# Planning Landscape Analysis for Self-Adaptive Systems

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.12472 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.12472/

## Key facts

- Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 16 of its 51 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 Mar 2022.

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [Finding Faster Configurations using FLASH](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1801.02175/) (2018)
- [Multi-Objectivizing Software Configuration Tuning (for a single performance concern)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01331/) (2021)
- [Transfer Learning for Performance Modeling of Configurable Systems: An Exploratory Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.02280/) (2017)
- [MMO: Meta Multi-Objectivization for Software Configuration Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.07303/) (2021)
- [FEMOSAA: Feature Guided and Knee Driven Multi-Objective Optimization for Self-Adaptive Software](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.08933/) (2016)
- [A Survey and Taxonomy of Self-Aware and Self-Adaptive Cloud Autoscaling Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1609.03590/) (2016)
- [An Uncertainty-Aware Approach to Optimal Configuration of Stream Processing Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.06543/) (2016)
- [Self-Adaptive Trade-off Decision Making for Autoscaling Cloud-Based Services](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1608.05917/) (2016)
- [BiLO-CPDP: Bi-Level Programming for Automated Model Discovery in Cross-Project Defect Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.13489/) (2020)
- [Lifelong Dynamic Optimization for Self-Adaptive Systems: Fact or Fiction?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.07096/) (2022)
- [TrimTuner: Efficient Optimization of Machine Learning Jobs in the Cloud via Sub-Sampling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2011.04726/) (2020)
- [Synergizing Domain Expertise with Self-Awareness in Software Systems: A Patternized Architecture Guideline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.07076/) (2020)
- [DATESSO: Self-Adapting Service Composition with Debt-Aware Two Levels Constraint Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2003.14377/) (2020)
- [Planning as Optimization: Dynamically Discovering Optimal Configurations for Runtime Situations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.01071/) (2019)
- [Towards Bridging the Gap between Control and Self-Adaptive System Properties](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.11846/) (2020)
- [Unlocking the Secrets of Software Configuration Landscapes-Ruggedness, Accessibility, Escapability, and Transferability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.01429/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 12 of 12)

- [Predicting Configuration Performance in Multiple Environments with Sequential Meta-learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03183/) (2024)
- [Predicting Software Performance with Divide-and-Learn](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.06651/) (2023)
- [Adapting Multi-objectivized Software Configuration Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04744/) (2024)
- [Distilled Lifelong Self-Adaptation for Configurable Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.00840/) (2025)
- [Faster Configuration Performance Bug Testing with Neural Dual-level Prioritization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.15392/) (2025)
- [Deep Configuration Performance Learning: A Systematic Survey and Taxonomy](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.03322/) (2024)
- [Revealing Domain-Spatiality Patterns for Configuration Tuning: Domain Knowledge Meets Fitness Landscapes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.19897/) (2026)
- [Dividable Configuration Performance Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.07629/) (2024)
- [CoTune: Co-evolutionary Configuration Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.24694/) (2025)
- [Light over Heavy: Automated Performance Requirements Quantification with Linguistic Inducement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.03421/) (2025)
- [Evaluating Useful Surrogate Models for Configuration Tuning Beyond Accuracy: A Fitness Landscape Analysis Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.21945/) (2025)
- [When to Use Which? Benchmarking Optimisers for Configurable Systems under Varying Budgets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.16476/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

To assure performance on the fly, planning is arguably one of the most important steps for self-adaptive systems (SASs), especially when they are highly configurable with a daunting number of adaptation options. However, there has been little understanding of the planning landscape or ways by which it can be analyzed. This inevitably creates barriers to the design of better and tailored planners for SASs. In this paper, we showcase how the planning landscapes of SASs can be quantified and reasoned, particularly with respect to the different environments. By studying four diverse real-world SASs and 14 environments, we found that (1) the SAS planning landscapes often provide strong guidance to the planner, but their ruggedness and multi-modality can be the major obstacle; (2) the extents of guidance and number of global/local optima are sensitive to the changing environment, but not the ruggedness of the surface; (3) the local optima are often closer to the global optimum than other random points; and (4) there are considerable (and useful) overlaps on the global/local optima between landscapes under different environments. We then discuss the potential implications to the future work of planner designs for SASs.