Sep 2026· Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Software System Performance and Reliability
Abstract
RaftShift is an experimental advisory controller for planned Raft leadership transfer. It compares forecast cumulative benefit with a component-based activation allowance, then invokes native transfer and voting. This technical report consolidates implementation, cloud, formal-model, and later measurement evidence while separating their validation scopes. Frozen three- and five-region workload experiments contain 960 evaluation runs and 960,000 operations; 22 of 24 workload cells favor RaftShift over retaining the incumbent after the declared multiplicity correction. These results do not establish the ledger's incremental advantage over simpler transfer rules. Dynamic comparisons against native transfer and a GeoLM-derived comparator remain unresolved; the cross-topology short-pulse non-inferiority gate fails. Disjoint WAN readiness validation rejects all tested activation budgets. A later corrected 64-run local measurement campaign retains all 2,496 offered requests, including 14 HTTP 503 failures charged according to the predeclared 2,000-ms loss convention. The one-time move-cost diagnostic fails in four of six horizon comparisons. These are forced-action engineering diagnostics, not a policy-superiority test or proof of RaftShift inferiority. Corrected bounded TLA+ checks are reported with their finite-state coverage and implementation limitations. Independently calibrated ledger superiority and a deployable economic cost model remain unestablished. This is an author-prepared technical report, not a peer-reviewed journal article. The accompanying ZIP contains report source and compact evidence, including per-request results; it is not a complete raw replay archive. Earlier raw cloud evidence remains in the linked artifact records. The September 12 local raw observation streams and replica disk images are not included in those earlier records. Report and original data/documentation: CC BY 4.0; software/model code: Apache-2.0, as scoped in the included license files. AI assistance and sole-author responsibility are disclosed in the report.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The results show that the embedded industry has been able to apply agile methods in its development processes and that the appreciation of the agile methods and their individual practices appears to increase once adopted and applied in practice.
O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· IET Software· 238 citations· ⚡9
Consequences of happiness and unhappiness that are beneficial and detrimental for developers' mental well-being, the software development process, and the produced artifacts are found.
D. Graziotin, Fabian Fagerholm, Xiaofeng Wang et al.· Journal of Systems and Softw...· 236 citations· ⚡13
The Mobile-D approach is briefly outlined here and the experiences gained from four case studies are discussed, which helped develop an agile development approach for mobile application development.
P. Abrahamsson, Antti Hanhineva, H. Hulkko et al.· Conference on Object-Oriente...· 225 citations· ⚡18
AI agents can generate code at a scale that’s hard for humans to review line-by-line. PDD Kit helps ensure the code is doing what the developer intended by creating formal specifications and testing against them. It converts developer intent into a Verus specification, proves AI-generated code meets it for every input, and uses tests where proofs aren't practical. Developers review intent, not every line. The post Formally verifying agent-written full-stack web apps with PDD Kit appeared first o…
Is your company’s AI sovereign? A practical guide for CIOs on AI vendor lock-in, EU Data Act switching, cloud sovereignty, and testing your exit plan before you need it. The post Sovereignty Is the Option to Leave appeared first on GPT-Lab.
Microsoft Research Blog· microsoft.comOct 30, 2026
Evaluating Microsoft Copilot at enterprise scale requires test data that captures the full complexity of real organizations, yet real enterprise data contains sensitive information that cannot be used for evaluation under any circumstances. The post From synthetic enterprise data evaluations to real Microsoft Copilot AI confidence appeared first on Microsoft Research.
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.