mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Predicting Software Performance with Divide-and-Learn

arXiv 2306.06651 ↗First posted 11 Jun 2023cs.SE cs.AI cs.PFcited by 16

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Predicting the performance of highly configurable software systems is the foundation for performance testing and quality assurance. To that end, recent work has been relying on machine/deep learning to model software performance. However, a crucial yet unaddressed challenge is how to cater for the sparsity inherited from the configuration landscape: the influence of configuration options (features) and the distribution of data samples are highly sparse. In this paper, we propose an approach based on the concept of 'divide-and-learn', dubbed DaL. The basic idea is that, to handle sample sparsity, we divide the samples from the configuration landscape into distant divisions, for each of which we build a regularized Deep Neural Network as the local model to deal with the feature sparsity. A newly given configuration would then be assigned to the right model of division for the final prediction. Experiment results from eight real-world systems and five sets of training data reveal that, compared with the state-of-the-art approaches, DaL performs no worse than the best counterpart on 33 out of 40 cases (within which 26 cases are significantly better) with up to 1.94x improvement on accuracy; requires fewer samples to reach the same/better accuracy; and producing acceptable training overhead. Practically, DaL also considerably improves different global models when using them as the underlying local models, which further strengthens its flexibility. To promote open science, all the data, code, and supplementary figures of this work can be accessed at our repository: https://github.com/ideas-labo/DaL.

Key facts. Cited by 16 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Jun 2023.

Builds on

16 of 74 references.

References · 16

  1. 2018Finding Faster Configurations using FLASHcited by 32
  2. 2021Multi-Objectivizing Software Configuration Tuning (for a single performance concern)cited by 28
  3. 2023Do Performance Aspirations Matter for Guiding Software Configuration Tuning?cited by 21
  4. 2016Simultaneous Safe Screening of Features and Samples in Doubly Sparse Modelingcited by 18
  5. 2016An Uncertainty-Aware Approach to Optimal Configuration of Stream Processing Systemscited by 17
  6. 2022Lifelong Dynamic Optimization for Self-Adaptive Systems: Fact or Fiction?cited by 16
  7. 2022Robust Dialogue State Tracking with Weak Supervision and Sparse Datacited by 15
  8. 2018Hyperparameter Optimization for Effort Estimationcited by 13
  9. 2022Planning Landscape Analysis for Self-Adaptive Systemscited by 12
  10. 2021White-Box Analysis over Machine Learning: Modeling Performance of Configurable Systemscited by 10
  11. 2022Does Configuration Encoding Matter in Learning Software Performance? An Empirical Study on Encoding Schemescited by 10
  12. 2017Low-Level Augmented Bayesian Optimization for Finding the Best Cloud VMcited by 9
4 more
  1. 2021White-Box Performance-Influence Models: A Profiling and Learning Approachcited by 9
  2. 2017Faster Discovery of Faster System Configurations with Spectral Learningcited by 6
  3. 2018ConPredictor: Concurrency Defect Prediction in Real-World Applicationscited by 4
  4. 2019Towards Quality Assurance of Software Product Lines with Adversarial Configurationscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 8; 2026: 3.

16 papers.

Sort:

By area: