skip to main content
10.1145/3205651.3208252acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgeccoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Using evolutionary dynamic optimization for monitor selection in highly dynamic communication infrastructures

Published:06 July 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we address the problem of applying evolutionary dynamic optimization of network monitoring to highly dynamic communication network infrastructures.

One major challenge of modern communication networks is the increasing volatility due to, e.g., changing availability of nodes and links, load of paths, or attacks. While optimization of those dynamic networks has been an important application area since decades, new developments in the area of network function virtualization and software defined network facilitate a completely new level of automated dynamic network optimization. Especially in mobile networks, changes can be observed to appear swiftly. Thus, using population-based heuristics becomes challenging as reevaluation of all candidate solutions may become time-wise impossible and operations need to rely on possibly obsolete fitness values.

Here, an established method has been applied to solve the dynamic monitor selection problem on multiple real-world problem instances using a different simulated level of change. Statistically significant results of the proposed method have been compared to the performance of a best-of-multiple selection local search (EMS LS) heuristic. As the results show, optimization reaches results of high quality even under difficult circumstances.

References

  1. Jürgen Branke and Hartmut Schmeck. 2003. Designing Evolutionary Algorithms for Dynamic Optimization Problems. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 239--262. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Shaowei Cai. 2015. Balance between complexity and quality: Local search for minimum vertex cover in massive graphs. IJCAI International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 2015-Janua, Ijcai (2015), 747--753. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Shaowei Cai, Jinkun Lin, and Chuan Luo. 2017. Finding A Small Vertex Cover in Massive Sparse Graphs: Construct, Local Search, and Preprocess. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 59 (2017), 463--494. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Ankit Chauhan, Tobias Friedrich, and Francesco Quinzan. 2017. Approximating Optimization Problems using EAs on Scale-Free Networks. In Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO). 235--242. arXiv: 1704.03664 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jianer Chen, Iyad A. Kanj, and Ge Xia. 2010. Improved upper bounds for vertex cover. Theoretical Computer Science 411, 40--42 (sep 2010), 3736--3756. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Carlos Artemio Coello Coello. 2012. Constraint-handling techniques used with evolutionary algorithms. In Proceedings of the fourteenth international conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation conference companion - GECCO Companion '12 (GECCO '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 849. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. C. Cruz, J.R. González, and D.A. Pelta. 2011. Optimization in dynamic environments: A survey on problems, methods and measures. Soft Computing 15, 7 (2011), 1427--1448. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Mou Dasgupta, G. P. Biswas, and Chandan Bhar. 2012. Optimization of multiple objectives and topological design of data networks using genetic algorithm. In 2012 1st International Conference on Recent Advances in Information Technology (RAIT). IEEE, 256--262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Benjamin Doerr, Daniel Johannsen, and Carola Winzen. 2012. Multiplicative drift analysis. Algorithmica 64, 4 (2012), 673--697. arXiv:1101.0776 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Mitsuo Gen and Runwei Cheng. 1999. Genetic Algorithms and Engineering Optimization. Vol. 7. John Wiley & Sons. 512 pages Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. ITU. 2014. The World in 2014 - ICT Facts and Figures. Technical Report in 2008. International Telecommunication Union (ITU), Geneva, Switzerland. 8 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Richard M. Karp. 2010. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In 50 Years of Integer Programming 1958-2008: From the Early Years to the State-of-the-Art. 219--241. arXiv:arXiv:1011.1669v3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Simon Knight, Nickolas Falkner, Hung X. Nguyen, Paul Tune, and Matthew Roughan. 2012. I can see for miles: Re-visualizing the internet. IEEE Network 26, 6 (2012), 26--32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Sofiane Lagraa and JéRome François. 2017. Knowledge discovery of port scans from darknet. In Proceedings of the IM 2017 - 2017 IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network and Service Management. IEEE, 935--940.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Jure Leskovec, Deepayan Chakrabarti, Jon Kleinberg, Christos Faloutsos, and Zoubin Ghahramani. 2008. Kronecker Graphs: An Approach to Modeling Networks. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 11 (2008), 985--1042. arXiv:0812.4905 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Jure Leskovec, Jon Kleinberg, and Christos Faloutsos. 2006. Graph Evolution: Densification and Shrinking Diameters. ACM Transactions on Knowledge Discovery from Data (TKDD) 1, 1 (mar 2006). arXiv:physics/0603229 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. H. B. Mann and D. R. Whitney. 1947. On a Test of Whether one of Two Random Variables is Stochastically Larger than the Other. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18, 1 (1947), 50--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Antonio Marotta, Fabio D'Andreagiovanni, Andreas Kassler, and Enrica Zola. 2017. On the energy cost of robustness for green virtual network function placement in 5G virtualized infrastructures. Computer Networks 125 (oct 2017), 64--75.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Zbigniew Michalewicz, Martin Schmidt, Matthew Michalewicz, and Constantin Chiriac. 2007. Adaptive business intelligence: Three case studies. In Studies in Computational Intelligence. Vol. 51. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 179--196.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Robin Mueller-Bady, Martin Kappes, Lukas Atkinson, and Inmaculada Medina-Bulo. 2017. Multijob. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion on - GECCO '17. ACM, Berlin, 1231--1238. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Robin Mueller-Bady, Martin Kappes, Inmaculada Medina-Bulo, and Francisco Palomo-Lozano. 2017. Optimization of Monitoring in Dynamic Communication Networks using a Hybrid Evolutionary Algorithm. In GECCO'17: Proceedings of the 2017 conference on genetic and evolutionary computation companion. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. P.S.R. Murty and P.S.R. Murty. 2017. Graph Theory (5th ed.). Springer, Heidelberg. 7--17 pages. arXiv:arXiv:1011.1669v3Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Ferrante Neri and Raino A.E. Mäkinen. 2007. Hierarchical evolutionary algorithms and noise compensation via adaptation. In Studies in Computational Intelligence. Vol. 51. Springer, 345--369.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Trung Thanh Nguyen, Shengxiang Yang, and Juergen Branke. 2012. Evolutionary dynamic optimization: A survey of the state of the art. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation 6 (oct 2012), 1--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. F.P. Quintao, F.G. Nakamura, and G.R. Mateus. 2005. Evolutionary Algorithm for the Dynamic Coverage Problem Applied to Wireless Sensor Networks Design. In 2005 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 2. IEEE, 1589--1596.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Matei Ripeanu and Ian Foster. 2002. Mapping the Gnutella Network: Macroscopic Properties of Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems. IEEE Internet Computing Journal (2002), 85--93. arXiv:cs/0209028Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Philipp Rohlfshagen and Xin Yao. 2008. Attributes of Dynamic Combinatorial Dynamic Optimisation : A Brief Overview. In Simulated Evolution and Learning, Xiaodong Li, Michael Kirley, Mengjie Zhang, David Green, Vic Ciesielski, Hussein Abbass, Zbigniew Michalewicz, Tim Hendtlass, Kalyanmoy Deb, Kay Chen Tan, Jürgen Branke, and Yuhui Shi (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 442--451. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Ole Tange. 2011. GNU Parallel: the command-line power tool. ;login: The USENIX Magazine 36, 1 (feb 2011), 42--47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Shengxiang Yang, Hui Cheng, and Fang Wang. 2010. Genetic algorithms with immigrants and memory schemes for dynamic shortest path routing problems in mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics Part C: Applications and Reviews 40, 1 (jan 2010), 52--63. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Using evolutionary dynamic optimization for monitor selection in highly dynamic communication infrastructures

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        GECCO '18: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion
        July 2018
        1968 pages
        ISBN:9781450357647
        DOI:10.1145/3205651

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 6 July 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,669of4,410submissions,38%

        Upcoming Conference

        GECCO '24
        Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference
        July 14 - 18, 2024
        Melbourne , VIC , Australia
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader