skip to main content
research-article

Systematic Scalability Modeling of QoS-aware Dynamic Service Composition

Published: 02 November 2022 Publication History

Abstract

In Dynamic Service Composition (DSC), an application can be dynamically composed using web services to achieve its functional and Quality of Services (QoS) goals. DSC is a relatively mature area of research that crosscuts autonomous and services computing. Complex autonomous and self-adaptive computing paradigms (e.g., multi-tenant cloud services, mobile/smart services, services discovery and composition in intelligent environments such as smart cities) have been leveraging DSC to dynamically and adaptively maintain the desired QoS, cost and to stabilize long-lived software systems. While DSC is fundamentally known to be an NP-hard problem, systematic attempts to analyze its scalability have been limited, if not absent, though such analysis is of a paramount importance for their effective, efficient, and stable operations.
This article reports on a new application of goal-modeling, providing a systematic technique that can support DSC designers and architects in identifying DSC-relevant characteristics and metrics that can potentially affect the scalability goals of a system. The article then applies the technique to two different approaches for QoS-aware dynamic services composition, where the article describes two detailed exemplars that exemplify its application. The exemplars hope to provide researchers and practitioners with guidance and transferable knowledge in situations where the scalability analysis may not be straightforward. The contributions provide architects and designers for QoS-aware dynamic service composition with the fundamentals for assessing the scalability of their own solutions, along with goal models and a list of application domain characteristics and metrics that might be relevant to other solutions. Our experience has shown that the technique was able to identify in both exemplars application domain characteristics and metrics that had been overlooked in previous scalability analyses of these DSC, some of which indeed limited their scalability. It has also shown that the experiences and knowledge can be transferable: The first exemplar was used as an example to inform and ease the work of applying the technique in the second one, reducing the time to create the model, even for a non-expert.

References

[1]
F. Alrebeish and R. Bahsoon. 2015. Stabilising performance in cloud services composition using portfolio theory. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS). IEEE, New York, NY, 1–8. DOI:
[2]
Damian Arellanes and Kung-Kiu Lau. 2020. Evaluating IoT service composition mechanisms for the scalability of IoT systems. Fut. Gen. Comput. Syst. 108 (2020), 827–848.
[3]
Parvaneh Asghari, Amir Masoud Rahmani, and Hamid Haj Seyyed Javadi. 2018. Service composition approaches in IoT: A systematic review. J. Netw. Comput. Applic. 120 (2018), 61–77.
[4]
R. Bahsoon and W. Emmerich. 2008. An economics-driven approach for valuing scalability in distributed architectures. In Proceedings of the 7th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA’08). IEEE Computer Society, 9–18.
[5]
Luciano Baresi, Liliana Pasquale, and Paola Spoletini. 2010. Fuzzy goals for requirements-driven adaptation. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference. IEEE, 125–134.
[6]
Amel Bennaceur, Thein Than Tun, Yijun Yu, and Bashar Nuseibeh. 2019. Requirements engineering. In Handbook of Software Engineering. Springer, Cham, 51–92.
[7]
Daniel M. Berry, Betty H. C. Cheng, and Jia Zhang. 2005. The four levels of requirements engineering for and in dynamic adaptive systems. In Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ).
[8]
Martin Bichler, Marion Kaukal, and Arie Segev. 1999. Multi-attribute auctions for electronic procurement. In Proceedings of the 1st IBM IAC Workshop on Internet-based Negotiation Technologies. Citeseer, 18–19. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.17.8499&rep=rep1&type=pdf.
[9]
N. Borissov, D. Neumann, and C. Weinhardt. 2010. Automated bidding in computational markets: An application in market-based allocation of computing services. Auton. Agents Multi-Agent Syst. 21, 2 (2010), 1–28. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com/index/41272l185u852475.pdf.
[10]
Radu Calinescu, Lars Grunske, Marta Kwiatkowska, Raffaela Mirandola, and Giordano Tamburrelli. 2010. Dynamic QoS management and optimization in service-based systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 37, 3 (2010), 387–409.
[11]
Mauro Caporuscio, Vincenzo Grassi, Moreno Marzolla, and Raffaela Mirandola. 2015. Go prime: A fully decentralized middleware for utility-aware service assembly. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 42, 2 (2015), 136–152.
[12]
Jorge Cardoso, Amit Sheth, John Miller, Jonathan Arnold, and Krys Kochut. 2004. Quality of service for workflows and web service processes. Web Semant.: Sci., Serv. Agents World Wide Web 1, 3 (Apr. 2004), 281–308. DOI:
[13]
Jaelson Castro, Manuel Kolp, and John Mylopoulos. 2002. Towards requirements-driven information systems engineering: The Tropos project. Inf. Syst. 27, 6 (2002), 365–389.
[14]
Yee-Ming Chen and Hsin-Mei Yeh. 2010. Autonomous adaptive agents for market-based resource allocation of cloud computing. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics. IEEE, 2760–2764.
[15]
Fadl Dahan, Wojdan Binsaeedan, Meteb Altaf, Mahfoudh Saeed Al-Asaly, and Mohammad Mehedi Hassan. 2021. An efficient hybrid metaheuristic algorithm for QoS-aware cloud service composition problem. IEEE Access 9 (2021), 95208–95217.
[16]
Anne Dardenne, Axel Van Lamsweerde, and Stephen Fickas. 1993. Goal-directed requirements acquisition. Sci. Comput. Program. 20, 1–2 (1993), 3–50.
[17]
Tom De Wolf and Tom Holvoet. 2006. A Catalogue of Decentralised Coordination Mechanisms for Designing Self-organising Emergent Applications. Technical Report CW458. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Department of Computer Science.
[18]
Jiang Dejun, Guillaume Pierre, and Chi-Hung Chi. 2009. EC2 performance analysis for resource provisioning of service-oriented applications. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Service-oriented Computing (ICSOC/ServiceWave’09). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 197–207. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1926618.1926641.
[19]
Leticia Duboc, Faisal Alrebeish, Vivek Nallur, and Rami Bahasoon. 2018. Summary of a literature review in scalability of qos-aware service composition. CoRR abs/1810.033014 (Apr. 2018), 5.
[20]
L. Duboc, E. Letier, and D. S. Rosenblum. 2013a. Systematic elaboration of scalability requirements through goal-obstacle analysis. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39, 1 (Jan. 2013), 119–140. DOI:
[21]
Leticia Duboc, Vivek Nallur, and Rami Bahsoon. 2013b. Escalabilidade em Composição Dinâmica de Serviços baseada em QoS: uma Revisão Sistemática. Cadernos do IME. Série Informática 35 (2013), 7–22. Retrieved from http://www.e-publicacoes.uerj.br/index.php/cadinf/article/view/7991.
[22]
Mirko D’Angelo, Mauro Caporuscio, Vincenzo Grassi, and Raffaela Mirandola. 2020. Decentralized learning for self-adaptive QoS-aware service assembly. Fut. Gen. Comput. Syst. 108 (2020), 210–227.
[23]
Erik M. Fredericks, Byron DeVries, and Betty H. C. Cheng. 2014. AutoRELAX: Automatically RELAXing a goal model to address uncertainty. Empir. Softw. Eng. 19, 5 (2014), 1466–1501.
[24]
Carlo Ghezzi, Valerio Panzica La Manna, Alfredo Motta, and Giordano Tamburrelli. 2015. Performance-driven dynamic service selection. Concurr. Computat.: Pract. Exper. 27, 3 (2015), 633–650. DOI:
[25]
Heather J. Goldsby, Pete Sawyer, Nelly Bencomo, Betty H. C. Cheng, and Danny Hughes. 2008. Goal-based modeling of dynamically adaptive system requirements. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual IEEE International Conference and Workshop on the Engineering of Computer Based Systems (ECBS’08). IEEE, 36–45.
[26]
Ikbel Guidara, Nawal Guermouche, Tarak Chaari, and Mohamed Jmaiel. 2020. Time-aware selection approach for service composition based on pruning and improvement techniques. Softw, Qual, J, 28, 3 (2020), 1245–1277.
[27]
Sara Hassan. 2019. Modelling and Evaluation of Microservice Granularity Adaptation Decisions. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Birmingham.
[28]
Vahideh Hayyolalam and Ali Asghar Pourhaji Kazem. 2018. A systematic literature review on QoS-aware service composition and selection in cloud environment. J. Netw. Comput. Applic. 110 (2018), 52–74.
[29]
Arshia Hosseini Bidi, Zahra Movahedi, and Zeinab Movahedi. 2021. A fog-based fault-tolerant and QoE-aware service composition in smart cities. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 32, 11 (2021), e4326.
[30]
Jun Huang, Qiang Duan, Song Guo, Yuhong Yan, and Shui Yu. 2015. Converged network-cloud service composition with end-to-end performance guarantee. IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput. 6, 2 (2015), 545–557.
[31]
Chandrashekar Jatoth, G. R. Gangadharan, and Rajkumar Buyya. 2015. Computational intelligence based QoS-aware web service composition: A systematic literature review. IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 10, 3 (2015), 475–492.
[32]
Amin Jula, Elankovan Sundararajan, and Zalinda Othman. 2014. Cloud computing service composition: A systematic literature review. Expert Syst. Applic. 41, 8 (2014), 3809–3824.
[33]
Christian Krupitzer, Felix Maximilian Roth, Sebastian VanSyckel, Gregor Schiele, and Christian Becker. 2015. A survey on engineering approaches for self-adaptive systems. Pervas. Mob. Comput. 17 (2015), 184–206.
[34]
Satish Kumar. 2021. Technical Debt-aware and Evolutionary Adaptation for Service Composition in SAAS Clouds. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Birmingham.
[35]
Emmanuel Letier and Axel van Lamsweerde. 2002. Agent-based tactics for goal-oriented requirements elaboration. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering. ACM, New York, NY, 83–93. DOI:
[36]
Shuhua Li and Minghua Chen. 2010. An adaptive-GA based QoS driven service selection for web services composition. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Application and System Modeling (ICCASM’10). IEEE, V13–416–V13–418. DOI:
[37]
Huagang Liang, Xiaoqian Wen, Yongkui Liu, Haifeng Zhang, Lin Zhang, and Lihui Wang. 2021. Logistics-involved QoS-aware service composition in cloud manufacturing with deep reinforcement learning. Robot. Comput.-Integ. Manuf. 67 (2021), 101991.
[38]
Harry Markowitz. 1952. Portfolio selection. J. Fin. 7, 1 (1952), 77–91. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2975974.
[39]
Mahboobeh Moghaddam and Joseph G. Davis. 2014. Service selection in web service composition: A comparative review of existing approaches. In Web Services Foundations. 321–346.
[40]
Ahmed Moustafa and Takayuki Ito. 2018. A deep reinforcement learning approach for large-scale service composition. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Principles and Practice of Multi-agent Systems. Springer, 296–311.
[41]
Ahmed Moustafa and Minjie Zhang. 2013. Multi-objective service composition using reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Service-oriented Computing. Springer, 298–312.
[42]
Vivek Nallur and Rami Bahsoon. 2013. A decentralized self-adaptation mechanism for service-based applications in the cloud. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 39, 5 (2013), 591–612. DOI:
[43]
Shunshun Peng, Hongbing Wang, and Qi Yu. 2020. Multi-clusters adaptive brain storm optimization algorithm for QoS-aware service composition. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 48822–48835.
[44]
M. Shepperd, C. Schofield, and B. Kitchenham. 1996. Effort estimation using analogy. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering. IEEE Computer Society, 170–178.
[45]
Alireza Souri, Amir Masoud Rahmani, Nima Jafari Navimipour, and Reza Rezaei. 2020. A hybrid formal verification approach for QoS-aware multi-cloud service composition. Clust. Comput. 23, 4 (2020), 2453–2470.
[46]
Sen Su, Fei Li, and FangChun Yang. 2008. Iterative selection algorithm for service composition in distributed environments. Sci. China Series F: Inf. Sci. 51, 11 (2008), 1841–1856.
[47]
Daniel Sykes, Jeff Magee, and Jeff Kramer. 2011. FlashMob: Distributed adaptive self-assembly. In Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Software Engineering for Adaptive and Self-managing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, 100–109.
[48]
Asrin Vakili and Nima Jafari Navimipour. 2017. Comprehensive and systematic review of the service composition mechanisms in the cloud environments. J. Netw. Comput. Applic. 81 (2017), 24–36.
[49]
Axel van Lamsweerde. 2008. Systematic Requirements Engineering: From System Goals to UML Models to Software Specifications. John Wiley & Sons.
[50]
Hongbign Wang, Xin Chen, Qin Wu, Qi Yu, Xingguo Hu, Zibin Zheng, and Athman Bouguettaya. 2017. Integrating reinforcement learning with multi-agent techniques for adaptive service composition. ACM Trans. Auton. Adapt. Syst. 12, 2 (2017), 1–42.
[51]
Hongbing Wang, Mingzhu Gu, Qi Yu, Yong Tao, Jiajie Li, Huanhuan Fei, Jia Yan, Wei Zhao, and Tianjing Hong. 2019. Adaptive and large-scale service composition based on deep reinforcement learning. Knowl.-based Syst. 180 (2019), 75–90.
[52]
Hongbing Wang, Guicheng Huang, and Qi Yu. 2016. Automatic hierarchical reinforcement learning for efficient large-scale service composition. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Web Services (ICWS). IEEE, 57–64.
[53]
Hongbing Wang, Jiajie Li, Qi Yu, Tianjing Hong, Jia Yan, and Wei Zhao. 2020. Integrating recurrent neural networks and reinforcement learning for dynamic service composition. Fut. Gen. Comput. Syst. 107 (2020), 551–563.
[54]
Danny Weyns. 2019. Software engineering of self-adaptive systems. In Handbook of Software Engineering. Springer, 399–443.
[55]
Jon Whittle, Pete Sawyer, Nelly Bencomo, Betty H. C. Cheng, and Jean-Michel Bruel. 2010. RELAX: A language to address uncertainty in self-adaptive systems requirement. Requir. Eng. 15, 2 (2010), 177–196.
[56]
X. Wang and Z. Jing, and H. Yang. 2011. Service selection constraint model and optimization algorithm for web service composition. Inf. Technol. J. 10 (2011), 1024–1030. DOI:
[57]
Zhuoqun Yang, Zhi Li, Zhi Jin, and Yunchuan Chen. 2014. A systematic literature review of requirements modeling and analysis for self-adaptive systems. In Proceedings of the International Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality. Springer, 55–71.
[58]
Eric S. K. Yu. 1997. Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering. IEEE, 226–235.
[59]
Tao Yu, Yue Zhang, and Kwei-Jay Lin. 2007. Efficient algorithms for web services selection with end-to-end QoS constraints. ACM Trans. Web 1, 1 (May 2007), 6. DOI:
[60]
Yuan Yuan, Weishi Zhang, and Xiuguo Zhang. 2018. A context-aware self-adaptation approach for web service composition. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Information Systems Engineering (ICISE). IEEE, 33–38.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Development of an inclusive, scalable, and flexible hydrologic modeling systemEnvironmental Modelling & Software10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.106225183:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2025

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems
ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems  Volume 16, Issue 3-4
December 2021
150 pages
ISSN:1556-4665
EISSN:1556-4703
DOI:10.1145/3543993
Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 02 November 2022
Online AM: 12 July 2022
Accepted: 25 March 2022
Revised: 31 January 2022
Received: 23 August 2020
Published in TAAS Volume 16, Issue 3-4

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Scalability modelling
  2. dynamic service composition
  3. autonomous and adaptive systems

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

  • European Union’s Horizon 2020
  • Marie Skłodowska-Curie
  • Agency for Business Competitiveness of the Government of Catalonia

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)62
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7
Reflects downloads up to 02 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Development of an inclusive, scalable, and flexible hydrologic modeling systemEnvironmental Modelling & Software10.1016/j.envsoft.2024.106225183:COnline publication date: 1-Jan-2025

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Full Text

View this article in Full Text.

Full Text

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media