Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper compares log-based (BERT) and graph-based (GNN) models for fault diagnosis on two datasets, TraceBench and BGL, evaluating both anomaly detection and fault type classification. Graph-only models underperform log-based encoders, suggesting the importance of sequential log information. However, combining log encoder representations with graph-based models yields the best performance, indicating that graph structures can augment traditional log analysis.
Simply throwing GNNs at logs doesn't beat BERT for fault diagnosis, but injecting log embeddings into graph models unlocks superior performance.
Modern distributed systems generate large volumes of logs that can be analyzed to support essential AIOps tasks such as fault diagnosis, which plays a crucial role in maintaining system reliability. Most existing approaches rely on log-based models that treat logs as linear sequences of events. However, such representations discard the structural context between events that are often present in execution logs, such as parent-child dependencies, fan-out (branching), or temporal features. To better capture these relationships, recent works on Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) suggest that representing logs as graphs offers a promising alternative. Building on these observations, this paper conducts a comparative study of log-based encoder architectures (e.g., BERT) and graph-based models (e.g., GNNs) for automated fault diagnosis. We evaluate our models on TraceBench, a trace-oriented log dataset, and on BGL, a more traditional system log dataset, covering both anomaly detection and fault type classification. Our results show that graph-only models fail to outperform encoder baselines. However, integrating learned representations from log encoders into graph-based models achieves the strongest overall performance. These findings highlight conditions under which graph-augmented architectures can outperform traditional log-based approaches.