Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2203.11423

RT-Bench: an Extensible Benchmark Framework for the Analysis and Management of Real-Time Applications

Abstract

Benchmarking is crucial for testing and validating any system, even more so in real-time systems. Typical real-time applications adhere to well-understood abstractions: they exhibit a periodic behavior, operate on a well-defined working set, and strive for stable response time avoiding non-predicable factors such as page faults. Unfortunately, available benchmark suites fail to reflect key characteristics of real-time applications. Practitioners and researchers must resort to either benchmark heavily approximated real-time environments, or to re-engineer available benchmarks to add -- if possible -- the sought-after features. Additionally, the measuring and logging capabilities provided by most benchmark suites are not tailored "out-of-the-box" to real-time environments, and changing basic parameters such as the scheduling policy often becomes a tiring and error-prone exercise. In this paper, we present RT-bench, an open-source framework adding standard real-time features to virtually any existing benchmark. Furthermore, RT-bench provides an easy-to-use, unified command line interface to customize key aspects of the real-time execution of a set of benchmarks. Our framework is guided by four main criteria: 1) cohesive interface, 2) support for periodic application behavior and deadline semantics, 3) controllable memory footprint, and 4) extensibility and portability. We have integrated within the framework applications from the widely used SD-VBS and IsolBench suites. We showcase a set of use-cases that are representative of typical real-time system evaluation scenarios and that can be easily conducted via RT-Bench.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mattia Nicolella, Shahin Roozkhosh, Denis Hoornaert, Andrea Bastoni, Renato Mancuso. 2022-07-30. RT-Bench: an Extensible Benchmark Framework for the Analysis and Management of Real-Time Applications. https://doi.org/10.1145/3534879.3534888

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE