A Fuzzy Logic-Based Quality Model For Identifying Microservices With Low Maintainability

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.14489v1
• Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:53:37 GMT
• Title: A Fuzzy Logic-Based Quality Model For Identifying Microservices With Low Maintainability
• Authors: Rahime Yilmaz, Feza Buzluca,
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes a hierarchical quality model based on fuzzy logic to measure and evaluate the maintainability of MSAs. We use a fuzzification technique to transform crisp values of code metrics into fuzzy levels and apply them as inputs to our quality model.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: Microservice Architecture (MSA) is a popular architectural style that offers many advantages regarding quality attributes, including maintainability and scalability. Developing a system as a set of microservices with expected benefits requires a quality assessment strategy that is established on the measurements of the system's properties. This paper proposes a hierarchical quality model based on fuzzy logic to measure and evaluate the maintainability of MSAs considering ISO/IEC 250xy SQuaRE (System and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation) standards. Since the qualitative bounds of low-level quality attributes are inherently ambiguous, we use a fuzzification technique to transform crisp values of code metrics into fuzzy levels and apply them as inputs to our quality model. The model generates fuzzy values for the quality sub-characteristics of the maintainability, i.e., modifiability and testability, converted to numerical values through defuzzification. In the last step, using the values of the sub-characteristics, we calculate numerical scores indicating the maintainability level of each microservice in the examined software system. This score was used to assess the quality of the microservices and decide whether they need refactoring. We evaluated our approach by creating a test set with the assistance of three developers, who reviewed and categorized the maintainability levels of the microservices in an open-source project based on their knowledge and experience. They labeled microservices as low, medium, or high, with low indicating the need for refactoring. Our method for identifying low-labeled microservices in the given test set achieved 94% accuracy, 78% precision, and 100% recall. These results indicate that our approach can assist designers in evaluating the maintainability quality of microservices.

Related papers

• Fostering Microservice Maintainability Assurance through a Comprehensive Framework [0.0]
  This project aims to offer maintainability assurance for microservice-based systems. It introduces an automated assessment framework tailored to microservice architecture. The framework addresses various levels, from artifacts to holistic views of system characteristics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-23T22:45:29Z)
• Benchmarks as Microscopes: A Call for Model Metrology [76.64402390208576]
  Modern language models (LMs) pose a new challenge in capability assessment. To be confident in our metrics, we need a new discipline of model metrology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-22T17:52:12Z)
• LMM-PCQA: Assisting Point Cloud Quality Assessment with LMM [83.98966702271576]
  This study aims to investigate the feasibility of imparting PCQA knowledge to LMMs through text supervision. We transform quality labels into textual descriptions during the fine-tuning phase, enabling LMMs to derive quality rating logits from 2D projections of point clouds. Our experimental results affirm the effectiveness of our approach, showcasing a novel integration of LMMs into PCQA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-28T14:47:09Z)
• A Novel Metric for Measuring Data Quality in Classification Applications (extended version) [0.0]
  We introduce and explain a novel metric to measure data quality. This metric is based on the correlated evolution between the classification performance and the deterioration of data. We provide an interpretation of each criterion and examples of assessment levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-13T11:20:09Z)
• QualEval: Qualitative Evaluation for Model Improvement [82.73561470966658]
  We propose QualEval, which augments quantitative scalar metrics with automated qualitative evaluation as a vehicle for model improvement. QualEval uses a powerful LLM reasoner and our novel flexible linear programming solver to generate human-readable insights. We demonstrate that leveraging its insights, for example, improves the absolute performance of the Llama 2 model by up to 15% points relative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-06T00:21:44Z)
• Towards Verifiable Generation: A Benchmark for Knowledge-aware Language Model Attribution [48.86322922826514]
  This paper defines a new task of Knowledge-aware Language Model Attribution (KaLMA) First, we extend attribution source from unstructured texts to Knowledge Graph (KG), whose rich structures benefit both the attribution performance and working scenarios. Second, we propose a new Conscious Incompetence" setting considering the incomplete knowledge repository. Third, we propose a comprehensive automatic evaluation metric encompassing text quality, citation quality, and text citation alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T11:45:59Z)
• Quality In / Quality Out: Assessing Data quality in an Anomaly Detection Benchmark [0.13764085113103217]
  We show that relatively minor modifications on the same benchmark dataset (UGR'16, a flow-based real-traffic dataset for anomaly detection) cause significantly more impact on model performance than the specific Machine Learning technique considered. Our findings illustrate the need to devote more attention into (automatic) data quality assessment and optimization techniques in the context of autonomous networks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T12:03:12Z)
• Blind Multimodal Quality Assessment: A Brief Survey and A Case Study of Low-light Images [73.27643795557778]
  Blind image quality assessment (BIQA) aims at automatically and accurately forecasting objective scores for visual signals. Recent developments in this field are dominated by unimodal solutions inconsistent with human subjective rating patterns. We present a unique blind multimodal quality assessment (BMQA) of low-light images from subjective evaluation to objective score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-18T09:04:55Z)
• The Meta-Evaluation Problem in Explainable AI: Identifying Reliable Estimators with MetaQuantus [10.135749005469686]
  One of the unsolved challenges in the field of Explainable AI (XAI) is determining how to most reliably estimate the quality of an explanation method. We address this issue through a meta-evaluation of different quality estimators in XAI. Our novel framework, MetaQuantus, analyses two complementary performance characteristics of a quality estimator.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-14T18:59:02Z)
• Fingerprint Image-Quality Estimation and its Application to Multialgorithm Verification [56.128200319868526]
  Signal-quality awareness has been found to increase recognition rates and to support decisions in multisensor environments significantly. Here, we study the orientation tensor of fingerprint images to quantify signal impairments, such as noise, lack of structure, blur, with the help of symmetry descriptors. The quantitative results favor quality awareness under all aspects, boosting recognition rates and fusing differently skilled experts efficiently as well as effectively.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-24T12:17:49Z)
• Maximizing Welfare with Incentive-Aware Evaluation Mechanisms [18.304048425012503]
  We propose an evaluation problem where the inputs are controlled by strategic individuals who can modify their features at a cost. A learner can only partially observe the features, and aims to classify individuals with respect to a quality score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-03T19:00:43Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.