Method and system for testing access interconnection of swan monk system

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of computer networks, and particularly provides an interconnection test method and system for the access of a swan gap system, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining interconnection transmission associated data of access equipment of the swan gap system, carrying out the preprocessing of the interconnection transmission associated data, and obtaining a multi-dimensional test data set; extracting interconnection adaptation features and data intercommunication features from the multi-dimensional test data set, and constructing a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic; inputting the combined test index matrix into a distributed test platform, simulating a multi-network and multi-protocol interconnection transmission scene and collecting test indexes to obtain interconnection test data; analyzing and visualizing the interconnection test data to generate an interconnection test report; and identifying and extracting interconnection access defects in the interconnection test report, and generating optimization suggestions according to the interconnection access defects. According to the invention, the stability and compatibility of cross-terminal and cross-brand interconnection of the swan gap system are remarkably improved, and the high-standard test requirement in a complex interconnection scene is met.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of computer network technology, and specifically to a method and system for testing access and interconnection of the HarmonyOS system. Background Technology

[0002] With the rapid development of IoT technology and distributed operating systems, HarmonyOS, with its core advantages of distributed soft bus, cross-device collaboration, and multi-terminal compatibility, is widely used in access scenarios for smart terminals, IoT devices, and cross-brand interconnected devices. The stability, adaptability, and data interoperability of HarmonyOS access and interconnection have become core factors affecting the device interconnection experience. Therefore, it is urgent to conduct targeted HarmonyOS access and interconnection testing to ensure the quality of interconnection transmission in cross-network and multi-protocol scenarios. Currently, a basic process has been established for testing operating system access and interconnection, roughly including interconnection data collection, test indicator construction, simulated scenario testing, and optimization suggestion generation. This process can achieve basic interconnection access function verification and has certain applicability in single-system, single-network protocol scenarios.

[0003] However, when facing the complex scenarios of multi-terminal, distributed, and cross-device interconnection of the HarmonyOS system, existing testing methods still have many shortcomings and cannot meet the high-standard testing requirements for HarmonyOS access interconnection. The specific defects are as follows: Existing HarmonyOS access interconnection testing methods have obvious shortcomings. The test indicators lack the linkage logic of adaptation and interoperability. They only extract interconnection adaptation or data interoperability related indicators separately without establishing a one-to-one correspondence between the two. The constructed test indicator matrix has no linkage logic design, which cannot fit the distributed interconnection characteristics of the HarmonyOS system and cannot reflect the core correlation issues in the two dimensions. The simulation test scenarios are not targeted enough, mostly limited to a single network and protocol environment. Moreover, the adaptation simulation and interoperability simulation are mechanically executed according to a fixed process, without differentiated testing strategies based on the compliance of adaptation indicators. This results in insufficient testing depth of core correlation scenarios, low accuracy of the collected interconnection test data, and difficulty in capturing hidden interconnection risks.

[0004] Based on this, the present invention provides a method and system for testing the interconnection of the HarmonyOS system to solve the above problems. Summary of the Invention

[0005] To overcome the shortcomings of existing technologies, this invention provides a method and system for testing HarmonyOS system access interconnection, thereby solving the problems in existing technologies.

[0006] One embodiment of the present invention provides a method for testing the interconnection of the HarmonyOS system, comprising the following steps: Obtain interconnection and transmission association data of the HarmonyOS system access device, preprocess the interconnection and transmission association data to obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset; Extract interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features from the multidimensional test dataset, and construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic; The combined test index matrix is ​​input into the distributed test platform to simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and multiple protocols and to collect test indexes to obtain interconnection test data. Analyze and visualize interconnection test data to generate interconnection test reports; Identify and extract interconnection access defects from interconnection test reports, and generate optimization suggestions based on these defects.

[0007] This application also relates to a HarmonyOS system access and interconnection testing system, including: The data acquisition module is used to acquire interconnection transmission association data of HarmonyOS access devices, and preprocess the interconnection transmission association data to obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset. The matrix construction module is used to extract interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features from a multidimensional test dataset, and construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic. The simulation test module is used to input the combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform, simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and multiple protocols, collect test indexes, and obtain interconnection test data. The report generation module is used to analyze and visualize interconnection test data to generate interconnection test reports; The suggestion generation module is used to identify and extract interconnection access defects in interconnection test reports, and generate optimization suggestions based on the interconnection access defects.

[0008] This application also relates to a computer device, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the computer program to implement the steps of the HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method described above.

[0009] This application also relates to a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of the HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method described above.

[0010] The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method and system provided in the above embodiments have the following beneficial effects: By establishing a one-to-one correspondence between interconnection adaptation features and data interoperability features, constructing a combined test indicator matrix containing dual-dimensional linkage logic, building independent and interference-free multi-network and multi-protocol simulation scenarios, and introducing differentiated interoperability testing strategies based on the compliance status of adaptation indicators, this invention's HarmonyOS access interconnection testing method breaks through the limitations of traditional test indicator dimension fragmentation, single scenario, and rigid process. It not only aligns with the core characteristics of HarmonyOS's distributed interconnection, accurately reflecting dual-dimensional core correlation issues, but also effectively enhances the testing depth of core correlation scenarios, improves the accuracy of interconnection test data, and fully captures hidden interconnection risks. At the same time, based on the hierarchical analysis and targeted optimization of dual-dimensional linkage logic, it further realizes the accurate positioning and efficient resolution of interconnection access defects, ultimately significantly improving the stability and compatibility of HarmonyOS's cross-terminal and cross-brand interconnection, and meeting the high-standard testing requirements under complex interconnection scenarios. Attached Figure Description

[0011] Figure 1 A flowchart of a HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method provided in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic block diagram of a computer device provided in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0012] The technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will now be clearly and completely described in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

[0013] Reference Figure 1 One embodiment of the present invention provides a method for testing the interconnection of the HarmonyOS system, comprising the following steps: S10. Obtain the interconnection transmission association data of the HarmonyOS system access device, preprocess the interconnection transmission association data, and obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset; S20. Extract interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features from the multidimensional test dataset, and construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic. S30. Input the combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform to simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and multiple protocols and collect test indicators to obtain interconnection test data. S40. Analyze and visualize the interconnection test data to generate an interconnection test report; S50. Identify and extract interconnection access defects from the interconnection test report, and generate optimization suggestions based on the interconnection access defects.

[0014] In this embodiment, the method addresses the problems of fragmented indicators, limited scenarios, and insufficient data support in existing HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing. Through a two-dimensional linkage design and precise simulation of multiple scenarios, it achieves efficient testing in complex interconnection scenarios. The specific steps are explained below: As described in step S10 above, the interconnection transmission association data of the HarmonyOS access devices is obtained, and the interconnection transmission association data is preprocessed to obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset. The interconnection transmission association data covers all association information of the HarmonyOS access devices during the interconnection process, specifically including but not limited to device hardware parameters (such as processor model, memory capacity, communication module type, etc.), network connection parameters (such as connection protocol type, signal strength, network latency baseline value, etc.), data transmission dynamic data (such as transmission rate, packet loss rate, data throughput, etc.), protocol compatibility logs (such as interaction logs when accessing different protocols, adaptation failure records, etc.), and device adaptation status feedback data (such as device access success rate, connection stability score, etc.). The preprocessing process includes data cleaning (removing duplicate data, invalid logs, and data with incorrect format), outlier handling (using the 3σ criterion to identify and correct abnormal transmission data exceeding 3 times the standard deviation), data standardization (converting data of different dimensions to the [0,1] interval to eliminate dimensional differences), and dimension fusion (classifying and integrating data according to adaptation and interoperability related dimensions). This can be achieved using tools such as Python. The Pandas library (for data cleaning and standardization) and the NumPy library (for outlier correction and linear interpolation) can be used, as well as the Matlab data processing toolbox. The core is to achieve data format unification and noise elimination. It is not limited to the above tools, which is clear to those skilled in the art. The final result is a multi-dimensional test dataset that is comprehensive, formatted uniformly, and highly effective, providing comprehensive and solid data support for subsequent feature extraction and indicator construction.

[0015] As described in step S20 above, interconnection adaptation features and data interoperability features are extracted from the multi-dimensional test dataset to construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic. Interconnection adaptation features are core features reflecting device access compatibility and connection stability, including but not limited to device compatibility type coverage, cross-terminal connection success rate, connection duration, and the number of supported adaptation protocols. Data interoperability features are key features reflecting data transmission quality and protocol adaptation efficiency, including but not limited to transmission latency, data integrity verification pass rate, protocol switching response speed, and cross-network data transmission stability. Based on the core characteristic of HarmonyOS distributed interconnection that "adaptation is the foundation of interoperability, and interoperability feeds back into adaptation optimization," a one-to-one correspondence between the two types of features is established to form feature linkage logic (such as triggering key monitoring of data interoperability features such as transmission latency and data integrity when the connection duration is lower than the preset threshold of the combined test index matrix). The combined test index matrix takes interconnection adaptation features and data interoperability features as core dimensions, including the normal threshold range, anomaly judgment criteria, and linkage triggering conditions corresponding to each feature, providing a standardized basis for subsequent simulation testing and defect judgment.

[0016] As described in step S30 above, the combined test indicator matrix is ​​input into the distributed test platform to simulate interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and protocols and collect test indicators to obtain interconnection test data. The distributed test platform has the ability to simulate multiple scenarios in parallel. For example, it can use the Jenkins+JMeter combination (supporting parallel scheduling of multiple scenarios), Huawei DevCloud distributed test service (adapted to interconnection testing of HarmonyOS ecosystem devices), or a custom-built Docker containerized test platform. The core is to achieve independent and interference-free simulation of multiple network / multi-protocol scenarios. It is not limited to the above platforms, which is clear to those skilled in the art. The distributed test platform can be based on the combined test... To meet the requirements of the test index matrix, independent and interference-free multi-network simulation scenarios (including different network standards such as Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, 5G, and LoRa, as well as complex network environments such as network switching, weak signal, and network congestion) and multi-protocol simulation scenarios (covering common interconnection protocols such as TCP / IP, MQTT, CoAP, and HarmonyOS distributed soft bus protocol, as well as cross-protocol compatibility scenarios) are built. During the simulation test, interconnection transmission simulation is executed according to the preset process, and dynamic test data corresponding to each interconnection adaptation feature and data interoperability feature in the combined test index matrix are collected in real time to ensure the comprehensiveness and timeliness of the collected data. Finally, the data is integrated to form interconnection test data covering multiple scenarios and multiple dimensions.

[0017] As described in step S40 above, the interconnection test data is analyzed and visualized to generate an interconnection test report. The analysis process is based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test indicator matrix, and carries out hierarchical analysis (statistical analysis of interconnection adaptation feature data and data interoperability feature data respectively), linkage consistency verification (verifying the correlation matching degree of the two types of feature data and judging whether there is linkage anomaly), and abnormal data tracing (locating abnormal indicators that exceed the threshold range and the corresponding test scenarios). The visualization process adopts an intuitive display form, transforming the analysis results into indicator trend curves, scenario comparison data tables, defect distribution heat maps, and feature linkage relationship diagrams, clearly presenting the indicator performance and correlation under each test scenario. The interconnection test report integrates test scenario descriptions, dual-dimensional indicator statistical results, abnormal data details, feature linkage consistency analysis conclusions, etc., providing a clear basis for subsequent defect identification and optimization suggestion generation.

[0018] As described in step S50 above, identify and extract interconnection access defects from the interconnection test report, and generate optimization suggestions based on the interconnection access defects; based on the anomaly judgment criteria of the combined test indicator matrix, identify and extract various types of interconnection access defects from the interconnection test report, including interconnection adaptation defects (such as insufficient coverage of device compatibility types, connection maintenance duration not meeting standards), data interoperability defects (such as excessive transmission latency, data integrity verification failure), and linkage adaptation defects (such as decreased interoperability quality caused by abnormal adaptation features); for different types of defects, combine feature linkage logic and test scenario information to generate targeted optimization suggestions, including adaptation parameter adjustment schemes, protocol compatibility optimization strategies, network environment adaptation improvement suggestions, etc., to ensure that the optimization suggestions are targeted and implementable.

[0019] In one feasible embodiment, assuming the application scenario is a cross-device interconnection test of the HarmonyOS ecosystem in smart homes, the test objects include HarmonyOS smart TVs (brand A), smart speakers (brand B), smart curtains (brand C), and smart door locks (brand D). The core test objective is to verify the device access compatibility and data interoperability stability when multiple devices are interconnected through multiple networks / protocols such as HarmonyOS distributed soft bus, Wi-Fi 6, and Bluetooth 5.2 (e.g., the linkage scenario of door lock unlocking triggering curtain opening, speaker broadcasting, and TV pop-up window). The specific implementation process is as follows: Step S10: First, collect interconnection and transmission data from all test devices, including hardware parameters of the smart door lock (e.g., Snapdragon 4100 processor, 2GB RAM, BLE5.2 communication module), network connection parameters of the smart TV (e.g., Wi-Fi 6 protocol, signal strength -55dBm, initial network latency 20ms), data transmission dynamic data of the smart curtain (e.g., motor drive transmission rate 100kbps, packet loss rate 0.3%), protocol compatibility logs of the smart speaker (e.g., HarmonyOS soft bus protocol access interaction logs, MQTT protocol adaptation failure records 3 times), and adaptation status feedback data of all devices (e.g., door lock access success rate 98%, curtain connection stability). The score is 85 points. Next, the data is preprocessed. First, duplicate protocol interaction logs in the smart speaker (e.g., 20 logs) are removed. Then, the 3σ criterion is used to identify and correct abnormal data in the smart curtain that exceed 3 times the standard deviation (e.g., 5 logs are corrected, and the original maximum value of 500kbps is corrected to 120kbps). Then, the hardware parameters, network parameters, and transmission data of all devices are standardized to the [0,1] range (e.g., the signal strength of -55dBm is standardized to 0.82). Finally, the data is classified and integrated according to the "adaptation dimension" and "interoperability dimension" to form a multidimensional test dataset containing several data dimensions (e.g., 12) and several valid data (e.g., 8000 data).

[0020] Step S20: From the preprocessed multidimensional test dataset, select interconnection adaptation features reflecting device access compatibility and connection stability. These features include: compatibility type coverage of test devices (e.g., 100% coverage of all 4 types of devices supporting HarmonyOS Distributed Soft Bus V2.0); cross-terminal connection success rate (e.g., 95% success rate for door lock-curtain connection, 99% success rate for speaker-TV connection); connection duration (e.g., continuous connection time between door lock and bus ≥ 24h); and the number of supported adaptation protocols (e.g., at least 3 protocols supported per device). Simultaneously, extract data interoperability features reflecting data transmission quality and protocol adaptation efficiency, including transmission latency (e.g., latency from door lock unlock signal to curtain reception signal ≤ 100ms) and data integrity verification pass rate (e.g., linkage commands). The test indicators include: data packet verification pass rate ≥ 99.9%; protocol switching response speed (e.g., response time ≤ 500ms when switching from Wi-Fi 6 to Bluetooth 5.2); and cross-network data transmission stability (e.g., uninterrupted transmission for 24 hours). Based on the characteristic of "adaptation as the basis for interoperability" in HarmonyOS distributed interconnection, a one-to-one correspondence between two types of features is established. For example, "door lock-curtain connection success rate" corresponds to "linkage command transmission delay" and "data packet integrity". Feature linkage logic is set (e.g., when the connection success rate is lower than 98%, key monitoring of transmission delay and integrity is triggered). Finally, a combined test indicator matrix is ​​constructed, which includes the normal threshold range of each feature (e.g., normal transmission delay range of 0-100ms), anomaly judgment criteria (e.g., >150ms), and linkage trigger conditions.

[0021] Step S30: Input the constructed combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform. The platform builds several independent network simulation scenarios (e.g., three types, including a Wi-Fi 6 full signal scenario, a Bluetooth 5.2 weak signal scenario, and a Wi-Fi / Bluetooth switching scenario) and several protocol simulation scenarios (e.g., two types, including a HarmonyOS distributed soft bus protocol scenario and an MQTT protocol scenario) according to test requirements. This simulates the complex interconnected environment that may occur in a smart home. Then, the simulation test is started, executing a multi-device linkage scenario according to a preset procedure: after the smart door lock unlocks, a linkage command is sent via the HarmonyOS soft bus, and the smart curtains... Bluetooth 5.2 receives commands and executes the activation action, while the smart speaker receives commands via Wi-Fi 6 and announces "Welcome Home." The smart TV simultaneously displays the unlock record in a pop-up window. During the test, adaptation characteristic data (such as a 94% success rate for door lock-curtain connection and a 23.5-hour duration for speaker-bus connection maintenance) and interoperability characteristic data (such as an 85ms transmission delay for unlock commands and a 99.7% pass rate for data packet integrity verification) of each device are collected in real time. After continuous collection for several durations (such as 24 hours), several valid interconnection test data (such as 100,000 data) are integrated to comprehensively cover the performance indicators of all simulated scenarios.

[0022] Step S40: Systematically analyze the collected interconnection test data. First, perform hierarchical statistical analysis of adaptation feature data and interoperability feature data to obtain the overall results of the average connection success rate (e.g., 96.5%) and average transmission latency (e.g., 78ms) of the test devices. Then, based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, conduct linkage consistency verification. It is found that there is a weak correlation anomaly between "smart door lock-smart curtain connection success rate (e.g., 94%)" and "transmission latency (e.g., 85ms)" (e.g., below the matrix preset correlation threshold of 0.7). Further tracing the source, it is located that the abnormal data comes from several records (e.g., 300 records) in the Bluetooth 5.2 occlusion weak field scenario, and this... The latency was generally high in the various scenarios. The analysis results were then transformed into an intuitive presentation using visualization tools, including transmission latency fluctuation curves over several time periods (e.g., a peak latency of 120ms in a weak-field scenario from 14:00 to 16:00 within 24 hours), comparative data tables for different scenarios (e.g., average latency of 62ms in Wi-Fi 6 vs. 98ms in Bluetooth weak-field scenario), and a defect distribution heatmap (marking abnormal areas in the "connection success rate - transmission latency" linkage in Bluetooth weak-field scenarios). Finally, the test scenario description, dual-dimensional indicator statistical results, abnormal data details, and characteristic linkage consistency analysis conclusions were integrated to generate a complete interconnection test report.

[0023] Step S50: Based on the anomaly judgment criteria of the combined test index matrix, three types of interconnection access defects are accurately identified from the interconnection test report: First, interconnection adaptation defects, which manifest as insufficient adaptation of the HarmonyOS soft bus protocol in Bluetooth weak field scenarios, with the connection success rate (e.g., 94%) lower than the threshold (e.g., 98%); second, data interoperability defects, which manifest as transmission latency (e.g., 98ms) higher than the threshold (e.g., 80ms) in Bluetooth weak field scenarios; and third, linkage adaptation defects, which manifest as a low adaptation connection success rate directly leading to increased data interoperability latency. For these specific defects, combined with the feature linkage logic and test scenario information, targeted optimization suggestions are generated: Adjust the transmission power of the Bluetooth 5.2 communication module of the smart curtain (e.g., increase from 4dBm to 7dBm) to enhance signal transmission capability in weak field environments; optimize the weak field adaptation algorithm of the HarmonyOS soft bus protocol to improve connection stability under low signal strength; set up a scene adaptive switching mechanism to automatically switch to Wi-Fi 6 assisted transmission in Bluetooth weak field scenarios to ensure adaptation stability and data interoperability efficiency in multi-device linkage scenarios.

[0024] It should be noted that the specific implementation process, related equipment parameters, scene settings, and data indicators described above, using the cross-device interconnection test of the HarmonyOS ecosystem in smart homes as an example, are not intended to limit the application scenarios or implementation details of this invention. They are merely provided to more intuitively demonstrate to those skilled in the art the complete execution process of this method, the logical coordination of each step, and its practical application value, helping them quickly understand the core design concept of this method. This method is adaptable to all multi-terminal interconnection test scenarios equipped with the HarmonyOS system, including but not limited to interconnection testing of smart wearable devices, interconnection testing of HarmonyOS devices in the industrial IoT, interconnection testing of the HarmonyOS ecosystem in the Internet of Vehicles, and cross-device interconnection testing in smart offices. The core of this method utilizes a dual-dimensional linkage logic of adaptation and interoperability, along with multi-scenario simulation testing, to achieve accurate testing and optimization under different complex interconnection environments, demonstrating broad applicability and scalability.

[0025] In one embodiment, step S20 specifically includes the following steps: S21. Extract interconnect adaptation features from the multidimensional test dataset, including pairing success rate features, pairing stability features, and cross-device protocol compatibility features, wherein the pairing stability features are associated with the continuity of data transmission. S22. Extract the data interoperability features corresponding to the interconnection adaptation features, wherein the data interoperability features include transmission rate features, transmission continuity features, and cross-device compatibility features; S23. Based on the interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features, construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic. The feature linkage logic is as follows: the quantitative index of interconnection and adaptation features is linked with the corresponding quantitative index of data interoperability features. When any dimension index fails to meet the standard, the index corresponding to the other dimension is triggered to perform threshold calibration.

[0026] In this embodiment, as described in steps S21-S23 above, the core is to refine the feature extraction and indicator matrix construction process of step S20, clarify the specific dimensions of interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features, as well as the implementation rules of the linkage logic, and solve the problems of fuzzy feature extraction and unclear linkage relationships. This provides accurate and operable standardized basis for subsequent multi-scenario simulation tests, as detailed below: Step S21 is the precise interconnection adaptation feature extraction stage, the core of which is to focus on the core capabilities of device access and clarify the specific dimensions and related attributes of the adaptation features. Specifically, from the multi-dimensional test dataset generated in step S10, three types of core interconnection adaptation features are extracted to ensure coverage of key indicators throughout the device access process: First, the pairing success rate feature, reflecting the success rate of the device's first and repeated pairings, including quantitative indicators such as the single pairing success rate under different network / protocol scenarios, the number of consecutive 10 successful pairings, and the difference in pairing success rates across terminals (e.g., in the smart home scenario, the Bluetooth 5.2 pairing success rate of smart door locks and smart curtains is 95%, and the HarmonyOS soft bus pairing success rate is 99%); Second, the pairing stability feature, which focuses on the continuity of data transmission. The core indicators for connectivity include connection duration (e.g., continuous connection duration ≥ 24h in non-interactive state), number of disconnections per unit time (e.g., ≤ 1 disconnection within 24h), and reconnection recovery time (e.g., reconnection after disconnection ≤ 3s), which directly affect the continuity of subsequent data transmission. Thirdly, cross-device protocol compatibility features reflect the device's ability to adapt to multiple protocols, including the number of supported protocols (e.g., at least compatible with HarmonyOS soft bus, Bluetooth, and Wi-Fi 6 protocols), cross-protocol pairing success rate (e.g., pairing success rate ≥ 98% when switching from Bluetooth to HarmonyOS soft bus), and the percentage of protocol adaptation logs without errors. By extracting these three types of features, the device's access adaptation capabilities are accurately quantified, laying the foundation for the subsequent extraction of corresponding data interoperability features.

[0027] Step S22 is the corresponding data interoperability feature extraction step, the core of which is to establish a one-to-one correspondence with the interconnection and adaptation features to ensure that the feature linkage has a clear basis. Specifically, based on the logic of "adaptation as the foundation of interoperability," three types of data interoperability features are extracted that precisely correspond to the three types of interconnection and adaptation features of S21: First, transmission rate features, corresponding to pairing success rate features, quantify data transmission efficiency under different pairing scenarios, including peak transmission rate, average transmission rate, and rate fluctuation amplitude (e.g., average transmission rate ≥50Mbps and fluctuation amplitude ≤10% in the HarmonyOS soft bus scenario); Second, transmission continuity features, directly related to pairing stability features, reflect the ability to transmit data without interruption or packet loss, with core indicators including packet loss rate (e.g., ≤0.5%), number of transmission stutters (e.g., ≤2 times within 24 hours), and integrity of breakpoint resume recovery (e.g., 100% recovery); Third, cross-device compatibility features, corresponding to cross-device protocol compatibility features, focusing on data interoperability quality in multi-device and multi-protocol scenarios, including cross-device data format conversion power (e.g., ≥99.9%), cross-protocol data transmission latency differences (e.g., latency difference ≤20ms in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi 6 scenarios), and conflict-free rate of multi-device concurrent transmission. During the extraction process, it is ensured that each type of data interoperability feature can form a logical association with the interconnection and adaptation features, directly verifying whether "data can be transmitted well after successful adaptation", and providing a clear correspondence for the subsequent linkage logic construction.

[0028] Step S23 is the construction of the linked combined test index matrix. Its core is to transform the feature correspondence into executable linkage rules, achieving dynamic calibration between indicators. Specifically, using the interconnection adaptation features extracted in S21 and the data interoperability features extracted in S22 as dual core dimensions, a structured combined test index matrix is ​​constructed. The core of the matrix lies in implementing the feature linkage logic: First, a quantitative indicator and initial normal threshold are set for each type of feature (e.g., pairing success rate ≥ 98%, transmission latency ≤ 80ms); second, the rules for "linking and associating the quantitative indicators of interconnection adaptation features with the corresponding quantitative indicators of data interoperability features" are clarified, establishing a one-to-one linkage mapping (e.g., pairing success rate corresponds to transmission rate feature, pairing stability feature corresponds to transmission continuity feature, cross-device protocol compatibility feature corresponds to cross-device compatibility feature); finally, thresholds are set. The value calibration mechanism automatically triggers threshold calibration for the corresponding indicator in another dimension when any dimension fails to meet the standard. For example, if the pairing success rate (94%) of the smart curtain and smart door lock is lower than the initial threshold (98%), the corresponding transmission rate characteristic threshold is calibrated from "≥50Mbps" to "≥40Mbps", and strict monitoring of the transmission continuity characteristic (disconnection count ≤0 times) is triggered. Conversely, if the data packet loss rate (1.2%) of the transmission continuity characteristic is higher than the initial threshold (0.5%), the reconnection recovery time threshold of the pairing stability characteristic is lowered (calibrated from ≤3s to ≤2s), ensuring that the linkage logic has dynamic adaptability. The matrix ultimately includes feature names, quantitative indicators, initial thresholds, linkage mapping relationships, threshold calibration rules, and anomaly judgment criteria, providing accurate and operable standardized basis for multi-scenario simulation testing and subsequent defect identification in step S30. It is also completely consistent with the core logic of the combined test indicator matrix in step S20, ensuring a smooth and unbiased process.

[0029] In one embodiment, step S30, simulating the interconnection and transmission scenario of multiple networks and multiple protocols, specifically includes the following steps: S31. Based on the interconnection and adaptation characteristics and data interoperability characteristics of the combined test index matrix, control the distributed test platform to classify and construct independent and interference-free multi-network simulation scenarios and multi-protocol simulation scenarios. S32. Based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, perform directional interconnection transmission simulation in multi-network simulation scenario and multi-protocol simulation scenario respectively.

[0030] In this embodiment, as described in steps S31-S32 above, the core is to construct independent and interference-free simulation scenarios by category and perform targeted simulations by combining feature linkage logic. This solves the problems of traditional scenario construction lacking specificity and simulation process lacking clear guidance, ensuring that test data in multi-network / multi-protocol scenarios can accurately reflect the "adaptation-interoperability" dual-dimensional feature correlation, providing more valuable samples for subsequent analysis, as detailed below: Step S31 classifies and isolates simulated scenarios based on the dual-dimensional features of the combined test index matrix to ensure scenario relevance and independence. Specifically, this step is guided by the test requirements of interconnection adaptation features (such as pairing stability and cross-device protocol compatibility features) and data interoperability features (such as transmission continuity and cross-device compatibility features), and controls the distributed test platform to construct simulated scenarios in two categories: one is multi-network simulated scenarios, classified according to network standard and environmental complexity, and each scenario runs independently without interference (for example, in the smart home scenario, constructing a Wi-Fi 6 full signal scenario, a Bluetooth 5.2 weak field obstruction scenario, and a Wi-Fi and Bluetooth switching scenario, with network parameters configured independently for each scenario to avoid signal interference causing test data distortion); the other is multi-protocol simulated scenarios, classified according to interconnection protocol type to ensure the purity of protocol scenarios (for example, constructing a HarmonyOS distributed soft bus V2.0 protocol scenario and an MQTT protocol scenario, with the two scenarios loading the corresponding protocol stacks respectively, without protocol conflicts, and can specifically verify the correlation performance of cross-device protocol compatibility features and cross-device compatibility features). During the scenario construction process, the parameter settings for each scenario are matched with the feature thresholds of the combined test index matrix (such as the threshold of "number of disconnections ≤ 1" for pairing stability features, setting the signal strength to -75dBm in the Bluetooth weak field scenario to simulate a real interference environment), ensuring that the scenario can accurately trigger the test requirements of the target features.

[0031] Step S32 is based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix. It performs targeted interconnection transmission simulation in the constructed scenario, so that the simulation process focuses on the correlation verification of two-dimensional features, rather than indiscriminate generalization testing. Specifically, this step no longer performs a unified simulation according to a fixed process, but targets the core test objectives of different scenarios. Combined with the feature linkage mapping relationship established in S23 (such as pairing stability feature corresponding to transmission continuity feature, cross-device protocol compatibility feature corresponding to cross-device compatibility feature), it designs targeted simulation tasks (for example, in the Bluetooth 5.2 occlusion weak field scenario, it focuses on simulating the pairing process of smart door lock and smart curtain and the subsequent linkage command transmission, focusing on verifying the linkage performance of "pairing success rate-transmission rate" and "pairing stability-transmission continuity", and collecting correlation indicators such as pairing success rate, number of disconnections, transmission delay, and data packet loss rate in real time; in the HarmonyOS soft bus and MQTT protocol switching scenario, it simulates the protocol switching process of smart speaker and smart TV, focusing on verifying the linkage of cross-device protocol compatibility feature and cross-device compatibility feature, and collecting indicators such as protocol switching response speed and data format conversion power). During the simulation, if a certain dimension feature index fluctuates close to the threshold (e.g., the pairing success rate drops to 96%, close to the initial threshold of 98%), the monitoring frequency of the corresponding data exchange feature will be automatically increased (e.g., the acquisition interval of the transmission rate will be shortened from 1s to 0.5s) to ensure that the dynamic correlation data of the two-dimensional features are captured.

[0032] In one embodiment, step S321, directional interconnection transmission simulation includes: S321. Perform targeted adaptation simulation corresponding to the interconnection adaptation features in a multi-network simulation scenario to obtain adaptation simulation results. The targeted adaptation simulation includes device pairing and connection establishment simulation, cross-network handover connection maintenance simulation, connection stability simulation under multi-network interference, and cross-network segment protocol compatibility simulation. S322. Based on the adaptation simulation results, perform directional interoperability simulation corresponding to the data interoperability characteristics in the multi-protocol simulation scenario to obtain the interconnection simulation results. The directional interoperability simulation includes multi-protocol switching data transmission simulation and cross-device protocol interoperability compatibility simulation. S323. Based on the characteristic linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, perform linkage calibration test on the interconnection simulation results to complete the directional interconnection transmission simulation. The linkage calibration test includes the transmission rate adaptation simulation corresponding to the pairing success rate and the transmission continuity guarantee simulation corresponding to the connection stability.

[0033] In this embodiment, as described in steps S321-S323 above, the core is to decompose and refine the process of the directional interconnection transmission simulation in step S32, clarifying the specific content of multi-network scenario adaptation simulation, multi-protocol scenario interoperability simulation, and linkage calibration test. This solves the problems of lacking hierarchical logic in directional simulation and lacking clear operation procedures in linkage calibration, ensuring that the correlation verification of the "adaptation-interoperability" dual dimensions is more hierarchical and accurate, as detailed below: Step S321 is a multi-network directional adaptation simulation focusing on interconnection adaptation characteristics. Through targeted design of adaptation-related simulation tasks, it comprehensively verifies the device's access adaptation capabilities in different network environments. Specifically, in the independent multi-network simulation scenario constructed in S31, this step designs four types of simulation tasks around interconnection adaptation characteristics (pairing success rate, pairing stability, and cross-device protocol compatibility): Device pairing and connection establishment simulation is used to verify the success probability of initial pairing and reconnection of devices under different network environments (e.g., in a Bluetooth 5.2 weak field scenario in a smart home, simulating the initial pairing of a smart door lock and a smart curtain, and the reconnection of a smart speaker to a smart TV after a power outage and restart, collecting pairing success rate data); Cross-network handover connection maintenance simulation is used to verify the connection stability of devices when switching between different network standards (e.g., simulating smart...). The curtain switches from a Wi-Fi 6 scenario to a Bluetooth 5.2 scenario, monitoring whether the connection is interrupted and whether reconnection is timely during the switching process, corresponding to the "number of disconnections" metric of pairing stability characteristics; connection stability simulation under multi-network interference is used to verify the connection continuity capability under complex interference environments (for example, in a scenario where Wi-Fi and Bluetooth signals are superimposed and interfere, simulating the continuous connection between a smart door lock and the bus, monitoring whether the number of disconnections within 24 hours meets the threshold requirement of ≤1 time); cross-network segment protocol compatibility simulation is used to verify the protocol adaptation capability between devices in different network segments (for example, simulating a smart TV and smart curtain in different Wi-Fi network segments, pairing them through the HarmonyOS soft bus protocol, verifying cross-device protocol compatibility characteristics), and finally outputting adaptation simulation results containing various adaptation index data, providing a basis for adaptation judgment for subsequent interoperability simulations.

[0034] Step S322 is a multi-protocol directional interoperability simulation based on the adaptation simulation results and focusing on data interoperability characteristics. This ensures a strong correlation between the interoperability simulation and the adaptation foundation, avoiding invalid interoperability tests without adaptation support. Specifically, this step first determines whether the adaptation simulation results of S321 meet the basic thresholds of the combined test indicator matrix (e.g., pairing success rate ≥ 90%, number of disconnections ≤ 2). If so, in the multi-protocol simulation scenario constructed in S31, two types of simulation tasks are performed around the data interoperability characteristics (transmission rate, transmission continuity, cross-device compatibility characteristics): multi-protocol switching data transmission simulation is used to verify the data transmission quality when switching between different protocols (e.g., in a smart home scenario). In the scenario of switching between HarmonyOS Soft Bus V2.0 and MQTT protocol, the unlocking command of the simulated smart door lock is switched from HarmonyOS Soft Bus protocol to MQTT protocol and transmitted to the smart speaker, and data such as transmission rate and rate fluctuation amplitude are collected; the cross-device protocol interoperability and compatibility simulation is used to verify the data interoperability and compatibility of different devices under the same protocol (for example, in the HarmonyOS Soft Bus protocol scenario, whether the unlocking command data format sent by the simulated smart door lock can be synchronously parsed by the smart TV and smart curtains, corresponding to the "data format conversion power" index of cross-device compatibility characteristics), and finally outputs the interconnection simulation results containing various interoperability index data, realizing the logical closed loop of "testing interoperability after adaptation meets the standards".

[0035] If necessary, the following steps may be included before step S322: S3211. Monitor the adaptation simulation index corresponding to the interconnect adaptation feature in real time during the targeted adaptation simulation process, compare the monitored value of the adaptation simulation index with the preset threshold of the corresponding interconnect adaptation feature in the combined test index matrix, and determine whether the adaptation simulation index meets the standard.

[0036] Specifically, during the targeted adaptation simulation of S321, this step simultaneously collects real-time monitoring values ​​for each type of interconnection adaptation feature (e.g., in a smart home scenario, the real-time monitoring value of the pairing success rate of smart door locks and smart curtains is 94%, the monitoring value of the number of disconnections within 24 hours is 1, and the monitoring value of the percentage of cross-network segment protocol compatibility without errors is 96%). Each value is then compared with the corresponding preset thresholds in the combined test indicator matrix (e.g., pairing success rate ≥ 98%, number of disconnections ≤ 1, percentage of cross-network segment protocol compatibility without errors ≥ 99%) to clearly determine the compliance status of each adaptation simulation indicator (e.g., pairing success rate of 94% not met, number of disconnections of 1 met, percentage of cross-network segment protocol compatibility without errors of 96% not met). This provides accurate judgment criteria for subsequent interoperability simulations performed in different scenarios, avoiding the waste of test resources caused by indiscriminate execution.

[0037] S3212. If the adaptation simulation index fails to meet the standard, then based on the one-to-one correspondence between the interconnection adaptation feature and the data interoperability feature, mark the data interoperability feature corresponding to the interconnection adaptation feature and the corresponding multi-protocol simulation scenario.

[0038] Specifically, based on the "adaptation-interoperability" feature linkage mapping relationship established in S23 (pairing success rate → transmission rate, pairing stability → transmission continuity, cross-device protocol compatibility features → cross-device compatibility features), when a certain interconnection adaptation feature fails to meet the standard, its corresponding target data interoperability feature and the multi-protocol simulation scenarios that need to be tested are directly located and labeled (for example, in the smart home scenario, when the pairing success rate fails to meet the standard, the corresponding transmission rate feature is labeled, as well as the HarmonyOS Soft Bus V2.0 protocol scenario and the MQTT protocol switching scenario; when the cross-network segment protocol compatibility error-free ratio fails to meet the standard, the corresponding cross-device compatibility feature is labeled, as well as the HarmonyOS Soft Bus protocol cross-device interaction scenario), ensuring that subsequent interoperability simulations can specifically focus on the interoperability dimensions corresponding to the failure to meet the adaptation features, thereby improving the testing targeting.

[0039] When performing the directional communication simulation (step S322), the process is executed according to the scenario based on the judgment result of S3211: If the adaptation simulation indicators meet the standards, then during the execution of step S322, the directional interoperability simulation will be performed according to the original process without additional data collection and verification operations. For example, in a smart home scenario, if the pairing success rate (99%) and disconnection count (0 times) of the smart door lock and smart TV both meet the standards, then the data transmission rate will be collected at a conventional interval of 1 second and a sample size of 1000 data points without additional verification, thus ensuring data validity while controlling test resource consumption.

[0040] If the adaptation simulation indicators fail to meet the standards, the frequency of collecting the corresponding data interoperability simulation indicators will be increased, the sample size of the interoperability simulation indicators will be expanded, and the real-time validity verification of the interoperability simulation indicators will be strengthened. For example, if the pairing success rate of 94% fails to meet the standard, the corresponding transmission rate collection interval will be shortened from 1s to 0.5s, the sample size will be expanded from 1000 to 2000, and the frequency of data integrity verification will be increased (verified once every 100 data entries, compared to the original standard of once every 200 data entries) to ensure accurate capture of interoperability data anomalies corresponding to adaptation defects, providing a more comprehensive sample of problems for subsequent joint calibration.

[0041] Step S323, based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, performs targeted linkage calibration tests on the interconnection simulation results, completing the core closed loop of the directional interconnection transmission simulation. Specifically, this step focuses on the "adaptation-interoperability" feature linkage mapping relationship established in S23, and designs two types of core calibration test tasks: transmission rate adaptation simulation corresponding to the pairing success rate, that is, adjusting the verification standard of transmission rate according to the pairing success rate data in S321 (for example, in a smart home scenario, if the pairing success rate of smart door lock and smart curtain is 94%, which is lower than the initial threshold of 98%, then in this calibration test...). The simulation tests adapt to a transmission rate reduction from ≥50Mbps to ≥40Mbps, verifying that even with a slightly lower pairing success rate, the transmission rate still meets basic interoperability requirements. The simulation also includes a continuity test to ensure connection stability. This involves verifying transmission continuity based on connection stability data from S321 (such as the number of disconnections and connection duration). For example, if the smart lock's connection to the bus lasts for 23 hours, less than the 24-hour threshold, the simulation checks the continuous transmission of linkage commands in this scenario, monitoring whether the data packet loss rate is ≤0.5%, ensuring continuity even with slightly lower connection stability. Through these two types of linkage calibration tests, the interconnection simulation results are dynamically corrected, ultimately outputting complete directional interconnection transmission simulation data that balances basic compatibility and interoperability quality, providing more accurate and comprehensive sample support for the data analysis in step S40.

[0042] In one embodiment, step S30, collecting test indicators and obtaining interconnect test data, specifically includes the following steps: S33. Based on the interconnection adaptation features and corresponding data interoperability features in the combined test index matrix, synchronously collect full-process test indicators during the directional interconnection transmission simulation, including: During the targeted adaptation simulation process, adaptation simulation indicators corresponding to interconnection adaptation features are collected. These adaptation simulation indicators include device pairing success rate, cross-network handover connection success rate, connection stability duration under multi-network interference, cross-network segment protocol compatibility matching rate, and number of connection interruptions, forming an adaptation dataset. Based on the adaptation dataset, interoperability simulation indicators corresponding to the corresponding data interoperability characteristics are collected during the directional interoperability simulation process. The interoperability simulation indicators include multi-protocol switching transmission rate, cross-device protocol interoperability transmission latency, data transmission packet loss rate, and cross-device compatible transmission success rate, forming an interoperability dataset. Based on the characteristic linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, the calibration indexes during the linkage calibration test process are collected. The calibration indexes include the transmission rate compliance rate corresponding to the pairing success rate, the transmission continuity compliance rate corresponding to the connection stability, and the index deviation value after linkage threshold calibration, forming a calibration dataset. S34. Perform data preprocessing on the adaptation dataset, interoperability dataset, and calibration dataset respectively; S35. Based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, associate and integrate the preprocessed adaptation dataset, interoperability dataset, and calibration dataset, verify the linkage consistency between the adaptation simulation index and the interoperability simulation index, and obtain the interconnection test data after removing invalid data.

[0043] In this embodiment, as described in steps S33-S35 above, the core is to refine the process of "collecting test indicators and generating interconnection test data" in step S30, clarify the hierarchical dimensions of indicator collection, the targeted operations of data preprocessing, and the verification rules for the linkage and integration of multiple datasets. This solves the problems of traditional indicator collection being disorganized, data quality being inconsistent, and linkage features lacking consistency verification, ensuring that the final interconnection test data is comprehensive, accurate, and conforms to the "adaptation-interoperability" dual-dimensional linkage logic, providing high-quality data support for subsequent analysis and defect identification, as detailed below: Step S33 is the hierarchical, full-process test indicator collection stage. Its core is to collect indicators according to a three-layer logic of "adaptation-interoperability-calibration," ensuring precise alignment between the data and the two-dimensional features of the combined test indicator matrix. Specifically, based on the linkage mapping relationship between interconnection adaptation features and data interoperability features in the combined test indicator matrix, three types of core indicators are synchronously collected throughout the entire process of directional interconnection transmission simulation, forming a corresponding dataset. Adaptation simulation index collection: During the S321 targeted adaptation simulation, focusing on interconnection adaptation characteristics (pairing success rate, pairing stability, cross-device protocol compatibility characteristics), targeted quantitative indicators are collected, including device pairing success rate (e.g., 94% Bluetooth 5.2 pairing success rate between smart door locks and smart curtains in smart home scenarios), cross-network switching connection success rate (e.g., 96% success rate of smart curtains switching from Wi-Fi 6 to Bluetooth 5.2), connection stability duration under multiple network interference (e.g., 23 hours of continuous connection duration between door locks and bus in scenarios with superimposed interference from Wi-Fi and Bluetooth), cross-network segment protocol compatibility matching rate (e.g., 96% compatibility rate of HarmonyOS soft bus protocol between TVs and curtains in different Wi-Fi network segments), and number of connection interruptions (e.g., 1 disconnection within 24 hours). All indicators are linked and integrated according to timestamps to form an adaptation dataset. Interoperability simulation index collection: Based on the basic compliance judgment of the adaptation dataset, during the S322 directional interoperability simulation, indices corresponding to data interoperability characteristics (transmission rate, transmission continuity, cross-device compatibility characteristics) are collected, including multi-protocol switching transmission rate (e.g., unlock command transmission rate of 45Mbps when switching between HarmonyOS soft bus and MQTT protocol), cross-device protocol interoperability transmission latency (e.g., latency of 78ms for door lock command transmission to speaker), data transmission packet loss rate (e.g., packet loss rate of 0.3% within 24 hours), and cross-device compatibility transmission success rate (e.g., success rate of door lock command format being synchronously parsed by TV and curtains of 99.7%), forming an interoperability dataset to ensure that the scenarios and timestamps correspond one-to-one with the adaptation dataset; Calibration index collection: During the S323 linkage calibration test, calibration-related indicators are collected around the feature linkage logic, including the transmission rate compliance rate corresponding to the pairing success rate (e.g., in the scenario of a 94% pairing success rate, the compliance rate of transmission rate ≥ 40Mbps is 92%), the transmission continuity compliance rate corresponding to the connection stability (e.g., in the scenario of a stable connection duration of 23 hours, the compliance rate of packet loss rate ≤ 0.5%), and the index deviation value after linkage threshold calibration (e.g., the actual deviation value of 3Mbps after the transmission rate threshold is calibrated from 50Mbps to 40Mbps). A calibration dataset is formed to completely record the index changes during the linkage calibration process.

[0044] Step S34 is a targeted data preprocessing step. Its core is to optimize data quality according to the characteristics of the three types of datasets, eliminating noise and format differences to ensure the feasibility of subsequent integration. Specifically, differentiated preprocessing operations are performed for the different data types of the adaptation dataset, the interoperable dataset, and the calibration dataset: Adaptation dataset preprocessing: Focus on removing invalid records (such as invalid data with a "0% success rate" due to the device not starting pairing) and standardizing the format (converting "connection stability duration" to "hours" and "number of interruptions" to 24 hours) to avoid correlation deviations caused by inconsistent data formats; Interoperable dataset preprocessing: The core is outlier correction (using the 3σ criterion to identify and correct abnormal peak values ​​of transmission delay, such as correcting a burst delay of 150ms to an interval average of 85ms) and standardization of indicator units (converting transmission rates "Mbps" and "kbps" to "Mbps") to ensure that the data meets the requirements of statistical analysis. Calibration dataset preprocessing mainly involves threshold calibration labeling (labeling each calibration indicator with the association information of "initial threshold - post-calibration threshold - deviation value") and data integrity completion (filling in missing deviation values ​​using linear interpolation) to ensure the traceability of the calibration process. All three types of datasets, after preprocessing, meet the requirements of "uniform format, no abnormal noise, and associative indicators".

[0045] Step S35 is the linkage integration and consistency verification stage. Its core is to correlate three types of data based on feature linkage logic, eliminate invalid information, and generate the final interconnection test data. Specifically, it is executed in three steps according to the "adaptation-interoperability" linkage mapping relationship of the combined test indicator matrix: Dataset association: Using timestamps as the core index, the preprocessed adaptation dataset, interoperability dataset, and calibration dataset are associated one by one to form a three-dimensional data structure of "adaptation index - interoperability index - calibration index" (e.g., "pairing success rate 94% → transmission rate 45Mbps → transmission rate compliance rate 92% → deviation value 3Mbps"). Linkage Consistency Verification: Verify the linkage matching degree between the adaptation simulation index and the corresponding interoperability simulation index. For example, determine whether "pairing success rate 94% (not reaching the initial threshold of 98%)" and "transmission rate compliance rate 92% (based on the calibrated threshold of 40Mbps)" conform to the linkage logic set in S23 (the interoperability index can be appropriately relaxed when the adaptation is slightly poor). If they match, the data is retained. If there are contradictory linkage data such as "pairing success rate 99% (compliant) but transmission rate compliance rate 80% (not compliant)", they are determined to be invalid data and removed. Final data integration: After removing invalid data with inconsistencies or abnormal formats, the remaining valid data is integrated to form interconnection test data that covers the entire process of "adaptation-interoperability-calibration" and has consistent linkage logic. This data includes both the original indicators of each dimension and linkage association markers and calibration information, providing an accurate and complete data source for the hierarchical analysis and visualization processing in step S40. It is also completely consistent with the core logic of the previous solution, ensuring a smooth and unbiased process.

[0046] In one embodiment, step S40 specifically includes the following steps: S41. Perform hierarchical analysis on the interconnection test data based on the combined test index matrix, including adaptation simulation index analysis based on interconnection adaptation features, interoperability simulation index analysis based on data interoperability features, and linkage consistency analysis based on feature linkage logic, and output the hierarchical analysis results. S42. Based on the results of the hierarchical analysis, investigate and locate the adaptation defects, interoperability defects and linkage adaptation defects of the interconnection access, and output the defect analysis results including defect type, defect item and defect degree. S43. Visualize the results of the hierarchical analysis and the defect analysis to generate multi-dimensional visualization charts; S44. Integrate the hierarchical analysis results, defect analysis results, and visualization charts to generate an interconnection test report that includes details of interconnection access defects.

[0047] In this embodiment, as described in steps S41-S44 above, the core is to refine the entire process of "data analysis - defect location - visualization processing - report generation" in step S40, clarifying the dimensions of hierarchical analysis, the corresponding logic of defect investigation, the specific form of visualization, and the integration specifications of the report. This solves the problems of traditional analysis not being hierarchical, vague defect location, single visualization, and fragmented report information, ensuring accurate analysis results, traceable defects, intuitive presentation, and complete reports, providing strong support for subsequent defect extraction and optimization suggestion generation, as detailed below: Step S41 is a hierarchical analysis based on the combined test indicator matrix. Its core is to break down and analyze the data according to the three dimensions of "adaptation, interoperability, and linkage," ensuring that the performance and potential defects of each dimension are accurately captured. Specifically, based on the two-dimensional characteristics and linkage logic of the combined test indicator matrix, targeted hierarchical analysis is conducted on the interconnection test data: Adaptation simulation index analysis: Focusing on the adaptation dataset corresponding to the interconnection adaptation characteristics, the overall performance of key indicators (such as an average pairing success rate of 95% and a cross-network switching connection success rate of 94% in smart home scenarios), scenario differences (such as a pairing success rate of 99% in a Wi-Fi 6 full signal scenario vs. 94% in a Bluetooth weak signal scenario) and threshold compliance (such as a scenario with ≤1 connection interruption in 24 hours accounting for 88%), to clarify the advantages and disadvantages of adaptation capabilities. Interoperability simulation index analysis: Based on the interoperability dataset corresponding to the data interoperability characteristics, analyze the core indicators of transmission quality (such as average multi-protocol switching transmission rate of 48Mbps, average cross-device transmission latency of 72ms), fluctuation range (such as transmission rate fluctuation amplitude of 12%) and abnormal distribution (such as 30% of transmission latency exceeding the 80ms threshold in Bluetooth weak field scenarios) to locate the weak links in data interoperability. Linkage Consistency Analysis: Based on feature linkage logic, it verifies the correlation and matching degree between the adaptation index and the corresponding interoperability index (e.g., in a scenario with a pairing success rate ≥98%, the proportion of transmission rates ≥50Mbps is 96%; in a scenario with a pairing success rate 94%, the proportion of transmission rates ≥40Mbps is 92%), identifies linkage inconsistencies (e.g., abnormal correlation cases with a pairing success rate of 99% but a transmission packet loss rate of 1.2%), and outputs hierarchical analysis results including "dimensional performance - scenario differences - compliance rate - anomaly details".

[0048] Step S42 is the defect localization step corresponding to the stratified analysis results. Its core is to precisely link the analyzed problems with the three types of defects: "adaptation," "interoperability," and "linkage," clarifying the specific type, item, and severity of the defect. Specifically, by referring to the anomaly judgment criteria of the combined test indicator matrix, the three core types of defects are identified and located from the stratified analysis results: Adaptation defects: These correspond to the results of adaptation simulation index analysis, indicating issues where interconnection adaptation features fail to meet thresholds. These defects include defect types (such as protocol compatibility defects and connection stability defects), defect items (such as cross-network segment HarmonyOS soft bus protocol compatibility rate of 96% < 99% threshold, Bluetooth weak field scenario pairing success rate of 94% < 98% threshold), and defect severity (mild: a single indicator is slightly below the threshold and does not affect basic access; moderate: core indicators fail to meet standards, leading to unstable access; severe: multiple indicators are severely substandard, preventing normal pairing). Interoperability defects: These correspond to the interoperability simulation index analysis results and refer to issues where data interoperability characteristics do not meet thresholds. Examples include defect types (excessive transmission latency, abnormal packet loss rate), defect items (Bluetooth weak field scenario transmission latency 98ms > 80ms threshold, packet loss rate 0.8% > 0.5% threshold during multi-protocol switching), and defect severity (mild: does not affect data integrity; moderate: causes data transmission lag; severe: causes data loss). Linkage Adaptation Defects: Corresponding to the linkage consistency analysis results, this refers to the problem of contradiction between the adaptation and interoperability indicators. For example, defect types (adaptation meets the standard but interoperability is abnormal, adaptation is slightly poor but interoperability is seriously substandard), defect items (pairing success rate of 99% meets the standard but the transmission rate is only 35Mbps < 50Mbps threshold, pairing success rate of 94% is slightly poor but the transmission packet loss rate of 1.5% is severely exceeded), and defect severity (mild: linkage deviation does not affect use; moderate: leads to a decline in functional experience; severe: disrupts the linkage logic of multiple devices). The final output is a clear defect analysis result.

[0049] Step S43 is the multi-dimensional visualization process, the core of which is to transform abstract analysis and defect data into intuitive charts, lowering the barrier to data interpretation. Visualization tools include Python Matplotlib / Seaborn libraries (for drawing trend charts and heatmaps), ECharts (for generating interactive network diagrams), and Tableau (for integrating multi-dimensional charts). Visualization components built into the HarmonyOS ecosystem can also be used. The core is to achieve intuitive data presentation, and it is not limited to the tools mentioned above, which is clear to those skilled in the art. Specifically, differentiated visualization formats are designed based on the different characteristics of the hierarchical analysis results and the defect analysis results: Indicator trend charts: Line charts show the time-series changes of core indicators (such as the Bluetooth weak field scenario transmission latency fluctuation curve within 24 hours), and bar charts compare the indicator performance in different scenarios (such as the pairing success rate comparison of Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.2, and network switching scenarios). Defect distribution charts: Use heatmaps to mark the concentrated defect areas in different scenarios and with different indicators (such as a two-dimensional defect heatmap of "pairing success rate - transmission latency" in the Bluetooth weak field scenario), and use pie charts to show the proportion of various defects (such as adaptation defects accounting for 40%, interoperability defects accounting for 35%, and linkage defects accounting for 25%). Relationship-based charts: Use a network diagram to show the correspondence between "adaptation indicators - interoperability indicators - defect types" (e.g., the related links of "low cross-network handover success rate" → "large transmission rate fluctuation" → "linkage adaptation defects"). Detailed data charts: Use tables to list specific information about abnormal data (such as defect items, corresponding scenarios, measured values, thresholds, and deviation ranges) to ensure that the visualization results are both intuitive and allow for tracing the details.

[0050] Step S44 is the integrated interconnection test report generation stage. Its core is to systematically integrate the results of the entire process analysis into a standardized report that is both complete and practical. Specifically, it integrates various results according to a "general-specific-detailed" structure: Overview section: summarizes the test background (e.g., cross-device interconnection test of the HarmonyOS ecosystem in smart homes), test scope (e.g., 4 types of devices, 3 types of network scenarios, 2 types of protocol scenarios), and core conclusions (e.g., overall compatibility rate of 92%, interoperability rate of 88%, and the main defects are concentrated in Bluetooth weak field scenarios). Layered analysis section: Integrates the three-dimensional analysis results of S41, with an attached summary table of indicator statistics and conclusions on scenario difference analysis; The defect details section lists the defect analysis results of S42, presented in the format of "defect type - defect item - involved scenario - measured value - threshold - defect severity - scope of impact", which facilitates quick location of core issues; The visualization attachment section includes various charts from S43 as intuitive support for the analysis and defect conclusions; the final output is an interconnected test report containing all elements of "overview-analysis-defects-visualization", which not only meets the needs of technical personnel for in-depth analysis, but also makes it easy for non-technical personnel to quickly grasp the core issues, providing a direct basis for defect extraction and optimization suggestions in step S50.

[0051] In one embodiment, step S50 specifically includes the following steps: S51. Identify and extract the types of interconnection access defects in the interconnection test report, and generate corresponding optimization suggestions, including: When the interconnection access defect type includes adaptation defects and / or interoperability defects, targeted optimization suggestions are generated for adaptation defects and / or interoperability defects based on the interconnection adaptation features and / or data interoperability features in the combined test index matrix. When the interconnection access defect type includes linkage adaptation defect, based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, an adaptation-interoperability linkage collaborative optimization suggestion is generated for the linkage adaptation defect, and the linkage matching parameters of the interconnection adaptation feature and the corresponding data interoperability feature are optimized simultaneously. S52. Based on the combined test index matrix and feature linkage logic, verify the optimization feasibility of the targeted optimization suggestions and the adaptation-interconnection linkage collaborative optimization suggestions, and generate optimization suggestions for interconnection access.

[0052] In this embodiment, as described in steps S51-S52 above, the core is to refine the "defect extraction - optimization suggestion generation - feasibility verification" process in step S50, clarify the targeted optimization logic for different defect types and the verification standards for suggestion feasibility, and solve the problems of generalized optimization suggestions without targeting, uncoordinated optimization of linked defects, and lack of guarantee for suggestion implementation in traditional methods. This ensures that the optimization suggestions not only fit the essence of the defects but also have practicality and linkage compatibility, providing clear guidance for the optimization of HarmonyOS interconnection access, as detailed below: Step S51 is the categorized defect extraction and targeted optimization suggestion generation stage. Its core is matching corresponding optimization logic according to defect type, achieving "one solution for one type of defect" and avoiding generalized suggestions. Specifically, it accurately identifies interconnection access defect types from interconnection test reports, and combines the two-dimensional features and linkage logic of the combined test indicator matrix to generate optimization suggestions for different scenarios. Optimization of Adaptation / Interoperability Defects: When the defect type is an adaptation defect (such as a cross-network segment HarmonyOS soft bus protocol compatibility rate of 96% < 99% threshold, or a Bluetooth weak field scenario pairing success rate of 94% < 98% threshold) and / or an interoperability defect (such as a Bluetooth weak field transmission latency of 98ms > 80ms threshold, or a multi-protocol switching packet loss rate of 0.8% > 0.5% threshold), targeted optimization suggestions are generated by focusing on the core shortcomings of the corresponding characteristics: For adaptation defects, based on the indicator requirements of interconnection adaptation characteristics, optimize the device hardware configuration (such as adjusting the transmission power of the smart curtain Bluetooth 5.2 module from 4dBm to 7dBm to enhance weak field signal coverage) and protocol adaptation algorithms (such as optimizing the cross-network segment adaptation logic of the HarmonyOS soft bus protocol to improve the compatibility matching rate); For interoperability defects, around the transmission requirements of data interoperability characteristics, adjust the transmission parameters (such as increasing the buffer size during multi-protocol switching to reduce the packet loss rate) and optimize the network adaptation strategy (such as enabling adaptive adjustment of transmission rate in Bluetooth weak field scenarios to avoid latency exceeding the standard). Linkage Adaptation Defect Optimization: When the defect type is a linkage adaptation defect (such as a pairing success rate of 99% meeting the standard but a transmission rate of only 35Mbps < 50Mbps threshold, or a pairing success rate of 94% slightly worse but a transmission packet loss rate of 1.5% severely exceeding the standard), based on the feature linkage logic, adaptation-interoperability linkage collaborative optimization suggestions are generated, and the linkage matching parameters of the two dimensions are adjusted simultaneously: for example, for "adaptation meets the standard but interoperability is abnormal", the threshold matching rules in the linkage mapping relationship are corrected (the transmission rate threshold corresponding to a pairing success rate of 99% is slightly adjusted from 50Mbps to 45Mbps, while optimizing the protocol transmission efficiency to ensure that the standard is met); for "adaptation is slightly worse but interoperability is severely substandard", the adaptation foundation and interoperability quality are optimized simultaneously (such as improving the stability of Bluetooth weak field pairing while enabling cross-protocol data compression transmission to reduce the packet loss rate), to achieve collaborative matching of the two-dimensional indicators.

[0053] Step S52 is the feasibility verification and final generation stage of the optimization suggestions. The core is to ensure the suggestions are implementable and free from conflicting trends through multi-dimensional verification, avoiding new problems caused by optimizing a single indicator. Specifically, based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test indicator matrix, the feasibility of the optimization suggestions is verified from three dimensions: Technical feasibility verification: Determine whether the recommendations are compatible with the existing hardware capabilities and software architecture (e.g., if the recommendation is to adjust the transmission power of the Bluetooth module, it is necessary to verify whether the device's power supply capability can support it to avoid exceeding the power consumption limit). Scene compatibility verification: Verify the compatibility of the recommendations in multi-network / multi-protocol scenarios (such as cross-network segment protocol optimization recommendations, which must be effective in different scenarios such as Wi-Fi 5 / 6 and Bluetooth 5.2, without any scene compatibility gaps). Linkage compatibility verification: The core verification optimization suggestions affect the "adaptation-interoperability" dual-dimensional linkage logic (such as adjusting the transmission rate threshold while simultaneously verifying whether the corresponding pairing success rate threshold is still reasonable to avoid linkage conflicts); after the verification is passed, all effective optimization suggestions are integrated, and suggestions with technical bottlenecks, insufficient scenario adaptation, or linkage conflicts are eliminated. Finally, a complete interconnection access optimization suggestion containing "defect type - corresponding suggestion - implementation steps - expected effect" is generated (such as "low pairing success rate in Bluetooth weak field scenario (94%) → adjust Bluetooth module transmit power to 7dBm + optimize HarmonyOS soft bus weak field adaptation algorithm → after implementation, the expected pairing success rate is increased to 97%, and the transmission latency is reduced to within 85ms"), ensuring that the suggestions have a clear implementation path and expected effect.

[0054] The final optimization suggestions can be directly used as the basis for parameter adjustment in the next round of HarmonyOS device interconnection testing. The optimization effect can be verified through iterative testing, and the threshold setting of the combined test index matrix can be further improved to form a closed-loop process of "test-analysis-optimization-retest".

[0055] In one embodiment, a HarmonyOS system access and interconnection testing system is provided, which corresponds to the HarmonyOS system access and interconnection testing method described in the above embodiments. The HarmonyOS system access and interconnection testing system includes: The data acquisition module is used to acquire interconnection transmission association data of HarmonyOS access devices, and preprocess the interconnection transmission association data to obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset. The matrix construction module is used to extract interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features from a multidimensional test dataset, and construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic. The simulation test module is used to input the combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform, simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and multiple protocols, collect test indexes, and obtain interconnection test data. The report generation module is used to analyze and visualize interconnection test data to generate interconnection test reports; The suggestion generation module is used to identify and extract interconnection access defects in interconnection test reports, and generate optimization suggestions based on the interconnection access defects.

[0056] For specific limitations regarding the HarmonyOS system access interconnection test system, please refer to the limitations of the HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method described above, which will not be repeated here. Each module in the aforementioned HarmonyOS system access interconnection test system can be implemented entirely or partially through software, hardware, or a combination thereof. These modules can be embedded in or independent of the processor in the computer device in hardware form, or stored in the memory of the computer device in software form, so that the processor can call and execute the corresponding operations of each module.

[0057] In one embodiment, a computer device is provided, which may be a server, and its internal structure diagram may be as follows. Figure 2 As shown, the computer device includes a processor, memory, network interface, and database connected via a system bus. The processor provides computing and control capabilities. The memory includes non-volatile storage media and internal memory. The non-volatile storage media stores the operating system, computer programs, and database. The internal memory provides the environment for the operation of the operating system and computer programs stored in the non-volatile storage media. The database is used for data storage, data processing, and data analysis. The network interface is used for communication with external terminals via a network connection. When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements a HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method.

[0058] In one embodiment, a computer device is provided, including a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor. When the processor executes the computer program, it implements a HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method.

[0059] In one embodiment, a computer-readable storage medium is provided having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements a HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method.

[0060] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the processes in the methods of the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The computer program can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium. When executed, the computer program can include the processes of the embodiments of the above methods. Any references to memory, storage, databases, or other media used in the embodiments provided in this application can include non-volatile and / or volatile memory. Non-volatile memory may include read-only memory (ROM), programmable ROM (PROM), electrically programmable ROM (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable ROM (EEPROM), or flash memory. Volatile memory may include random access memory (RAM) or external cache memory. By way of illustration and not limitation, RAM is available in a variety of forms, such as static RAM (SRAM), dynamic RAM (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), dual data rate SDRAM (DDRSDRAM), enhanced SDRAM (ESDRAM), synchronous link DRAM (SLDRAM), RAMbus direct RAM (RDRAM), direct memory bus dynamic RAM (DRDRAM), and memory bus dynamic RAM (RDRAM), etc.

[0061] Those skilled in the art will clearly understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the above-described division of functional units and modules is used as an example. In practical applications, the above functions can be assigned to different functional units and modules as needed, that is, the internal structure of the device can be divided into different functional units or modules to complete all or part of the functions described above.

[0062] The above-described embodiments are only used to illustrate the technical solutions of this application, and are not intended to limit them. Although this application has been described in detail with reference to the foregoing embodiments, those skilled in the art should understand that modifications can still be made to the technical solutions described in the foregoing embodiments, or equivalent substitutions can be made to some of the technical features. Such modifications or substitutions do not cause the essence of the corresponding technical solutions to deviate from the spirit and scope of the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application, and should all be included within the protection scope of this application.

Claims

1. A method for testing the interconnection of the HarmonyOS system, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: Obtain interconnection and transmission association data of the HarmonyOS system access device, preprocess the interconnection and transmission association data to obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset; Extract interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features from the multidimensional test dataset, and construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic; The combined test index matrix is ​​input into the distributed test platform to simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and multiple protocols and to collect test indexes to obtain interconnection test data. Analyze and visualize interconnection test data to generate interconnection test reports; Identify and extract interconnection access defects from interconnection test reports, and generate optimization suggestions based on these defects.

2. The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The step of extracting interconnection and data interoperability features from the multidimensional test dataset and constructing a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic specifically includes the following steps: Interconnection adaptation features, including pairing success rate features, pairing stability features, and cross-device protocol compatibility features, are extracted from the multidimensional test dataset. The pairing stability feature is associated with the continuity of data transmission. Extract data interoperability features corresponding to the interconnection adaptation features, including transmission rate features, transmission continuity features, and cross-device compatibility features; Based on the interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features, a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic is constructed. The feature linkage logic is as follows: the quantitative index of interconnection and adaptation features is linked with the corresponding quantitative index of data interoperability features. When any dimension index fails to meet the standard, the corresponding index of the other dimension is triggered to perform threshold calibration.

3. The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The step of inputting the combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform to simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and protocols and collect test indicators to obtain interconnection test data specifically includes the following steps: Based on the interconnection and adaptation characteristics and data interoperability characteristics of the combined test index matrix, the distributed test platform is controlled to classify and construct independent and interference-free multi-network simulation scenarios and multi-protocol simulation scenarios. Based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, directional interconnection transmission simulation is performed in both multi-network simulation scenarios and multi-protocol simulation scenarios.

4. The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method as described in claim 3, characterized in that, In the step of executing directional interconnection transmission simulation in multi-network simulation scenarios and multi-protocol simulation scenarios respectively, based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, the directional interconnection transmission simulation includes: In a multi-network simulation scenario, targeted adaptation simulations corresponding to interconnection adaptation features are performed to obtain adaptation simulation results. The targeted adaptation simulations include device pairing and connection establishment simulation, cross-network handover connection maintenance simulation, connection stability simulation under multi-network interference, and cross-network segment protocol compatibility simulation. Based on the adaptation simulation results, a directional interoperability simulation corresponding to the data interoperability characteristics is performed in a multi-protocol simulation scenario to obtain the interconnection simulation results. The directional interoperability simulation includes multi-protocol switching data transmission simulation and cross-device protocol interoperability compatibility simulation. Based on the characteristic linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, linkage calibration test is performed on the interconnection simulation results to complete the directional interconnection transmission simulation. The linkage calibration test includes the transmission rate adaptation simulation corresponding to the pairing success rate and the transmission continuity guarantee simulation corresponding to the connection stability.

5. The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method as described in claim 4, characterized in that, The step of inputting the combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform to simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and protocols and to collect test indicators to obtain interconnection test data specifically includes the following steps: Based on the interconnection adaptation features and corresponding data interoperability features in the combined test index matrix, full-process test indicators are synchronously collected during the directional interconnection transmission simulation, including: During the targeted adaptation simulation process, adaptation simulation indicators corresponding to the interconnection adaptation features are collected. These adaptation simulation indicators include device pairing success rate, cross-network handover connection success rate, connection stability duration under multi-network interference, cross-network segment protocol compatibility matching rate, and number of connection interruptions, forming an adaptation dataset. Based on the adaptation dataset, interoperability simulation indicators corresponding to the corresponding data interoperability characteristics are collected during the directional interoperability simulation process. The interoperability simulation indicators include multi-protocol switching transmission rate, cross-device protocol interoperability transmission latency, data transmission packet loss rate, and cross-device compatible transmission success rate, forming an interoperability dataset. Based on the characteristic linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, the calibration indexes in the linkage calibration test process are collected. The calibration indexes include the transmission rate compliance rate corresponding to the pairing success rate, the transmission continuity compliance rate corresponding to the connection stability, and the index deviation value after linkage threshold calibration, forming a calibration dataset. Data preprocessing is performed on the adaptation dataset, interoperability dataset, and calibration dataset respectively; Based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, the preprocessed adaptation dataset, interoperability dataset, and calibration dataset are associated and integrated. The linkage consistency between the adaptation simulation index and the interoperability simulation index is verified. After removing invalid data, the interconnection test data is obtained.

6. The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method as described in claim 1, characterized in that, The steps of analyzing and visualizing interconnection test data to generate an interconnection test report specifically include the following steps: The interconnection test data is analyzed hierarchically based on the combined test index matrix, including adaptation simulation index analysis based on interconnection adaptation features, interoperability simulation index analysis based on data interoperability features, and linkage consistency analysis based on feature linkage logic, and the hierarchical analysis results are output. Based on the results of the hierarchical analysis, the adaptation defects, interoperability defects, and linkage adaptation defects of interconnection access are identified and located, and the defect analysis results including defect type, defect item, and defect severity are output. Visualize the results of the hierarchical analysis and the defect analysis to generate multi-dimensional visualization charts; By integrating the results of hierarchical analysis, defect analysis, and visualization charts, an interconnection test report containing details of interconnection access defects is generated.

7. The HarmonyOS system access interconnection testing method as described in claim 6, characterized in that, The step of identifying and extracting interconnection access defects from the interconnection test report, and generating optimization suggestions based on the interconnection access defects, specifically includes the following steps: Identify and extract the types of interconnection access defects in the interconnection test report, and generate corresponding optimization suggestions, including: When the interconnection access defect type includes adaptation defects and / or interoperability defects, targeted optimization suggestions are generated for adaptation defects and / or interoperability defects based on the interconnection adaptation features and / or data interoperability features in the combined test index matrix. When the interconnection access defect type includes linkage adaptation defect, based on the feature linkage logic of the combined test index matrix, an adaptation-interoperability linkage collaborative optimization suggestion is generated for the linkage adaptation defect, and the linkage matching parameters of the interconnection adaptation feature and the corresponding data interoperability feature are optimized simultaneously. Based on the combined test index matrix and feature linkage logic, the optimization feasibility of targeted optimization suggestions and adaptation-interoperability linkage collaborative optimization suggestions is verified, and optimization suggestions for interconnection access are generated.

8. A HarmonyOS system access and interconnection testing system, used to implement the steps of the HarmonyOS system access and interconnection testing method as described in any one of claims 1-7, characterized in that, include: The data acquisition module is used to acquire interconnection transmission association data of HarmonyOS access devices, and preprocess the interconnection transmission association data to obtain a multi-dimensional test dataset. The matrix construction module is used to extract interconnection and adaptation features and data interoperability features from a multidimensional test dataset, and construct a combined test index matrix containing feature linkage logic. The simulation test module is used to input the combined test index matrix into the distributed test platform, simulate the interconnection and transmission scenarios of multiple networks and multiple protocols, collect test indexes, and obtain interconnection test data. The report generation module is used to analyze and visualize interconnection test data to generate interconnection test reports; The suggestion generation module is used to identify and extract interconnection access defects in interconnection test reports, and generate optimization suggestions based on the interconnection access defects.

9. A computer device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored in the memory and executable on the processor, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the steps of the HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the HarmonyOS system access interconnection test method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

Images