Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Improving the reliability of real-time embedded systems using innate immune techniques

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Evolutionary Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous work has shown that immune-inspired techniques have good potential for solving problems associated with the development of real-time embedded systems (RTES), where for various reasons traditional real-time development techniques are not suitable. This paper examines in more detail the general applicability of the Dendritic Cell Algorithm (DCA) to the problem of task scheduling in RTES. To make this possible, an understanding of the problem characteristics is formalised, such that the results produced by the DCA can be examined in relation to the overall problem difficulty. The paper then contains a detailed understanding of how well the DCA which demonstrates that it generally performs well, however it clearly identifies properties of anomalies that are difficult to detect. These properties are as anticipated based on real-time scheduling theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Burns A, Wellings A (2001) Real-time systems and programming languages, 3rd edn, Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  2. Graham RL (1969) Bounds on multiprocessing timing anomalies. SIAM J Appl Math 17:416–429

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Lundqvist T, Stenstrom P (1999) Timing anomalies in dynamically scheduled microprocessors. In: Proceedings of 20th IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS) 1999, pp 12–21

  4. Engblom J (2003) Analysis of the execution time unpredictability caused by dynamic branch prediction. In: Proceedings of 9th real-time and embedded technology and applications symposium (RTAS) 2003, pp 152–159

  5. Holsti N, Saarinen S (2002) Status of the Bound-T WCET tool, Proc 2nd international workshop on worst-case execution time analysis

  6. Theiling H, Ferdinand C, Wilhelm R (2000) Fast and precise WCET prediction by separated cache and path analyses. Real-Time Syst 18(2):157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lay N, Bate I (2007) Applying artificial immune systems to real-time embedded systems. In: Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation (CEC) 2007, pp 3743–3750

  8. Greensmith J, Aickelin U, Twycross J (2006) Articulation and clarification of the dendritic cell algorithm. In: Proceedings of international conference on artificial immune systems (ICARIS) 2006, pp 404–417

  9. Puschner P, Burns A (2000) Guest editorial: a review of worst-case execution-time analysis. Real-Time Syst 18(2):115–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bouyssounouse B, Sifakis J (2005) Embedded systems design: the ARTIST roadmap for research and development. LNCS, vol 3436. Springer, Berlin

  11. Graaf B, Lormans M, Toetenel H (2003) Embedded software engineering: the state of the practice. IEEE Softw 20(6):61–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vahid F, Givargis TD (2002) Embedded system design: a unified hardware/software introduction. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eisenring M, Thiele L, Zitzler E (2000) Conflicting criteria in embedded system design. IEEE Des Test Comput 17(2):51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hart E, Ross P, Nelson J (1998) Producing robust schedules via an artificial immune system. In: Proceedings of the world congress on computational intelligence (WCCI) 1998, pp 464–469

  15. Hart E, Ross P (1999) An immune system approach to scheduling in changing environments. In: Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO) 1999, pp 1559–1566

  16. Colin A, Petters SM (2003) Experimental evaluation of code properties for WCET analysis. In: Proceedings of 24th IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS) 2003, pp 190–199

  17. Bernat G, Colin A, Petters SM (2002) WCET analysis of probabilistic hard real-time systems. In: Proceedings of 23rd real-time systems symposium (RTSS) 2002, pp 279–288

  18. Audsley NC, Burns A, Richardson MF, Wellings AJ (1991) Hard real-time scheduling: the deadline monotonic approach. In: Proceedings 8th IEEE workshop on real-time operating systems and software 1991, pp 133–137

  19. Sha L, Rajkumar R, Sathaye SS (1994) Generalized rate-monotonic scheduling theory: a framework for developing real-time systems. Proc IEEE 82(1):68–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu CL, Layland JW (1973) Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard-real-time environment. J ACM 20(1):40–61

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Katcher DI, Arakawa H, Strosnider JK (1993) Engineering and analysis of fixed priority schedulers. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 19(9):920–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Harter PK Jr (1987) Response times in level-structured systems. ACM Trans Comput Syst 5(3):232–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Buttazzo GC, Sensini F (1999) Optimal deadline assignment for scheduling soft aperiodic tasks in hard real-time environments. Trans Comput 48(10):1035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stepney S, Smith R, Timmis J, Tyrrell A, Neal M, Hone A (2005) Conceptual frameworks for artificial immune systems. Int J Unconv Comput 1(3):315–338

    Google Scholar 

  25. de Castro LN, Timmis J (2002) Artificial immune systems: a new computational intelligence approach. Springer, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Hart E, Ross P (1999) The evolution and analysis of potential antibody library for use in job-shop scheduling. In: Corne D, Dorigo M, Glover F (eds) New ideas in optimisation. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 185–202

    Google Scholar 

  27. Medzhitov R, Janeway CA Jr (1998) Innate immune recognition and control of adaptive immune responses. Semin Immunol 10(5):351–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Twycross J, Aickelin U (2005) Towards a conceptual framework for innate immunity. In: Proceedings of international conference on artificial immune systems (ICARIS) 2005, pp 112–125

  29. Neal M, Feyereisl J, Rascunà R, Wang X (2006) Don’t touch me, I’m fine: robot autonomy using an artificial innate immune system. In: Proceedings of international conference on artificial immune systems (ICARIS) 2006, pp 349–361

  30. Zhang X, Dragffy G, Pipe AG, Zhu QM (2005) Artificial innate immune system: An instant defence layer of embryonics. In: Proceedings of international conference on artificial immune systems (ICARIS) 2005, pp 302–315

  31. Burnet FM (1968) Evolution of the immune process in vertebrates. Nature 218:426–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Stibor T, Mohr P, Timmis J, Eckert C (2005) Is negative selection appropriate for anomaly detection? In: Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO) 2005, pp 321–328

  33. Matzinger P (1994) Tolerance, danger, and the extended family. Annu Rev Immunol 12(1):991–1045

    Google Scholar 

  34. Medzhitov R, Janeway CA Jr. (2002) Decoding the patterns of self and nonself by the innate immune system. Science 296(5566):298–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Greensmith J, Aickelin U, Cayzer S (2005) Introducing dendritic cells as a novel immune-inspired algorithm for anomaly detection. In: Proceedings of international conference on artificial immune systems (ICARIS) 2005, pp 153–167

  36. Kim J, Bentley P, Wallenta C, Ahmed M, Hailes S (2006) Danger is ubiquitous: detecting malicious activities in sensor networks using the dendritic cell algorithm. In: Proceedings of international conference on artificial immune systems (ICARIS) 2006, pp 390–403

  37. Greensmith J, Aickelin U (2007) Dendritic cells for SYN scan detection. In: Proceedings of genetic and evolutionary computation conference (GECCO) 2007, pp 49–56

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by EPSRC and Philips Research through a CASE award, reference CASE/CNA/04/78.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, University of York, York, UK

    Nicholas Lay & Iain Bate

Authors
  1. Nicholas Lay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Iain Bate
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas Lay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lay, N., Bate, I. Improving the reliability of real-time embedded systems using innate immune techniques. Evol. Intel. 1, 113–132 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-008-0009-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12065-008-0009-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation