mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

FEMOSAA: Feature Guided and Knee Driven Multi-Objective Optimization for Self-Adaptive Software

arXiv 1608.08933 ↗First posted 31 Aug 2016cs.SEcited by 18

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Self-adaptive software (SAS) can reconfigure itself to adapt to the changing environment at runtime, aiming for continually optimizing conflicted non-functional objectives, e.g., response time, energy consumption, throughput and cost etc. In this paper, we present Feature guided and knEe driven Multi-Objective optimization for Self-Adaptive softwAre (FEMOSAA), a novel framework that automatically synergizes the feature model and Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm (MOEA), to optimize SAS at runtime. FEMOSAA operates in two phases: at design time, FEMOSAA automatically transposes the engineers' design of SAS, expressed as a feature model, to fit the MOEA, creating new chromosome representation and reproduction operators. At runtime, FEMOSAA utilizes the feature model as domain knowledge to guide the search and further extend the MOEA, providing a larger chance for finding better solutions. In addition, we have designed a new method to search for the knee solutions, which can achieve a balanced trade-off. We comprehensively evaluated FEMOSAA on two running SAS: one is a highly complex SAS with various adaptable real-world software under the realistic workload trace, another is a service-oriented SAS that can be dynamically composed from services. In particular, we compared the effectiveness and overhead of FEMOSAA against four of its variants and three other search-based frameworks for SAS under various scenarios, including three commonly applied MOEAs, two workload patterns and diverse conflicting quality objectives. The results reveal the effectiveness of FEMOSAA and its superiority over the others with high statistical significance and non-trivial effect sizes.

Key facts. Cited by 18 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 31 Aug 2016.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 6; 2023: 1; 2024: 3; 2025: 7.

18 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2021Multi-Objectivizing Software Configuration Tuning (for a single performance concern)cited by 27
  2. 2023Do Performance Aspirations Matter for Guiding Software Configuration Tuning?cited by 21
  3. 2022The Weights can be Harmful: Pareto Search versus Weighted Search in Multi-Objective Search-Based Software Engineeringcited by 17
  4. 2024Predicting Configuration Performance in Multiple Environments with Sequential Meta-learningcited by 17
  5. 2024Adapting Multi-objectivized Software Configuration Tuningcited by 13
  6. 2022Planning Landscape Analysis for Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 12
  7. 2025Distilled Lifelong Self-Adaptation for Configurable Systemscited by 11
  8. 2022Does Configuration Encoding Matter in Learning Software Performance? An Empirical Study on Encoding Schemescited by 10
  9. 2025Faster Configuration Performance Bug Testing with Neural Dual-level Prioritizationcited by 9
  10. 2025Dually Hierarchical Drift Adaptation for Online Configuration Performance Learningcited by 7
  11. 2022The Vision of Self-Evolving Computing Systemscited by 4
  12. 2025Learning Software Bug Reports: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 3
6 more
  1. 2022Deep Learning for Effective and Efficient Reduction of Large Adaptation Spaces in Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 2
  2. 2025CoTune: Co-evolutionary Configuration Tuningcited by 2
  3. 2025Light over Heavy: Automated Performance Requirements Quantification with Linguistic Inducementcited by 2
  4. 2022Multifaceted Hierarchical Report Identification for Non-Functional Bugs in Deep Learning Frameworkscited by 0
  5. 2024Contexts Matter: An Empirical Study on Contextual Influence in Fairness Testing for Deep Learning Systemscited by 0
  6. 2025Evaluating Useful Surrogate Models for Configuration Tuning Beyond Accuracy: A Fitness Landscape Analysis Perspectivecited by 0