Comparison of exact and approximate multi-objective optimization for software product lines

Rafael Olaechea, Derek Rayside, Jianmei Guo, K. Czarnecki
{"title":"Comparison of exact and approximate multi-objective optimization for software product lines","authors":"Rafael Olaechea, Derek Rayside, Jianmei Guo, K. Czarnecki","doi":"10.1145/2648511.2648521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Software product lines (SPLs) allow stakeholders to manage product variants in a systematical way and derive variants by selecting features. Finding a desirable variant is often difficult, due to the huge configuration space and usually conflicting objectives (e.g., lower cost and higher performance). This scenario can be characterized as a multi-objective optimization problem applied to SPLs. We address the problem using an exact and an approximate algorithm and compare their accuracy, time consumption, scalability, parameter setting requirements on five case studies with increasing complexity. Our empirical results show that (1) it is feasible to use exact techniques for small SPL multi-objective optimization problems, and (2) approximate methods can be used for large problems but require substantial effort to find the best parameter setting for acceptable approximation which can be ameliorated with known good parameter ranges. Finally, we discuss the tradeoff between accuracy and time consumption when using exact and approximate techniques for SPL multi-objective optimization and guide stakeholders to choose one or the other in practice.","PeriodicalId":303765,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 18th International Software Product Line Conference - Volume 1","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"88","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 18th International Software Product Line Conference - Volume 1","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2648511.2648521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 88

Abstract

Software product lines (SPLs) allow stakeholders to manage product variants in a systematical way and derive variants by selecting features. Finding a desirable variant is often difficult, due to the huge configuration space and usually conflicting objectives (e.g., lower cost and higher performance). This scenario can be characterized as a multi-objective optimization problem applied to SPLs. We address the problem using an exact and an approximate algorithm and compare their accuracy, time consumption, scalability, parameter setting requirements on five case studies with increasing complexity. Our empirical results show that (1) it is feasible to use exact techniques for small SPL multi-objective optimization problems, and (2) approximate methods can be used for large problems but require substantial effort to find the best parameter setting for acceptable approximation which can be ameliorated with known good parameter ranges. Finally, we discuss the tradeoff between accuracy and time consumption when using exact and approximate techniques for SPL multi-objective optimization and guide stakeholders to choose one or the other in practice.
软件产品线精确与近似多目标优化的比较
软件产品线(SPLs)允许涉众以系统的方式管理产品变体,并通过选择特性派生变体。由于巨大的配置空间和通常相互冲突的目标(例如,更低的成本和更高的性能),找到理想的变体通常是困难的。这种情况可以被描述为应用于spc的多目标优化问题。我们使用精确算法和近似算法来解决问题,并在五个日益复杂的案例研究中比较它们的准确性,时间消耗,可扩展性,参数设置要求。我们的实证结果表明:(1)对于小SPL多目标优化问题使用精确技术是可行的;(2)近似方法可以用于大型问题,但需要大量的努力才能找到可接受的近似的最佳参数设置,并且可以在已知的良好参数范围内进行改进。最后,我们讨论了使用精确和近似技术进行SPL多目标优化时的精度和时间消耗之间的权衡,并指导利益相关者在实践中选择其中一种。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信