Using Bad Learners to find Good Configurations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Finding the optimally performing configuration of a software system for a given setting is often challenging. Recent approaches address this challenge by learning performance models based on a sample set of configurations. However, building an accurate performance model can be very expensive (and is often infeasible in practice). The central insight of this paper is that exact performance values (e.g. the response time of a software system) are not required to rank configurations and to identify the optimal one. As shown by our experiments, models that are cheap to learn but inaccurate (with respect to the difference between actual and predicted performance) can still be used rank configurations and hence find the optimal configuration. This novel rank-based approach allows us to significantly reduce the cost (in terms of number of measurements of sample configuration) as well as the time required to build models. We evaluate our approach with 21 scenarios based on 9 software systems and demonstrate that our approach is beneficial in 16 scenarios; for the remaining 5 scenarios, an accurate model can be built by using very few samples anyway, without the need for a rank-based approach.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2017.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 2; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.
8 papers.
- 2024Predicting Configuration Performance in Multiple Environments with Sequential Meta-learningcited by 17
- 2022Does Configuration Encoding Matter in Learning Software Performance? An Empirical Study on Encoding Schemescited by 10
- 2024Rethinking Performance Analysis for Configurable Software Systems: A Case Study from a Fitness Landscape Perspectivecited by 3
- 2025Linux Kernel Configurations at Scale: A Dataset for Performance and Evolution Analysiscited by 2
- 2025Prompting for Performance: Exploring LLMs for Configuring Softwarecited by 1
- 2025Hardness, Structural Knowledge, and Opportunity: An Analytical Framework for Modular Performance Modelingcited by 0
- 2025Evaluating Useful Surrogate Models for Configuration Tuning Beyond Accuracy: A Fitness Landscape Analysis Perspectivecited by 0
- 2026Transpiler Autotuning with Predictive Models for Quantum Circuit Optimizationcited by 0
- 2026Transpiler Autotuning with Predictive Models for Quantum Circuit Optimization31 Jul 2026
- 2025Evaluating Useful Surrogate Models for Configuration Tuning Beyond Accuracy: A Fitness Landscape Analysis Perspective26 Sep 2025
- 2025Hardness, Structural Knowledge, and Opportunity: An Analytical Framework for Modular Performance Modeling13 Sep 2025
- 2025Prompting for Performance: Exploring LLMs for Configuring Software13 Jul 2025
- 2025Linux Kernel Configurations at Scale: A Dataset for Performance and Evolution Analysis12 May 2025
- 2024Rethinking Performance Analysis for Configurable Software Systems: A Case Study from a Fitness Landscape Perspective22 Dec 2024
- 2024Predicting Configuration Performance in Multiple Environments with Sequential Meta-learning5 Feb 2024
- 2022Does Configuration Encoding Matter in Learning Software Performance? An Empirical Study on Encoding Schemes30 Mar 2022