mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Finding Faster Configurations using FLASH

arXiv 1801.02175 ↗First posted 7 Jan 2018cs.SEcited by 32

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Finding good configurations for a software system is often challenging since the number of configuration options can be large. Software engineers often make poor choices about configuration or, even worse, they usually use a sub-optimal configuration in production, which leads to inadequate performance. To assist engineers in finding the (near) optimal configuration, this paper introduces FLASH, a sequential model-based method, which sequentially explores the configuration space by reflecting on the configurations evaluated so far to determine the next best configuration to explore. FLASH scales up to software systems that defeat the prior state of the art model-based methods in this area. FLASH runs much faster than existing methods and can solve both single-objective and multi-objective optimization problems. The central insight of this paper is to use the prior knowledge (gained from prior runs) to choose the next promising configuration. This strategy reduces the effort (i.e., number of measurements) required to find the (near) optimal configuration. We evaluate FLASH using 30 scenarios based on 7 software systems to demonstrate that FLASH saves effort in 100% and 80% of cases in single-objective and multi-objective problems respectively by up to several orders of magnitude compared to the state of the art techniques.

Key facts. Cited by 32 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 7 Jan 2018.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 7; 2023: 5; 2024: 6; 2025: 6; 2026: 6.

32 papers.

Sort:

  1. 2022Fairness-aware Configuration of Machine Learning Librariescited by 28
  2. 2021Multi-Objectivizing Software Configuration Tuning (for a single performance concern)cited by 27
  3. 2023Do Performance Aspirations Matter for Guiding Software Configuration Tuning?cited by 21
  4. 2021MMO: Meta Multi-Objectivization for Software Configuration Tuningcited by 19
  5. 2022The Weights can be Harmful: Pareto Search versus Weighted Search in Multi-Objective Search-Based Software Engineeringcited by 17
  6. 2024Predicting Configuration Performance in Multiple Environments with Sequential Meta-learningcited by 17
  7. 2022Lifelong Dynamic Optimization for Self-Adaptive Systems: Fact or Fiction?cited by 16
  8. 2023Can Fairness be Automated? Guidelines and Opportunities for Fairness-aware AutoMLcited by 16
  9. 2023Predicting Software Performance with Divide-and-Learncited by 16
  10. 2024Adapting Multi-objectivized Software Configuration Tuningcited by 13
  11. 2022Planning Landscape Analysis for Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 12
  12. 2025Distilled Lifelong Self-Adaptation for Configurable Systemscited by 11
20 more
  1. 2022Does Configuration Encoding Matter in Learning Software Performance? An Empirical Study on Encoding Schemescited by 10
  2. 2023Information-Theoretic Testing and Debugging of Fairness Defects in Deep Neural Networkscited by 10
  3. 2025Faster Configuration Performance Bug Testing with Neural Dual-level Prioritizationcited by 9
  4. 2024Deep Configuration Performance Learning: A Systematic Survey and Taxonomycited by 8
  5. 2024Dividable Configuration Performance Learningcited by 4
  6. 2026Revealing Domain-Spatiality Patterns for Configuration Tuning: Domain Knowledge Meets Fitness Landscapescited by 4
  7. 2023Learning from Very Little Data: On the Value of Landscape Analysis for Predicting Software Project Healthcited by 3
  8. 2024Rethinking Performance Analysis for Configurable Software Systems: A Case Study from a Fitness Landscape Perspectivecited by 3
  9. 2022Deep Learning for Effective and Efficient Reduction of Large Adaptation Spaces in Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 2
  10. 2025CoTune: Co-evolutionary Configuration Tuningcited by 2
  11. 2025Software Engineering Principles for Fairer Systems: Experiments with GroupCARTcited by 1
  12. 2025Prompting for Performance: Exploring LLMs for Configuring Softwarecited by 1
  13. 2026When to Use Which? Benchmarking Optimisers for Configurable Systems under Varying Budgetscited by 1
  14. 2022Uncertainty-Aware Performance Prediction for Highly Configurable Software Systems via Bayesian Neural Networkscited by 0
  15. 2024Contexts Matter: An Empirical Study on Contextual Influence in Fairness Testing for Deep Learning Systemscited by 0
  16. 2025Evaluating Useful Surrogate Models for Configuration Tuning Beyond Accuracy: A Fitness Landscape Analysis Perspectivecited by 0
  17. 2026LLMSYS-HPOBench: Hyperparameter Optimization Benchmark Suite for Real-World LLM Systemscited by 0
  18. 2026SemiScope: Disentangling Classifier Tuning and Joint Optimization in Semi-Supervised Security Classificationcited by 0
  19. 2026Is Model Instability just Noise to be Tolerated or a Property that can be Managed?cited by 0
  20. 2026Transpiler Autotuning with Predictive Models for Quantum Circuit Optimizationcited by 0