg, Duncan A. Mellichamp, Thomas F. Edgar, and Francis J. Doyle, 2011.Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    MacMillan J. Entin E.E. Serfaty, D. and E.B. Entin. The decision-making expertise of battle commanders. 1997.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Mary Shaw. Beyond objects: A software design paradigm based on process control. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 20(1):27–38, 1995.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Stefanie Tellex, Pratiksha Thaker, Joshua Mason Joseph, and Nicholas Roy. Learning perceptually grounded word meanings from unaligned parallel data. Machine Learning, 94(2):151–167, 2014.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    A. Tiwari and J.K. Hollingsworth. Online adaptive code generation and tuning. In Proceedings of 2011 International Symposium on Parallel Distributed Processing (IPDPS), pages 879–892, 2011.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Romina Torres, Nelly Bencomo, and Hernán Astudillo. Market-awareness in service-based systems. In Sixth IEEE International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops, SASOW 2012, pages 169–174, 2012.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157):1124–1131, September 1974.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Laura Pfeifer Vardoulakis, Lazlo Ring, Barbara Barry, Candace L. Sidner, and Timothy W. Bickmore. Designing relational agents as long term social companions for older adults. In Intelligent Virtual Agents - 12th International Conference, IVA 2012, volume 7502 of LNCS, pages 289–302. Springer, 2012.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Michael J. Voss and Rudolf Eigemann. High-level adaptive program optimization with adapt. In Proceedings of the eighth ACM SIGPLAN symposium on principles and practices of parallel programming, PPoPP ’01, pages 93–102. ACM, 2001.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Mark Weiser. The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American, 265(3):94–104, September 1991.Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Kristopher Welsh, Pete Sawyer, and Nelly Bencomo. Towards requirements aware systems: Run-time resolution of design-time assumptions. In 26th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE 2011), pages 560–563, 2011.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    R. Clinton Whaley, Antoine Petitet, and Jack Dongarra. Automated empirical optimizations of software and the ATLAS project. Parallel Computing, 27(1–2):3–35, 2001.Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Tom Wolf and Tom Holvoet. Engineering Self-Organising Systems: Methodologies and Applications, chapter Emergence Versus Self-Organisation: Different Concepts but Promising When Combined, pages 1–15. Springer, 2005.Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Michael Wooldridge and Nicholas R. Jennings. Intelligent agents: theory and practice. Knowledge Eng. Review, 10(2):115–152, 1995.Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Jun Xu, Pinyao Guo, Mingyi Zhao, Robert F. Erbacher, Minghui Zhu, and Peng Liu. Comparing different moving target defense techniques. In Proceedings of the First ACM Workshop on Moving Target Defense, MTD ’14, pages 97–107. ACM, 2014.Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Eric Yuan, Naeem Esfahani, and Sam Malek. Automated mining of software component interactions for self-adaptation. In Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-Managing Systems, SEAMS 2014, pages 27–36. ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA
  2. 2.The Aerospace CorporationLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Thomas J. Watson Research CenterYorktown HeightsUSA
  4. 4.University of L’AquilaL’AquilaItaly
  5. 5.Aston UniversityBirminghamUK
  6. 6.Telecom Paris TechParisFrance
  7. 7.Hasso-Plattner-InstitutPotsdamGermany
  8. 8.University of Technology DresdenDresdenGermany
  9. 9.Universität WürzburgWürzburgGermany

Personalised recommendations