Cited by 39Software System Performance and ReliabilitySoftware Engineering ResearchCloud Computing and Resource Management

Root Cause Analysis in Microservice Using Neural Granger Causal Discovery

Open access
Lin, Cheng-Ming, Chang, Ching, Wang, Wei-Yao, Wang, Kuang-Da, Peng, Wen-Chih·2024·Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

Abstract

In recent years, microservices have gained widespread adoption in IT operations due to their scalability, maintenance, and flexibility. However, it becomes challenging for site reliability engineers (SREs) to pinpoint the root cause due to the complex relationship in microservices when facing system malfunctions. Previous research employed structure learning methods (e.g., PC-algorithm) to establish causal relationships and derive root causes from causal graphs. Nevertheless, they ignored the temporal order of time series data and failed to leverage the rich information inherent in the temporal relationships. For instance, in cases where there is a sudden spike in CPU utilization, it can lead to an increase in latency for other microservices. However, in this scenario, the anomaly in CPU utilization occurs before the latency increases, rather than simultaneously. As a result, the PC-algorithm fails to capture such characteristics. To address these challenges, we propose RUN, a novel approach for root cause analysis using neural Granger causal discovery with contrastive learning. RUN enhances the backbone encoder by integrating contextual information from time series and leverages a time series forecasting model to conduct neural Granger causal discovery. In addition, RUN incorporates Pagerank with a personalization vector to efficiently recommend the top-k root causes. Extensive experiments conducted on the synthetic and real-world microservice-based datasets demonstrate that RUN noticeably outperforms the state-of-the-art root cause analysis methods. Moreover, we provide an analysis scenario for the sock-shop case to showcase the practicality and efficacy of RUN in microservice-based applications. Our code is publicly available at https://github.com/zmlin1998/RUN.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1609/aaai.v38i1.27772

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Chen, B.; Yu, L.; Luo, W.; Wu, C.; Li, M.; Tan, H.; Huang, J.; and Wan, Z. 2022. Hybrid tree model for root cause analysis of wireless network fault localization. Web Intell., 20(3): 213-223.
  2. Chen, X.; and He, K. 2021. Exploring Simple Siamese Rep- resentation Learning. In CVPR, 15750-15758.
  3. Cheng, Y.; Yang, R.; Xiao, T.; Li, Z.; Suo, J.; He, K.; and Dai, Q. 2023. CUTS: Neural Causal Discovery from Irreg- ular Time-Series Data. In ICLR. OpenReview.net.
  4. Fan, C.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; and Ouyang, W. 2023. Inter- pretable Multi-Scale Neural Network for Granger Causal- ity Discovery. In ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), 1-5. IEEE.
  5. Gao, T.; Yao, X.; and Chen, D. 2021. SimCSE: Simple Con- trastive Learning of Sentence Embeddings. In EMNLP (1), 6894-6910. Association for Computational Linguistics.
  6. Granger, C. W. 1969. Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Economet- rica: journal of the Econometric Society, 424-438.
  7. Grill, J.; Strub, F.; Altché, F.; Tallec, C.; Richemond, P. H.; Buchatskaya, E.; Doersch, C.; Pires, B. Á.; Guo, Z.; Azar, M. G.; Piot, B.; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Munos, R.; and Valko, M. 2020. Bootstrap Your Own Latent -A New Approach to Self-Supervised Learning. In NeurIPS.
  8. Ikram, A.; Chakraborty, S.; Mitra, S.; Saini, S. K.; Bagchi, S.; and Kocaoglu, M. 2022. Root Cause Analysis of Failures in Microservices through Causal Discovery. In NeurIPS.
  9. Liu, D.; He, C.; Peng, X.; Lin, F.; Zhang, C.; Gong, S.; Li, Z.; Ou, J.; and Wu, Z. 2021. MicroHECL: High-Efficient Root Cause Localization in Large-Scale Microservice Sys- tems. In ICSE (SEIP), 338-347. IEEE.
  10. Mach. Learn. Knowl. Extr., 1(1): 312-340.
  11. Oliveira, E. E.; Miguéis, V. L.; and de Moura Borges, J. L. C. 2023. Automatic root cause analysis in manufacturing: an overview & conceptualization. J. Intell. Manuf., 34(5): 2061-2078.
  12. ACM. Soldani, J.; Forti, S.; and Brogi, A. 2022. Failure Root Cause Analysis for Microservices, Explained. In DAIS, vol- ume 13272 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 74-91. Springer.
  13. Tank, A.; Covert, I.; Foti, N. J.; Shojaie, A.; and Fox, E. B. 2022. Neural Granger Causality. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 44(8): 4267-4279.
  14. Wang, D.; Chen, Z.; Ni, J.; Tong, L.; Wang, Z.; Fu, Y.; and Chen, H. 2023. Hierarchical Graph Neural Networks for Causal Discovery and Root Cause Localization. CoRR, abs/2302.01987. · arXiv
  15. Wang, H.; Wu, Z.; Jiang, H.; Huang, Y.; Wang, J.; Köprü, S.; and Xie, T. 2021. Groot: An Event-graph-based Approach for Root Cause Analysis in Industrial Settings. In ASE, 419- 429. IEEE.
  16. Yue, Z.; Wang, Y.; Duan, J.; Yang, T.; Huang, C.; Tong, Y.; and Xu, B. 2022. TS2Vec: Towards Universal Representa- tion of Time Series. In AAAI, 8980-8987. AAAI Press.
  17. Zeng, A.; Chen, M.; Zhang, L.; and Xu, Q. 2023. Are Trans- formers Effective for Time Series Forecasting? In AAAI, 11121-11128. AAAI Press.
  18. Zhang, C.; Peng, X.; Sha, C.; Zhang, K.; Fu, Z.; Wu, X.; Lin, Q.; and Zhang, D. 2022. DeepTraLog: Trace- Log Combined Microservice Anomaly Detection through Graph-based Deep Learning. In ICSE, 623-634. ACM.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lin, C.-M., Chang, C., Wang, W.-Y., Wang, K.-D., & Peng, W.-C.
Affiliations
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University (TW)
Venue
Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence
Published
2024-03-24
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
206-213
ISSN
  • 2159-5399 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-3468
OpenAlex
W4393158607
Cited by
39
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 3
FWCI
17.07
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software System Performance and Reliability
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cloud Computing and Resource Management
Keywords
root cause analysis, microservices, contrastive learning, temporal order, time series forecasting, IT operations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review