Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2604.11341

Using Budgets to Reduce Application Emissions

Abstract

As carbon pricing mechanisms like the EU Emissions Trading System are set to increase prices of energy consumption, software architects face growing pressure to design applications that operate within financially predictable emission constraints. Existing approaches typically enforce rigid per-interval emission rates, which prove unsuitable in electrical grids with highly dynamic carbon intensity, which is common in grids with growing renewable energy adoption. We propose the use of emissions budgets, an approach that replaces fixed emission rates with time-bound budgets, enabling applications to dynamically save unused emission allowances during low carbon intensity periods and expend them during high carbon intensity periods. We describe emissions-aware applications using a MAPE-K feedback loop that continuously monitors application power consumption and grid carbon intensity, then adapts resource allocation through vertical scaling or migration to maintain long-term emission limits while maximizing performance. Through simulation using six weeks of real-world carbon intensity data from Germany, France, and Poland, we demonstrate that budget-based management improves task fulfillment by up to 36% in variable grids compared to fixed rates. Crucially, budgets achieve parity with fixed rates in stable grids, making them a safe replacement. We show that emissions budgets are a practical mechanism to balance environmental constraints, operational costs, and service quality when emissions directly translate to financial penalties.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Leo Wilhelm Lierse, Mahyar Tourchi Moghaddam, Sebastian Werner. 2026-04-13. Using Budgets to Reduce Application Emissions. https://doi.org/10.1109/icsa-c68850.2026.00066

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

From Prompting to Engineering: A Research Agenda for Prompt Engineering in Software Engineering

Prompt engineering is increasingly used across Software Engineering (SE) activities, including requirements analysis, coding, testing, documentation, repository analysis, and planning. Yet prompts and related instruction artifacts are often created and evolved through task-specific and informal practices, with limited support for their systematic evaluation, management, traceability, and governance. To examine how SE can contribute to the maturation of these practices, we organized a structured community discussion at the First International Workshop on Empirical Prompt Engineering for Software Engineering (PROMPT-SE), co-located with EASE 2026. Participants discussed current prompting practices, challenges to their adoption and evaluation, and future directions for integrating prompt engineering into software development. We synthesized these discussions into five areas: prompt artifacts and standardization; evaluation and benchmarking; lifecycle integration; human-AI collaboration and skills; and governance, privacy, and technical debt. Based on these areas, we outline a research agenda to move prompt engineering from predominantly ad hoc interactions toward more systematic, maintainable, evaluable, traceable, and governable SE practices.

cs.SE

Antipatterns in AI-assisted Qualitative Data Analysis: A Catalog of Temptations and Pitfalls for Software Engineering Researchers

AI-assisted qualitative data analysis (QDA) offers unprecedented opportunities to streamline software engineering (SE) research, yet uncritical use risks compromising analytical rigor and flooding the field with accelerated production of low-quality research. While tactical best practices will naturally evolve over time, SE researchers currently lack strategic guidance to identify and mitigate methodological risks when attempting AI-assisted QDA. Based on our decades of qualitative SE research expertise and experience combined with an understanding of the emerging landscape of AI-assisted QDA, this paper presents a catalog of antipatterns in AI-assisted QDA - a set of assumptions and practices that initially appear advantageous but ultimately undermine analytical rigor and validity. The antipatterns are grouped into three categories reflecting escalating impact: Dangerous Drivers, Operational Missteps, and Analytical Failures. As more SE researchers attempt AI-assisted QDA, these antipatterns will help them identify and avoid common temptations and pitfalls, while reviewers can be equipped with the vocabulary and criteria to call out problematic and failed practice. Ultimately, this catalog of antipatterns can serve as a stepping stone in our responsible methodological evolution toward principled and meaningful human-AI collaboration in qualitative research.

cs.SE

What Does an Evaluation License? A Commit-Bound Census of Claim Replay in Inspect Evals

Benchmarks can run without determining what their results license. We freeze a large evaluation collection and attempt to replay its historical claims. Most units stop because the evidence required for replay is not bound. Where replay is possible, different claims remain stable at different resolutions. We make this otherwise implicit inference step explicit and executable.

cs.SE