MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400946578 · doi:10.1109/icsa59870.2024.00009

Magnet: Method-Based Approach Using Graph Neural Network for Microservices Identification

2024· article· en· W4400946578 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroservicesComputer scienceArtificial neural networkMagnetIdentification (biology)GraphArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringOperating systemBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monolithic software systems face significant challenges in terms of maintenance, scalability, and portability. To address these challenges, many companies are embracing the microservices architectural style as a more flexible alternative to their monoliths. Microservices structure systems into modular, independent components, enabling easier development, deployment, and maintenance. However, the migration from a monolith to microservices is challenging due to the laborious task of manually identifying and decomposing a system into microservices. Several earlier studies focused on developing approaches to facilitate the migration process. However, the reliance on domain experts to define various parameters and thresholds restricted their use. In this paper, we introduce Magnet, a fully automated microservice identification approach, based on graph neural networks (GNNs). Magnet integrates a GNN model with a fine-grained method-based graph enriched with semantic and static features of the system. It enables accurate microservices identification while simultaneously promoting microservice cohesion and reducing microservice coupling. To validate the accuracy of Magnet, we performed extensive experiments using a set of open-source systems. Quantitatively, we use a set of quality metrics to assess the resulting microservices quality. We also compare our results to established ground truths. Empirical evidence suggests that our fully-automated approach Magnet achieves precision and recall rates of 56% and 68%. Qualitatively, we assess the modularity and functional independence of the resulting microservices by examining their relationships and semantic integrity. This evaluation demonstrates that our fully automated approach yields promising results, underlining its effectiveness in creating modular and coherent microservices.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.303
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.278 · 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