AML: An accuracy metric model for effective evaluation of log parsing techniques

IF 3.7 2区 计算机科学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING Journal of Systems and Software Pub Date : 2024-07-06 DOI:10.1016/j.jss.2024.112154
{"title":"AML: An accuracy metric model for effective evaluation of log parsing techniques","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jss.2024.112154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Logs are essential for the maintenance of large software systems. Software engineers often analyze logs for debugging, root cause analysis, and anomaly detection tasks. Logs, however, are partly structured, making the extraction of useful information from massive log files a challenging task. Recently, many log parsing techniques have been proposed to automatically extract log templates from unstructured log files. These parsers, however, are evaluated using different accuracy metrics. In this paper, we show that these metrics have several drawbacks, making it challenging to understand the strengths and limitations of existing parsers. To address this, we propose a novel accuracy metric, called AML (Accuracy Metric for Log Parsing). AML is a robust accuracy metric that is inspired by research in the field of remote sensing. It is based on measuring omission and commission errors. We use AML to assess the accuracy of 14 log parsing tools applied to the parsing of 16 log datasets. We also show how AML compares to existing accuracy metrics. Our findings demonstrate that AML is a promising accuracy metric for log parsing compared to alternative solutions, which enables a comprehensive evaluation of log parsing tools to help better decision-making in selecting and improving log parsing techniques.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Systems and Software","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Systems and Software","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0164121224001997","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Logs are essential for the maintenance of large software systems. Software engineers often analyze logs for debugging, root cause analysis, and anomaly detection tasks. Logs, however, are partly structured, making the extraction of useful information from massive log files a challenging task. Recently, many log parsing techniques have been proposed to automatically extract log templates from unstructured log files. These parsers, however, are evaluated using different accuracy metrics. In this paper, we show that these metrics have several drawbacks, making it challenging to understand the strengths and limitations of existing parsers. To address this, we propose a novel accuracy metric, called AML (Accuracy Metric for Log Parsing). AML is a robust accuracy metric that is inspired by research in the field of remote sensing. It is based on measuring omission and commission errors. We use AML to assess the accuracy of 14 log parsing tools applied to the parsing of 16 log datasets. We also show how AML compares to existing accuracy metrics. Our findings demonstrate that AML is a promising accuracy metric for log parsing compared to alternative solutions, which enables a comprehensive evaluation of log parsing tools to help better decision-making in selecting and improving log parsing techniques.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
AML:有效评估日志解析技术的准确度度量模型
日志对于大型软件系统的维护至关重要。软件工程师经常分析日志,以完成调试、根本原因分析和异常检测任务。然而,日志是部分结构化的,因此从海量日志文件中提取有用信息是一项极具挑战性的任务。最近,人们提出了许多日志解析技术,用于从非结构化日志文件中自动提取日志模板。然而,这些解析器使用不同的准确度指标进行评估。在本文中,我们发现这些指标存在一些缺陷,使得了解现有解析器的优势和局限性变得十分困难。为了解决这个问题,我们提出了一种新的准确度指标,称为 AML(日志解析的准确度指标)。AML 是一种稳健的准确度度量,其灵感来自遥感领域的研究。它以测量遗漏和误差为基础。我们使用 AML 来评估 14 种日志解析工具解析 16 个日志数据集的准确性。我们还展示了 AML 与现有准确度指标的比较。我们的研究结果表明,与其他解决方案相比,AML 是一种很有前途的日志解析准确度指标,它可以对日志解析工具进行全面评估,从而帮助在选择和改进日志解析技术时做出更好的决策。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Systems and Software
Journal of Systems and Software 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
5.70%
发文量
193
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Systems and Software publishes papers covering all aspects of software engineering and related hardware-software-systems issues. All articles should include a validation of the idea presented, e.g. through case studies, experiments, or systematic comparisons with other approaches already in practice. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: • Methods and tools for, and empirical studies on, software requirements, design, architecture, verification and validation, maintenance and evolution • Agile, model-driven, service-oriented, open source and global software development • Approaches for mobile, multiprocessing, real-time, distributed, cloud-based, dependable and virtualized systems • Human factors and management concerns of software development • Data management and big data issues of software systems • Metrics and evaluation, data mining of software development resources • Business and economic aspects of software development processes The journal welcomes state-of-the-art surveys and reports of practical experience for all of these topics.
期刊最新文献
FSECAM: A contextual thematic approach for linking feature to multi-level software architectural components Exploring emergent microservice evolution in elastic deployment environments An empirical study of AI techniques in mobile applications Information needs in bug reports for web applications Development and benchmarking of multilingual code clone detector
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1