Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2404.09866

Reimagining Self-Adaptation in the Age of Large Language Models

Abstract

Modern software systems are subjected to various types of uncertainties arising from context, environment, etc. To this end, self-adaptation techniques have been sought out as potential solutions. Although recent advances in self-adaptation through the use of ML techniques have demonstrated promising results, the capabilities are limited by constraints imposed by the ML techniques, such as the need for training samples, the ability to generalize, etc. Recent advancements in Generative AI (GenAI) open up new possibilities as it is trained on massive amounts of data, potentially enabling the interpretation of uncertainties and synthesis of adaptation strategies. In this context, this paper presents a vision for using GenAI, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of architectural adaptation. Drawing parallels with human operators, we propose that LLMs can autonomously generate similar, context-sensitive adaptation strategies through its advanced natural language processing capabilities. This method allows software systems to understand their operational state and implement adaptations that align with their architectural requirements and environmental changes. By integrating LLMs into the self-adaptive system architecture, we facilitate nuanced decision-making that mirrors human-like adaptive reasoning. A case study with the SWIM exemplar system provides promising results, indicating that LLMs can potentially handle different adaptation scenarios. Our findings suggest that GenAI has significant potential to improve software systems' dynamic adaptability and resilience.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Raghav Donakanti, Prakhar Jain, Shubham Kulkarni, Karthik Vaidhyanathan. 2024-04-15. Reimagining Self-Adaptation in the Age of Large Language Models. https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.09866

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