MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414605934 · doi:10.1109/qrs65678.2025.00018

Beyond Decomposition: A LLM-Powered Automated Approach to Refactoring Monoliths Into Microservices

2025· article· en· W4414605934 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Sellami, Oussama Jebbar, Ayyoub Gannoun, Mohamed Aymen Saied

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware System Performance and Reliability
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCode refactoringWorkflowDecompositionAutomationConsistency (knowledge bases)MicroservicesOverhead (engineering)Code (set theory)Benchmark (surveying)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organizations migrating monolithic applications to microservice architectures often face significant challenges in both decomposition and refactoring phases. While the decomposition step has received considerable automation research, refactoring remains predominantly manual, creating bottlenecks in migration efforts and preventing runtime-based and a more realistic evaluation of decomposition techniques. We propose a fully automated refactoring methodology that complements existing decomposition approaches. Our technique implements an ID-based and DTO-based hybrid design for inter-service communication and leverages Large Language Models (LLMs) for decision making, code analysis and code generation. Taking a monolith's source code and decomposition plan as input, our approach identifies “API classes” that cross service boundaries, selects their appropriate target design among the ID and DTO based methods and then automatically generates the necessary communication components—API contracts, server-side endpoints, and client-side proxies. This approach balances the preservation of the monolith's workflow consistency through the ID-based design and minimizing the overhead and complexity of the cross-service interactions through the DTO-based design. A qualitative evaluation using three benchmark applications demonstrates our approach's feasibility and advantages over related work.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.601
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware System Performance and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207