Distilled Lifelong Self-Adaptation for Configurable Systems

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2501.00840
• Title: Distilled Lifelong Self-Adaptation for Configurable Systems
• Authors: Yulong Ye, Tao Chen, Miqing Li (University of Birmingham)
• Classification: cs.SE (Software Engineering), cs.AI
• Publication Date: January 1, 2025 (arXiv preprint)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.00840

Abstract

Modern configurable systems present tremendous opportunities for engineering intelligent software systems of the future. A critical challenge is how to effectively self-adapt the configuration of running systems to optimize performance (such as runtime and throughput) under time-varying workloads. Existing methods either ignore available historical knowledge or rely on static historical knowledge utilization without considering information utility, thus failing to address this problem adequately. This paper proposes the DLiSA framework to tackle this challenging problem. DLiSA exhibits two key characteristics: first, it supports lifelong planning where the planning process runs continuously throughout the system's lifecycle, enabling rapid adaptation through dynamic utilization of accumulated knowledge; second, it enhances planning for new workloads through distilled knowledge seeding, dynamically purifying knowledge and seeding only useful historical configurations when necessary, thereby reducing misleading information. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DLiSA significantly outperforms state-of-the-art methods, with performance improvements up to 229% and resource acceleration up to 2.22×.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Definition

The core problem addressed in this research is adaptive configuration optimization for configurable systems under time-varying workloads. Specifically:

1. Configuration Space Complexity: Modern software systems (such as database H2, file compressor KANZI, etc.) possess numerous configurable options, forming exponentially growing configuration spaces
2. Workload Dynamicity: Systems face workloads that change unpredictably over time, causing optimal configurations to shift accordingly
3. Real-time Requirements: Systems must rapidly identify optimal configurations adapting to new workloads under limited budget constraints

Importance Analysis

The significance of this problem is evident in:

• Practical Value: In modern cloud computing and edge computing scenarios, systems must dynamically adapt to different types and scales of workloads
• Performance Impact: Configuration choices directly affect critical system performance indicators (runtime, throughput, etc.)
• Resource Efficiency: Reasonable self-adaptation strategies can significantly improve resource utilization efficiency

Limitations of Existing Methods

Through analysis of existing approaches, the authors identify shortcomings in two major categories:

1. Static Adaptation Methods (e.g., FEMOSAA):
   • Search from scratch each time workloads change
   • Ignore historical optimization experience, causing redundant effort
   • Waste valuable historical information
2. Dynamic Adaptation Methods (e.g., Seed-EA, D-SOGA, LiDOS):
   • Employ static knowledge utilization strategies
   • Blindly seed all configurations from recent workloads
   • Discard useful information from earlier workloads
   • Cannot distinguish between beneficial and misleading configurations

Key Feature Discovery

Through empirical analysis of systems like KANZI and H2, the authors identify a critical characteristic of configurable systems:

Top-performing configurations across different workloads may be highly similar or vastly different, depending on system type and specific workloads

This finding reveals the fundamental flaw in static knowledge utilization strategies and provides theoretical foundation for dynamic knowledge distillation.

Core Contributions

1. Proposes DLiSA Framework: The first framework supporting distilled lifelong self-adaptation for configurable systems, combining lifelong planning and dynamic knowledge distillation
2. Designs Ranking-based Workload Similarity Analysis: A similarity measurement method based on ranking loss to determine when to perform knowledge seeding
3. Develops Weighted Configuration Seeding Strategy: Dynamically extracts the most useful historical configurations while filtering misleading information
4. Comprehensive Experimental Validation: Verification on 9 real systems with 93 test cases, achieving performance improvements up to 2.29× and efficiency gains up to 2.22×

Method Details

Task Definition

Input:

• Configurable system S with configuration space X = (x₁, x₂, ..., xₙ)
• Time-varying workload sequence W₁, W₂, ..., Wₜ
• Budget constraint Rₜ (maximum configuration evaluations per time step)

Output:

• Optimal configuration x* for each time step optimizing performance objective fₜ(x)

Constraints:

• Resource budget: rₜ ≤ Rₜ
• Real-time requirement: Must respond rapidly to workload changes

Model Architecture

DLiSA adopts the MAPE-K (Monitor-Analyze-Plan-Execute-Knowledge) architecture with two specialized components:

1. Knowledge Distillation Component (Analyzer)

Responsible for dynamically analyzing and extracting useful historical knowledge:

Ranking-based Workload Similarity Analysis:

• Compute ranking loss between adjacent workloads:

  L(D^(t+1)_t) = ∑∑ 1((f_t(x_j) < f_t(x_k)) ⊕ (f_(t+1)(x_j) < f_(t+1)(x_k)))
  

• Similarity score:

  S^(t+1)_t = 1 - L(D^(t+1)_t) / N_pairs
  

• Average similarity: S_sav used to determine whether to trigger seeding

Weighted Configuration Seeding:

• Local phase: Select top 50% best configurations from each workload
• Global phase: Compute weights based on robustness and timeliness
  • Robustness weight: w_(c,r) = O_c / H
  • Timeliness weight: w_(c,t) = S_c / H
  • Total weight: w_c = w_(c,r) + w_(c,t)

2. Evolutionary Planning Component (Planner)

Configuration optimization based on genetic algorithms:

• Use seeded configurations as initial population
• Evolve better configurations through crossover and mutation operations
• Evaluate configuration performance in Cyber-Twin environment

Technical Innovations

1. Dynamic Knowledge Utilization:
   • Unlike static methods, DLiSA dynamically decides whether to seed based on workload similarity
   • Avoids negative effects of blind seeding
2. Full Historical Knowledge Mining:
   • Not limited to recent workloads, extracts useful configurations from all historical workloads
   • Balances configuration robustness and timeliness through weighting mechanism
3. Lifelong Learning Paradigm:
   • Planning process runs continuously with state maintained across workloads
   • Achieves true dynamic optimization rather than static restart

Experimental Setup

Dataset

Experiments use 9 real configurable systems from different domains:

Total of 93 test cases covering different programming languages, application domains, and performance objectives.

Evaluation Metrics

1. Effectiveness: Scott-Knott test ranking, final performance values
2. Efficiency: Number of configuration evaluations needed to achieve equivalent performance, speedup s = b/m

Comparison Methods

• FEMOSAA: Static adaptation, searches from scratch each time
• Seed-EA: Dynamic adaptation, seeds all configurations from recent workload
• D-SOGA: Hybrid adaptation, 80% historical + 20% random configurations
• LiDOS: Dynamic adaptation, retains configurations based on multi-objective non-dominance

Implementation Details

• Population size: 20
• Budget constraint: 80 configuration evaluations
• Crossover rate: 0.9, Mutation rate: 0.1
• Threshold parameter: α = 0.3
• Independent runs: 100 with randomized workload ordering

Experimental Results

Main Results

DLiSA significantly outperforms comparison methods in both effectiveness and efficiency dimensions:

Effectiveness Results:

• DLiSA ranks first in 69 out of 93 test cases (74%)
• In comparison, other methods' best ranking cases: FEMOSAA (11), Seed-EA (33), D-SOGA (29), LiDOS (10)
• Maximum performance improvement: 2.29× (KANZI system W8 workload)

Efficiency Results:

• Compared to FEMOSAA: DLiSA more efficient in 88 cases, maximum speedup 2.16×
• Compared to Seed-EA: DLiSA more efficient in 57 cases, maximum speedup 2.22×
• Compared to D-SOGA: DLiSA more efficient in 58 cases, maximum speedup 2.05×
• Compared to LiDOS: DLiSA more efficient in 79 cases, maximum speedup 2.05×

Ablation Study

Two variants designed to verify component contributions:

1. DLiSA-I: Replace weighted configuration seeding with random seeding
   • Result: DLiSA wins in 50 cases, 43 ties, 0 losses
   • Validates effectiveness of weighted configuration seeding
2. DLiSA-II: Disable workload similarity analysis, trigger seeding randomly
   • Result: DLiSA wins in 39 cases, 53 ties, 1 loss
   • Demonstrates importance of similarity analysis

Parameter Sensitivity Analysis

Sensitivity analysis on threshold parameter α ∈ {0, 0.1, ..., 0.9}:

• α = 0.3 achieves best performance, obtaining most first-place rankings in Scott-Knott test
• Too small α: Excessive seeding, introduces misleading information
• Too large α: Insufficient seeding, wastes historical knowledge
• Performance degradation with larger α is more severe than with smaller α

Experimental Findings

1. Role of Workload Similarity: Similarity analysis effectively identifies favorable seeding opportunities, avoiding harmful seeding when configuration landscapes differ significantly
2. Effect of Weighted Seeding: High-weight configurations typically perform better on new workloads, validating the rationality of robustness and timeliness weight design
3. System Specificity: Different systems exhibit different workload similarity patterns, such as KANZI having more overlap between workloads while H2 shows greater differences

Related Work

Static Adaptation Methods

Traditional approaches like FEMOSAA focus on single optimization problems, restarting search each time workloads change. These methods simplify the optimization process but ignore valuable historical experience.

Dynamic Adaptation Methods

Methods like PLATO and Seed-EA support continuous planning and state preservation but employ static knowledge utilization strategies, unable to dynamically adjust seeding strategies based on workload characteristics.

Control Theory Methods

Approaches based on Kalman filtering and model predictive control show promise in adaptive planning but face challenges in modeling complex nonlinear system dynamics.

Performance Learning Methods

Methods using support vector machines, neural networks, and ensemble learning focus on modeling relationships between configurations and performance, complementing DLiSA's optimization perspective.

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. DLiSA Effectiveness: Through dynamic knowledge distillation, DLiSA significantly outperforms existing methods in most test cases
2. Significant Efficiency Gains: Resource utilization efficiency improved up to 2.22×, demonstrating the value of historical knowledge reuse
3. Clear Component Contributions: Ablation experiments verify independent contributions of ranking similarity analysis and weighted seeding
4. Reasonable Parameter Settings: α = 0.3 performs best in balancing seeding benefits and misleading risks

Limitations

1. Parameter Tuning: Threshold α may require system-specific tuning for optimal performance
2. System Scope: While covering 9 systems, extension to more system types may require further validation
3. Cyber-Twin Dependency: Experiments rely on existing benchmarks as Cyber-Twin; actual deployment may require more complex modeling

Future Directions

1. Landscape Analysis Methods: Develop more refined configuration landscape analysis techniques to better handle workload evolution
2. Feedback Mechanisms: Explore feedback mechanisms for more precise identification of beneficial planning information
3. Multi-objective Extension: Extend framework to multi-objective optimization scenarios
4. Theoretical Analysis: Provide deeper theoretical analysis to guide parameter settings and system design

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Clear Problem Definition: Accurately identifies fundamental flaws in existing methods' knowledge utilization
2. Reasonable Method Design: Ranking-based similarity analysis and weighted seeding strategy are ingeniously designed with solid theoretical foundation
3. Comprehensive Experimental Design: Covers multiple systems and scenarios with sufficient statistical validation
4. High Practical Value: Significant performance and efficiency improvements demonstrate practical applicability
5. Clear Writing: Well-structured paper with accurate technical detail descriptions

Weaknesses

1. Limited Theoretical Analysis: Lacks theoretical guarantees on convergence and optimality
2. Parameter Sensitivity: Selection of α parameter may require system-type-specific tuning
3. Computational Complexity: Lacks detailed analysis of computational overhead in knowledge distillation
4. Long-term Behavior: Insufficient analysis of system long-term running behavior

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Provides new knowledge utilization paradigm for self-adaptive systems
2. Practical Value: Directly applicable to cloud computing, edge computing, and other real-world scenarios
3. Reproducibility: Provides complete code and data supporting result reproduction
4. Inspirational Significance: Offers new insights for lifelong learning applications in system optimization

Applicable Scenarios

1. Cloud Computing Platforms: System configuration optimization under dynamic workloads
2. Edge Computing: Rapid configuration adaptation in resource-constrained environments
3. Database Systems: Performance tuning for different query patterns
4. Distributed Systems: Configuration management in multi-tenant environments

References

The paper cites 76 relevant references covering multiple domains including self-adaptive systems, search-based software engineering, and dynamic optimization, providing solid theoretical foundation and comprehensive comparative analysis.

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality software engineering research paper proposing innovative solutions to the important problem of adaptive optimization for configurable systems. The method design is reasonable, experimental validation is comprehensive, and practical value is significant. While there is room for improvement in theoretical analysis and long-term behavior research, the overall contribution is outstanding with important implications for related fields.