MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172156727 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10955

Studying the Performance Impact of SOA Design Patterns via Coupled Model Transformations

2015· dissertation· en· W3172156727 on OpenAlexaff
Nariman Mani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicService-Oriented Architecture and Web Services
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCode refactoringComputer scienceUnified Modeling LanguageModel transformationSoftware design patternTransformation (genetics)Behavioral modelingProgramming languageArtificial intelligenceConsistency (knowledge bases)Software

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early performance analysis of designs for Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) can be based on performance models derived from the design models using known techniques, such as Performance from Unified Model Analysis (PUMA).When a SOA design pattern is applied to solve some architectural, design or implementation problem, it impacts the design model and its derived performance model.Conventionally, the performance model needs to be reconstructed to reflect the design pattern changes on the design model.This thesis proposes a technique to trace the causality from the design changes introduced by the pattern application to the corresponding changes in the performance model.The approach takes as input a SOA design model expressed in UML extended with two standard profiles: SoaML for expressing SOA solutions and MARTE for performance annotations.The SOA design patterns are specified using Role Based Modeling (RBM) and the performance model is expressed in Layered Queueing Networks (LQN).To support the exploration of different patterns, the thesis proposes the following approaches: 1) Systematic identification of SOA design problem, selecting an appropriate pattern and binding the design with the RBM problem specification of the pattern; 2) Systematic recording of the SOA design changes (refactoring) using the RBM pattern solution specification; 3) Automatic derivation of the corresponding performance model changes from the design model changes using coupled transformation; 4) Automatic derivation of transformation directives from the performance model changes and annotation of the performance model with the transformation directives; 5) Automatic refactoring of the performance model by QVT model transformation.iii Systematic and automated pattern exploration techniques and the tools support developed in the thesis are illustrated and evaluated with a Browsing and Shopping SOA case study.A test suite was designed and used to verify all the major functionalities of the proposed approach.Furthermore, several design patterns are applied to the Browsing and Shopping SOA to validate their effectiveness in the process of performance analysis by a system designer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicService-Oriented Architecture and Web ServicesFrench-language works237,207