Advertisement

Adaptation of Service-Based Systems

  • Raman Kazhamiakin
  • Salima Benbernou
  • Luciano Baresi
  • Pierluigi Plebani
  • Maike Uhlig
  • Olivier Barais
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6500)

Abstract

The advances in modern technology development and future technology changes dictate new challenges and requirements to the engineering and provision of services and service-based systems (SBS). These services and systems should become drastically more flexible; they should be able to operate and evolve in highly dynamic environments and to adequately react to various changes in these environments. In these settings, adaptability becomes a key feature of services as it provides a way for an application to continuously change itself in order to satisfy new contextual requirements.

Events and conditions triggering application adaptation include: changes in the infrastructural layer of the application due to quality of service changes; changes of the (hybrid) application context and location; changes of the user types, preferences, and constraints that require application customization and personalization as a means to adapt the application behavior to a particular user; changes in the functionalities provided by the component services that requires modifying the way in which services are composed and coordinated; and changes in the way the service is being used and managed by its consumers, which in turn leads to changes in the application requirements.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    DOPLER: An Adaptable Tool Suite for Product Line Engineering, volume 2. IEEE Computer Society (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adams, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Edmond, D., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Facilitating flexibility and dynamic exception handling in workflows through worklets. In: Short Paper Proceedings at (CAiSE), Porto, Portugal. CEUR Workshop Proc., vol. 161 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aksit, M., Choukair, Z.: Dynamic, Adaptive and Reconfigurable Systems Overview and Prospective Vision. In: ICDCS Workshops, p. 84 (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ardagna, D., Comuzzi, M., Mussi, E., Pernici, B., Plebani, P.: PAWS: A Framework for Executing Adaptive Web-Service Processes. IEEE Software 24(6), 39–46 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ardagna, D., Pernici, B.: Adaptive Service Composition in Flexible Processes. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 33(6), 369–384 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baresi, L., Guinea, S., Pasquale, L.: Self-healing BPEL processes with Dynamo and the JBoss rule engine. In: ESSPE ’07: International workshop on Engineering of software services for pervasive environments, pp. 11–20 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baresi, L., Ghezzi, C., Guinea, S.: Towards Self-healing Service Compositions. In: First Conference on the PRInciples of Software Engineering (PRISE’04), pp. 11–20 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Grigori, D., Nezhad, H.R.M., Toumani, F.: Developing Adapters for Web Services Integration. In: Pastor, Ó., Falcão e Cunha, J. (eds.) CAiSE 2005. LNCS, vol. 3520, pp. 415–429. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bianculli, D., Jurca, R., Binder, W., Ghezzi, C., Faltings, B.V.: Automated Dynamic Maintenance of Composite Services Based on Service Reputation. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 449–455. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brogi, A., Popescu, R.: Automated generation of BPEL adapters. In: Dan, A., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4294, pp. 27–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Canfora, G., di Penta, M., Esposito, R., Villani, M.L.: QoS-Aware Replanning of Composite Web Services. In: ICWS 2005 Proc., Orlando (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Casati, F., Ceri, S., Pernici, B., Pozzi, G.: Workflow evolution. Data Knowl. Eng. 24(3), 211–238 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cavallaro, L., Di Nitto, E.: An Approach to Adapt Service Requests to Actual Service Interfaces. In: SEAMS ’08: Proceedings of the 2008 international workshop on Software engineering for adaptive and self-managing systems, New York, NY, USA, pp. 129–136. ACM Press (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chafle, G., Dasgupta, K., Kumar, A., Mittal, S., Srivastava, B.: Adaptation in Web Service Composition and Execution. In: International Conference on Web Services - ICWS, pp. 549–557 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clements, P., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines: Practices and Patterns. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Clotet, R., Dhungana, D., Franch, X., Grünbacher, P., Lôpez, L., Marco, J., Seyff, N.: Dealing with Changes in Service-Oriented Computing Through Integrated Goal and Variability Modelling. In: Proceedings 2nd International Workshop on VaMoS (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Colombo, M., Di Nitto, E., Mauri, M.: SCENE: A Service Composition Execution Environment Supporting Dynamic Changes Disciplined Through Rules. In: Dan, A., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4294, pp. 191–202. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Console, L., Fugini, M.G.: The WS-Diamond Team:WS-DIAMOND: an approach to Web Services - DIAgnosability, MONitoring and Diagnosis. In: e-Challenges Conf. 2007, The Hague (Oct. 2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Coplien, J., Hoffman, D., Weiss, D.: Commonality and Variability in Software Engineering. IEEE Software 15(6), 37–45 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Czarnecki, K., Helsen, S., Eisenecker, U.: Formalizing Cardinality-based Feature Models and Their Specialization. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 10(1), 7–29 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dumas, M., Spork, M., Wang, K.: Adapt or perish: Algebra and visual notation for service interface adaptation. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 65–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eder, J., Liebhart, W.: Workflow recovery. In: Proc. of IFCIS Int. Conf. on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS), Brussels, Belgium, pp. 124–134. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Erradi, A., Maheshwari, P., Tosic, V.: Policy-driven middleware for self-adaptation of web services compositions. In: van Steen, M., Henning, M. (eds.) Middleware 2006. LNCS, vol. 4290, pp. 62–80. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Casati, F., Ceri, S., Pernici, B., Pozzi, G.: Workflow Evolution. In: Thalheim, B. (ed.) ER 1996. LNCS, vol. 1157, Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gao, T., Ma, H., Yen, I.-L., Bastani, F., Tsai, W.T.: Toward QoS analysis of adaptive service-oriented architecture. In: Toward QoS analysis of adaptive service-oriented architecture (SOSE), pp. 219–226 (2005)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gomaa, H., Barber, M.: Designing Software Product Lines With UML: From Use Cases to Pattern-Based Software Architectures. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hagen, C., Alonso, G.: Exception handling in workflow management systems. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 26(10), 943–958 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hallerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing Process Variants in the Process Lifecycle. In: 10th Int’l Conf. on Enterprise Information Systems (2008)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hallsteinsen, S.O., Stav, E., Solberg, A., Floch, J.: Using Product Line Techniques to Build Adaptive Systems. In: SPLC, pp. 141–150 (2006)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hamadi, R., Benatallah, B.: Recovery nets: Towards self-adaptive workflow systems. In: Zhou, X., Su, S., Papazoglou, M.P., Orlowska, M.E., Jeffery, K. (eds.) WISE 2004. LNCS, vol. 3306, pp. 439–453. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Illner, S., Pohl, A., Krumm, H., Luck, I., Manka, D., Sparenberg, T.: Automated runtime management of embedded service systems based on design-time modeling and model transformation. In: 3rd IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics, pp. 134–139 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kang, K.C., Kim, S., Lee, J., et al.: FORM: A Feature-oriented Reuse Method with Domain-specific Reference Architectures. Annals of Software Engineering 5, 143–168 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kazhamiakin, R., Metzger, A., Pistore, M.: Towards correctness assurance in adaptive service-based applications. In: Mähönen, P., Pohl, K., Priol, T. (eds.) ServiceWave 2008. LNCS, vol. 5377, pp. 25–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ketfi, A., Belkhatir, N., Cunin, P.-Y.: Dynamic Updating of Component-based Applications. In: SERP (2002)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kiczales, G., Lamping, J., Mendhekar, A., Maeda, C., Lopes, C.V., Loingtier, J.-M., Irwin, J.: Aspect-oriented programming. In: Aksit, M., Matsuoka, S. (eds.) ECOOP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1241, pp. 220–242. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bockle, G., Pohl, K., van der Linden, F.J.: Software Product Line Engineering: Foundations, Principles and Techniques. Springer, New York (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kongdenfha, W., Saint-Paul, R., Benatallah, B., Casati, F.: An aspect-oriented framework for service adaptation. In: Dan, A., Lamersdorf, W. (eds.) ICSOC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4294, pp. 15–26. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ly, L.T., Rinderle, S., Dadam, P.: Integration and Verification of Semantic Constraints in Adaptive Process Management Systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 64(1), 3–23 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    McKinley, P.K., Sadjadi, S.M., Kasten, E.P., Cheng, B.H.C.: A Taxonomy of Compositional Adaptation. Technical report, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Michigan State University (2004)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Modafferi, S., Mussi, E., Pernici, B.: Sh-bpel: a self-healing plug-in for ws-bpel engines. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Middleware for Service Oriented Computing, MW4SOC 2006, Melbourne, Australia, November 27 - December 01, 2006, pp. 48–53 (2006)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Nezhad, H.R.M., Benatallah, B., Martens, A., Curbera, F., Casati, F.: Semi-automated adaptation of service interactions. In: WWW ’07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 993–1002, New York, NY, USA, ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Di Nitto, E., Di Penta, M., Gambi, A., Ripa, G., Villani, M.L.: Negotiation of Service Level Agreements: An Architecture and a Search-Based Approach. In: Krämer, B.J., Lin, K.-J., Narasimhan, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4749, pp. 295–306. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Di Penta, M., Esposito, R., Villani, M.L., Codato, R., Colombo, M., Di Nitto, E.: WS Binder: a Framework to Enable Dynamic Binding of Composite Web Services. In: SOSE ’06: Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on Service-oriented software engineering, New York, NY, USA, pp. 74–80. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pernici, B., Rosati, A.M.: Automatic Learning of Repair Strategies for Web Services. In: Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference on Web Services (ECOWS 2007), November 26 - 28, 2007, pp. 119–128 (2007)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Reichert, M., Dadam, P.: ADEPTflex - Supporting Dynamic Changes of Workflows Without Loosing Control. JIIS, 93 – 129 (1998)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Reichert, M., Rinderle, S., Kreher, U., Dadam, P.: Adaptive process management with ADEPT2. In: Proc. of Int. Conf. on Data Engineering ICDE, pp. 1113–1114, Tokyo, Japan (2005)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rinderle, S., Reichert, M.: A formal framework for adaptive access control models. J. Data Semantics 9, 82–112 (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Rukzio, E., Siorpaes, S., Falke, O., Hussmann, H.: Policy based adaptive services for mobile commerce. In: WMCS ’05: Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Workshop on Mobile Commerce and Services, pp. 183–192, Washington, DC, USA, IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Siljee, J., Bosloper, I., Nijhuis, J., Hammer, D.: DySOA: Making service systems self-adaptive. In: Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Traverso, P. (eds.) ICSOC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3826, pp. 255–268. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Spanoudakis, G., Zisman, A., Kozlenkov, A.: A Service Discovery Framework for Service Centric Systems. In: Proceedings of Service Computing Conference, SCC (2005)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    van der Linden, F.: Software Product Families in Europe: The Esaps & Café Projects. IEEE Software 19(4), 41–49 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Verma, K., Akkiraju, R., Goodwin, R., Doshi, P., Lee, J.: On accommodating inter service dependencies in web process flow composition. In: Proc. of Int. Semantic Web Services Symposium, AAAI spring symposium series, Palo Alto (CA) USA (2004)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Verma, K., Gomadam, K., Sheth, A.P., Miller, J.A., Wu, Z.: The METEOR-S Approach for Configuring and Executing Dynamic Web Processes. Technical report (2005)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Williams, S.K., Battle, S.A., Cuadrado, J.E.: Protocol Mediation for Adaptation in Semantic Web Services. In: 2nd European Semantic Web Conference, pp. 635–649 (2006)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wu, Y., Doshi, P.: Regret-Based Decentralized Adaptation of Web Processes with Coordination Constraint. In: Proceedings of Service Computing Conference, SCC (2007)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Xiong, P.C., Fan, Y.S., Zhou, M.C.: Petri net-based Approach to QoS-aware Configuration for WS. In: IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, pp. 1286–1291 (2007)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Zeng, L., Benatallah, B., Dumas, M., Kalagnamam, J., Chang, H.: QoS-Aware Middleware for Web Services Composition. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering 30(5) (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raman Kazhamiakin
    • 1
  • Salima Benbernou
    • 2
  • Luciano Baresi
    • 3
  • Pierluigi Plebani
    • 3
  • Maike Uhlig
    • 4
  • Olivier Barais
    • 5
  1. 1.Fondazione Bruno Kessler (FBK)TrentoItaly
  2. 2.Université Claude BernardLyonFrance
  3. 3.Politecnico di MilanoItaly
  4. 4.Universität Duisburg-EssenGermany
  5. 5.Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique (INRIA)France

Personalised recommendations