Human-computer interaction test method, device and system for game controller trigger

Abstract

The application provides a game controller trigger-oriented human-computer interaction test method, device and system, the method comprising: reading a preset trigger rule and a standard response configuration, normalizing to generate a trigger rule mapping set; retrieving a trigger condition set with the same input source to form a candidate boundary rule pair, calculating a candidate boundary position and a boundary importance to generate a key trigger boundary model; determining a test coverage width and a sample number according to the boundary importance, constructing a boundary test track and controlling a test fixture to generate a boundary special test set; and calculating an interaction consistency score according to an actual response sequence to generate an interaction consistency test result. The application extends the test to an interaction consistency test around the boundary, accurately locates a high-risk boundary and dynamically adjusts the test density, and effectively identifies boundary drift and response jump problems.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of human-computer interaction testing technology, and in particular relates to human-computer interaction testing methods, devices and systems for game controller triggering. Background Technology

[0002] With the rapid development of smart terminal products such as handheld game consoles, educational game consoles, smartwatches, electronic game consoles, and their associated controllers, the human-computer interaction methods of game controllers have gradually evolved from traditional single-button input to composite trigger interactions involving buttons, joysticks, triggers, touch, gestures, and combined triggers. Currently, a single interaction response in a controller is often determined by multiple trigger conditions. For example, the same confirmation button may correspond to short press confirmation, long press confirmation, or repeated triggering depending on the holding time; the same trigger may correspond to aiming, charging, or firing depending on the pressure range; and the same joystick may correspond to normal movement, dashing, or direction switching depending on the displacement amplitude and direction. Multiple input units acting together within a limited sequence or interval may also form combined interactions such as special skills, shortcut menus, or level operations. Therefore, controller testing is no longer simply about checking whether a button is active or whether an input is reported; it requires verifying the stability of the correspondence between the controller's trigger conditions and the game terminal's interaction response. In existing technologies, relatively close solutions typically include automated testing based on preset scripts, functional testing based on fixed samples, and boundary value testing for individual thresholds. These solutions can verify whether a target action produces a target response during factory inspection, firmware regression testing, or functional acceptance testing, such as whether pressing the confirmation button confirms the action, pushing the joystick moves the device, or pulling the trigger fires the device. However, in actual engineering processes, the triggering rules of the controller are usually scattered across firmware parameters, communication description files, host computer test specifications, and game terminal response configurations. Existing test scripts often directly call fixed actions to perform tests, lacking a unified organization of these scattered rules and making it difficult to automatically identify the critical positions that truly require focused testing between different interactive responses. Especially under conditions of production batch differences, component tolerances, joystick return deviation, trigger sampling errors, button aging, firmware threshold adjustments, and communication sampling fluctuations, standard trigger points often still pass the test, while boundary areas between short presses and long presses, half presses and full presses, normal movement and sprinting, and single-button triggers and combined triggers are prone to false triggers, missed triggers, response jumps, or inconsistent feel. Traditional functional testing primarily focuses on typical areas of each triggering rule, while simple boundary value testing typically only considers a single parameter, making it difficult to determine critical boundaries by combining controller input sources, differences in interaction responses, and the complexity of combined triggers. Furthermore, it struggles to generate continuous boundary operation trajectories on real test fixtures and to consistently evaluate the actual responses of game terminals. Therefore, existing technologies still require a testing method that can further improve upon existing controller rules and testing specifications. This method should organize scattered triggering rules into analyzable mapping relationships, identify critical triggering boundaries that significantly impact human-computer interaction, and perform specialized tests around these boundaries to uncover boundary-type interaction problems that traditional functional testing struggles to expose. Summary of the Invention

[0003] This invention discloses a human-computer interaction testing method, device, and system for game controller-triggered tests, in order to solve the problems mentioned in the background art.

[0004] To achieve the above objectives, the first aspect of the present invention provides a human-computer interaction testing method triggered by a game controller, the method comprising:

[0005] Read the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, perform normalization processing, and generate a trigger rule mapping set. The trigger rule mapping set includes a set of trigger conditions and the human-computer interaction response corresponding to the set of trigger conditions.

[0006] Based on the trigger rule mapping set, a set of trigger conditions with the same input source is retrieved among different human-computer interaction responses to form candidate boundary rule pairs. The candidate boundary positions and boundary importance are calculated to generate a key trigger boundary model.

[0007] Based on the boundary importance in the critical trigger boundary model, determine the test coverage width and the number of test samples, construct the boundary test trajectory and control the test fixture to execute, obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generate a boundary-specific test set;

[0008] The interaction consistency score is calculated based on the actual response sequence in the boundary-specific test set, and the interaction consistency test results are generated.

[0009] Furthermore, the step of reading the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, performing normalization processing, and generating a trigger rule mapping set includes:

[0010] Read the button status, joystick displacement range, trigger pressure range, duration range and combined trigger conditions, and use linear proportional mapping to convert the original trigger configuration value to a unified proportional range to obtain the normalized trigger feature value;

[0011] For each triggering rule, a rule record is generated, which includes a set of triggering conditions and the corresponding human-computer interaction response;

[0012] The rule records are merged according to the human-computer interaction response to generate the trigger rule mapping set.

[0013] Further, the step of retrieving a set of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses based on the triggering rule mapping set, forming candidate boundary rule pairs, calculating the candidate boundary positions and boundary importance, and generating a key triggering boundary model includes:

[0014] Retrieve sets of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses to form candidate boundary rule pairs;

[0015] Extract the nearest endpoints of two adjacent trigger intervals of continuous trigger conditions contained in the trigger condition set of the candidate boundary rule pair, and determine the center position of the nearest endpoints as the candidate boundary position.

[0016] Furthermore, the calculation of candidate boundary positions and boundary importance to generate a key trigger boundary model also includes:

[0017] Obtain the response difference value, the conditional coupling value, and the interval distance of the adjacent endpoints;

[0018] The boundary importance is calculated based on the response difference value, the conditional coupling value, and the interval distance;

[0019] The candidate boundaries are organized according to the input source, the candidate boundary location, and the boundary importance, and the corresponding candidate boundaries are generated to form the key trigger boundary model.

[0020] Further, based on the boundary importance in the critical trigger boundary model, the test coverage width and the number of test samples are determined, a boundary test trajectory is constructed and the test fixture is controlled to execute, the actual response returned by the game terminal is obtained, and a boundary-specific test set is generated, including:

[0021] The preset basic coverage width is compressed according to the boundary importance to obtain the test coverage width;

[0022] The number of test samples is obtained by increasing the preset base sample number according to the boundary importance.

[0023] Using the candidate boundary location as the center, the sampling locations of the number of test samples are divided within the test coverage width to generate the boundary test trajectory.

[0024] Furthermore, the control test fixture executes to obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal and generates a boundary-specific test set, including:

[0025] The control pressure actuator, two-dimensional displacement drive mechanism, button drive mechanism, or multi-input collaborative drive mechanism shall perform operations according to the boundary test trajectory;

[0026] Each operation is associated with and saved with the human-computer interaction response returned by the game terminal to generate the boundary-specific test set, which includes boundary identifiers, sampling locations, expected responses on both sides of the boundary, and actual responses.

[0027] Further, the step of calculating the interaction consistency score based on the actual response sequences in the boundary-specific test set and generating the interaction consistency test results includes:

[0028] The test data contained in the boundary-specific test set are grouped according to the boundary identifier to obtain a continuous response sequence;

[0029] Calculate the response matching value at each sampling position in the continuous response sequence, and the response anomalous jump value at adjacent sampling positions;

[0030] The interaction consistency score is calculated based on the response matching value and the response anomalous jump value, and the interaction consistency test result is generated.

[0031] Further, the calculation of the response matching value at each sampling position in the continuous response sequence, and the response anomalous jump value at adjacent sampling positions, includes:

[0032] When the actual response of the game terminal at the sampling location matches the expected response, the response matching value is taken as a first preset value; when they do not match, the second preset value is taken.

[0033] When the actual response change direction of adjacent sampling positions is consistent with the expected response switching direction, the abnormal response jump value is taken as the third preset value; when reverse switching or repeated switching occurs, the abnormal response jump value is taken as the fourth preset value.

[0034] A second aspect of the present invention provides a human-computer interaction testing system triggered by a game controller, comprising:

[0035] The mapping set construction module is used to read the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, perform normalization processing, and generate a trigger rule mapping set. The trigger rule mapping set includes a set of trigger conditions and the human-computer interaction response corresponding to the set of trigger conditions.

[0036] The boundary model generation module is used to retrieve a set of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses based on the triggering rule mapping set, form candidate boundary rule pairs, calculate the candidate boundary position and boundary importance, and generate a key triggering boundary model.

[0037] The test set execution module is used to determine the test coverage width and the number of test samples based on the boundary importance in the key trigger boundary model, construct the boundary test trajectory and control the test fixture to execute, obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generate a boundary-specific test set.

[0038] The consistency evaluation module is used to calculate the interaction consistency score based on the actual response sequence in the boundary-specific test set and generate the interaction consistency test results.

[0039] A third aspect of the present invention provides a human-computer interaction testing device for game controller triggering, comprising:

[0040] Memory, used to store computer programs;

[0041] A processor is used to implement the steps of the human-computer interaction testing method triggered by a game controller as described above when executing the computer program.

[0042] The beneficial technical effects of the present invention are at least as follows:

[0043] To address the aforementioned issues, this invention expands controller testing from single-function verification to interaction consistency testing around trigger rule boundaries. First, normalization integrates trigger conditions scattered across different configurations into a unified trigger rule mapping set, eliminating hardware sampling differences and providing a unified benchmark for subsequent analysis. Second, by extracting adjacent response rules with the same input source, and combining response differences, conditional coupling, and interval distance to calculate boundary importance, it accurately locates key trigger boundaries prone to false triggering and missed triggering, shifting the testing focus from typical functional points to high-risk boundary areas. Third, it dynamically adjusts the test coverage width and sampling density based on boundary importance, enabling higher-risk boundaries to receive narrower and more dense specialized testing, and uses physical fixtures to generate continuously changing realistic operation trajectories, effectively covering critical switching states. Finally, it combines response matching and jump penalty calculations to determine interaction consistency scores, accurately identifying deeper issues such as boundary drift, response jumps, and combined trigger failures. This solution constructs a complete testing chain, significantly improving the detection rate and testing efficiency of boundary-related interaction problems in game controllers. Attached Figure Description

[0044] The present invention will be further described with reference to the accompanying drawings, but the embodiments in the drawings do not constitute any limitation on the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on the following drawings without creative effort.

[0045] Figure 1 This is an overall architecture diagram of a human-computer interaction testing system triggered by a game controller, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0046] Figure 2 This is a flowchart of a human-computer interaction testing method triggered by a game controller, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0047] Figure 3 This is a block diagram of a human-computer interaction testing system triggered by a game controller, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0048] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a human-computer interaction test device triggered by a game controller, according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0049] Embodiments of the present invention are described in detail below. Examples of these embodiments are shown in the accompanying drawings, wherein the same or similar reference numerals denote the same or similar elements or elements having the same or similar functions throughout. The embodiments described below with reference to the accompanying drawings are exemplary and are only used to explain the present invention, and should not be construed as limiting the present invention.

[0050] In the field of game controller testing, with the rapid development of smart terminal products such as handheld game consoles, educational game consoles, smartwatches, electronic game consoles, and their associated controllers, the human-computer interaction methods of game controllers have gradually evolved from traditional single-button input to composite trigger interactions involving buttons, joysticks, triggers, touch, gestures, and combined triggers. Currently, an interaction response in a controller is often determined by multiple trigger conditions. For example, the same confirmation button may correspond to short press confirmation, long press confirmation, or repeated triggering depending on the holding time; the same trigger may correspond to aiming, charging, or firing depending on the pressure range; and the same joystick may correspond to normal movement, dashing, or direction switching depending on changes in displacement amplitude and direction.

[0051] Therefore, controller testing is no longer simply about checking whether a button is active or whether an input is reported; it requires verifying the stability of the correspondence between controller triggering conditions and game terminal interaction responses. Existing technologies typically include automated testing based on preset scripts, functional testing based on fixed samples, and boundary value testing for single thresholds. These solutions can verify whether a target action produces a target response during factory testing, firmware regression testing, or functional acceptance testing. However, in actual engineering processes, controller triggering rules are usually scattered across firmware parameters, communication description files, host computer test specifications, and game terminal response configurations. Existing test scripts often directly call fixed actions to execute tests, lacking a unified organization of these scattered rules and making it difficult to automatically identify the critical points between different interaction responses that truly require focused testing.

[0052] To address at least one or more of the aforementioned problems, at least one embodiment of this disclosure designs a human-computer interaction testing scheme triggered by a game controller, extending existing fixed action testing to interaction consistency testing centered around the boundaries of triggering rules.

[0053] Figure 1 An overall architecture diagram of a human-computer interaction testing system for game controller triggering according to at least one embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0054] like Figure 1As shown, the system includes testing equipment, a game controller, a game terminal, and a test fixture. The testing equipment connects to the game controller via a universal serial communication interface or a debugging interface to read the controller's preset trigger rules; the testing equipment obtains the standard response configuration of the game terminal through a test specification file or a function mapping configuration file; the testing equipment drives the test fixture to perform physical operations on the game controller through control signals; the game terminal receives input from the game controller and returns a human-computer interaction response, which the testing equipment collects for consistency evaluation.

[0055] In some embodiments, the test fixture includes a button drive mechanism, a joystick displacement drive mechanism, a trigger pressure actuator, and a multi-input collaborative drive mechanism, which can simulate the operation behavior of real users and generate continuously changing operation trajectories.

[0056] Figure 2 A flowchart is shown of a human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to at least one embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0057] like Figure 2 As shown, the method includes the following steps:

[0058] In step 201, a game controller trigger rule mapping set is constructed. The test device reads the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, and organizes the trigger conditions scattered in the controller firmware, communication description file, and host computer test specification into a unified trigger rule mapping set.

[0059] In step 202, a key trigger boundary model is generated. Based on the trigger rule mapping set, the test device retrieves sets of trigger conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses, forming candidate boundary rule pairs. The candidate boundary positions and boundary importance are calculated to generate the key trigger boundary model.

[0060] In step 203, a boundary-specific test set is generated and executed. The testing equipment determines the test coverage width and the number of test samples based on the boundary importance in the critical trigger boundary model, constructs the boundary test trajectory, controls the test fixture to execute it, obtains the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generates the boundary-specific test set.

[0061] In step 204, interactive consistency test results are generated. The test equipment calculates the interactive consistency score based on the actual response sequence in the boundary-specific test set, and generates interactive consistency test results to identify problems such as boundary drift, boundary overlap, response jumps, combined trigger failures, and misjudgments of critical positions.

[0062] In step 201, specifically, the test equipment reads the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, organizing the trigger conditions scattered in the controller firmware, communication description file, and host computer test specification into a unified trigger rule mapping set. For wired controllers, the test equipment reads the button configuration, joystick configuration, trigger configuration, and combination key configuration through a universal serial communication interface or debugging interface; for wireless controllers, the test equipment reads the trigger configuration parameters reported by the controller through a preset protocol parsing module; for game terminal-side responses, the test equipment reads standard responses from the test specification file or function mapping configuration file, such as confirm, return, normal movement, sprint, aim, fire, menu switching, etc. After reading, the test equipment converts the trigger conditions from different sources into a unified description. The trigger conditions include button state, joystick displacement range, trigger pressure range, duration range, and combined trigger conditions. Since the original output range of different controller models may be different, continuous trigger conditions are normalized using a linear proportional mapping, converting the original configuration values ​​to a unified comparison range. This linear scaling mapping originates from interval linear transformation in mathematics. In this scheme, it is used to organize the game controller triggering rules so that triggering parameters from different configuration sources, such as joystick, trigger, and duration, can enter the same triggering rule mapping structure.

[0063] The normalized trigger feature value is calculated using the following formula:

[0064] ;

[0065] in, This represents the normalized trigger characteristic value, calculated by the test equipment based on the original trigger configuration. This indicates the raw trigger configuration value read from the controller firmware configuration table, communication description file, or test specification; This indicates the minimum possible value of this type of triggering feature in the configuration of the controller under test; This indicates the maximum possible value for this type of triggering characteristic in the configuration of the controller under test. If the read value... This indicates that the input unit lacks a valid stroke or has an abnormal configuration. The test equipment does not perform division calculations but instead records the trigger feature as non-normalizable and outputs a configuration abnormality. If the calculated value is... If the value is less than zero or greater than one, it is truncated to a uniform proportional range of zero to one before proceeding to subsequent boundary analysis. Taking the right trigger firing rule as an example, the original output range of a certain model of right trigger is 0 to 1023, and the firing trigger threshold is 768. Therefore, the normalized trigger characteristic value is approximately 0.751. The original output range of another model of right trigger is 0 to 4095, and the firing trigger threshold is 3072. Similarly, the normalized trigger characteristic value is also approximately 0.751. After this processing, trigger firing conditions under different hardware sampling ranges can enter the mapping set at a uniform proportion. Subsequently, key boundaries can be determined around adjacent trigger rules such as half-press and full-press, aiming and firing.

[0066] After normalization, the test equipment generates a rule record for each trigger rule, represented as follows:

[0067] ;

[0068] in, This indicates a single trigger rule record, generated by the test equipment after reading and organizing the controller trigger rules. This represents a set of trigger conditions derived from the controller firmware configuration table, communication description file, and test specifications. It includes one or more of the following trigger conditions: button state, joystick interval, trigger interval, duration interval, or combination of trigger conditions. This indicates that the human-computer interaction response corresponding to the trigger condition originates from the game terminal's standard response configuration or test specification document. For example, in a certain rule record, This includes the right trigger reaching the firing pressure range and remaining in an effective firing state. The corresponding character performs a firing action; for example, when the left analog stick is pushed forward to reach the sprint range and held, ... Includes joystick direction, joystick displacement range, and duration range. The corresponding character enters a sprint state. Regarding the combination trigger rules... It also stores the input units involved in the triggering, the triggering order, and the allowed intervals. For example, when a function key and trigger work together within a set interval, the skill release is triggered. The testing equipment then merges the rule records according to the human-computer interaction response to form a trigger rule mapping set. Mapping set Each item in the dataset contains a corresponding interactive response, along with all valid combinations of conditions that trigger that response and the relationships between those conditions. For example, in a game console testing scenario, "enter the next level" might correspond to a short press of the confirmation button, or it might be triggered by a combination of the direction keys and the confirmation button. These operation methods are all preserved in the mapping relationship corresponding to the same interactive response. The final generated trigger rule mapping set This is used in subsequent steps to analyze the critical boundaries between the triggering conditions corresponding to different responses.

[0069] In step 202, specifically, step 202 uses the trigger rule mapping set generated in step 201. As input. Test device reads. All rule records are collected and organized according to human-computer interaction response categories, so that rule records triggering the same response are grouped into the same response group. Subsequently, the test equipment searches for rule records with the same input source across different response groups, forming candidate boundary rule pairs. Here, the same input source means that both responses are determined by the same type of game controller input unit, such as both determined by button duration, both by joystick displacement, both by trigger pressure, or both by the same combination of trigger intervals. Taking a handheld game console as an example, normal movement and dash both originate from the forward displacement of the left joystick, short press and long press confirm both originate from the confirmation button duration, and aiming and firing both originate from the right trigger pressure. These rules have actual operational response switching relationships. The test equipment starts from... Extract the set of triggering conditions corresponding to these adjacent responses and record the corresponding human-computer interaction responses to provide a basis for determining key triggering boundaries in the future.

[0070] For continuous trigger conditions in candidate boundary rule pairs, the test device extracts the nearest endpoints of two adjacent trigger intervals and determines the candidate boundary position. Continuous trigger conditions include joystick displacement intervals, trigger pressure intervals, button duration intervals, and combined trigger interval intervals. Since step 201 has already converted the continuous trigger conditions to a unified proportional range, this step directly calculates based on the unified interval endpoints. The determination of the candidate boundary position is derived from the mathematical method of calculating the midpoint of an interval, combined with the boundary value analysis concept from the field of software testing. Boundary value analysis suggests that the boundary position of adjacent valid intervals is most prone to changes in judgment; this solution applies this concept to game controller trigger testing, using the nearest endpoints of adjacent trigger rules as the basis for boundary construction, and taking the center position of the two endpoints as the center reference point of the response switching area:

[0071] ;

[0072] in, The candidate boundary locations are represented by a mapping set obtained by the test equipment based on trigger rules. The adjacent trigger intervals are calculated in the data; This indicates the endpoint of the trigger interval in the first rule record that is closest to the second rule record, originating from... The set of triggering conditions in; This indicates the endpoint of the trigger interval in the second rule record that is closest to the first rule record, also originating from... The set of triggering conditions in. and All values ​​are normalized proportions from step 201 and belong to the same trigger feature scale. If two intervals overlap, the testing equipment will still calculate based on the closest endpoints on both sides of the overlapping boundary. The candidate boundary is then marked as an overlap type for further testing in subsequent steps; if a gap exists between the two intervals, then... Located at the center of this gap, subsequent tests simultaneously check whether the non-responding interval conforms to the specifications. The derivation of this formula is as follows: adjacent triggering rules occupy both sides of the boundary. and These represent the positions on either side of the trigger interval closest to the other. To ensure that subsequent test points are distributed around the switching center of the two rules, the average position of the two is taken as the candidate boundary position. Taking the right trigger as an example, if the end point of the pressure interval corresponding to the aiming response is 0.6 and the start point of the pressure interval corresponding to the firing response is 0.7, then... The value is 0.65; if a short press confirms the end point of the corresponding duration interval as 0.3, and a long press confirms the start point of the corresponding duration interval as 0.32, then... The value is 0.31. The position calculated above is not a direct determination result, but rather the center position generated in subsequent boundary-specific test samples.

[0073] After obtaining the candidate boundary locations, the testing equipment further calculates the importance of the candidate boundaries to determine the priority coverage order for subsequent boundary-specific tests. This calculation is based on the classic risk assessment concept that "the degree of impact and the probability of occurrence jointly determine the magnitude of risk," and has been modified to suit the game controller triggering scenario. The boundary risk of a game controller is related not only to the distance between two trigger intervals but also to the degree of difference between the two responses and the complexity of the coupling of triggering conditions. For example, the response difference between aiming and firing is usually greater than the response difference between slow movement and normal movement; the boundary formed by a single trigger pressure is usually lower than the boundary formed by a combination of function keys and triggers; the smaller the distance between adjacent intervals, the more likely inconsistencies in response switching are to occur due to device differences, sampling jitter, or firmware parameter changes. Therefore, the testing equipment calculates the boundary importance based on response differences, conditional coupling, and the distance between adjacent intervals:

[0074] ;

[0075] in, The importance of the boundary is calculated by the testing equipment according to the candidate boundary rules. This indicates the response difference value, which originates from... The human-computer interaction response categories are assigned values ​​according to the response difference levels predefined in the test specifications. For example, lower values ​​are taken between similar movement states, and higher values ​​are taken between obviously different interaction states such as aiming and firing, normal attack and skill release. Indicates the conditional coupling value, derived from The set of triggering conditions in the data is used to assign values ​​to the number of input units involved in boundary switching, whether there is a triggering order, and whether there is a combined triggering interval, according to the candidate rules. and These represent the endpoints of two adjacent intervals involved in the candidate boundary position calculation. In this formula, the numerator... The denominator represents the degree of impact of boundary switching on interaction differences. This indicates the suppressive effect of the distance between adjacent trigger intervals on boundary risk; the smaller the interval distance, the closer the denominator is to one, and the higher the boundary importance; when the interval distance increases, the boundary importance decreases. and In one implementation, the test specifications pre-define the range to a non-negative level. Take the response difference level value between zero and one. Take a conditional coupling level value between 0 and 1.5. It is not used as a probability value, but rather as a dimensionless importance for boundary ranking and sampling density adjustment. Because... , , , All values ​​are expressed using a uniform ratio or a preset grade value. Both sides of the formula are dimensionless values, and the calculation results can be directly used for sorting.

[0076] Taking the right trigger of a video game console as an example, aim at the end of the pressure range of the rule. The starting point of the pressure range for the firing rule is 0.6. The test specification defines aiming and firing as different interaction states, with a response difference value of 0.7. Choose one; this boundary is formed solely by the change in right trigger pressure, a conditionally coupled value. Take 0.5, then This equals 1 plus 0.5 divided by 1 plus 0.1, resulting in approximately 1.36. Taking the combination of the function key and the right trigger to trigger a skill as another example, the trigger interval boundary endpoints between the normal attack rule and the skill release rule are 0.4 and 0.45 respectively, with a response difference value... Choose one, because this boundary involves the function key, the right trigger, and the trigger interval of both, resulting in a conditional coupling value. Take point 1.2, then This equals 2.2 divided by 1.05, resulting in approximately 2.1. This result gives the combined trigger boundary a higher priority in subsequent tests, consistent with the engineering characteristics of game controllers where combined triggers are more prone to feel differences and false triggers in actual use.

[0077] After the testing equipment completes the location and importance calculations for all candidate boundaries, it organizes the candidate boundaries according to their input source, boundary location, and boundary importance to generate a critical trigger boundary model. . Each boundary record includes the two human-computer interaction responses that formed the boundary, the corresponding input sources, and the candidate boundary locations. Boundary importance And the triggering conditions on both sides of the boundary. For joystick-type boundaries, record the joystick direction and displacement switching position; for trigger-type boundaries, record the pressure switching position; for button-continuous boundary types, record the duration switching position; for combined trigger boundary types, record the participating input units, triggering order, and combined trigger interval. The final key trigger boundary model is obtained. As input to the boundary-specific test set generated in step 203, subsequent tests can be conducted around the locations where response switching is most likely to occur in real-world interactions with the game controller.

[0078] In step 203, specifically, step 203 uses the key trigger boundary model generated in step 202. As input. Test device reads. Each boundary record in the database already contains candidate boundary locations. Boundary importance The human-machine interaction responses on both sides of the boundary and the corresponding triggering conditions are recorded. This step converts these boundary records into controller operation trajectories that can be actually executed by the test fixture, and forms a boundary-specific test set after execution. For trigger-type boundaries, the testing equipment will determine the boundary position. Convert the target stroke of the pressure actuator; for rocker-type boundaries, the test equipment will determine the boundary position. Convert the target displacement into a two-dimensional displacement driving mechanism; for continuous button boundaries, the testing equipment will determine the boundary position. Convert to a button hold process; for combined trigger class boundaries, the test device will determine the boundary position. This is converted into a trigger interval between multiple input units. Because... Derived from the critical trigger boundary model in step 202 Therefore, the test actions generated in this step always revolve around the response switching area between the actual triggering rules.

[0079] Test equipment based on boundary importance Determine the test coverage width for each boundary. This approach stems from the concepts of boundary value analysis and risk-driven testing in software testing: boundary value analysis emphasizes testing near critical locations, while risk-driven testing emphasizes denser coverage of higher-risk locations. This solution combines both approaches in game controller trigger testing, ensuring that trigger boundaries with higher importance receive more concentrated test coverage, preventing high-risk boundaries from being diluted by an excessively wide test range. The test coverage width is calculated using the following formula:

[0080] ;

[0081] in, The test coverage width, representing the current boundary, is determined by the test equipment based on the critical trigger boundary model. Boundary importance in Calculated; This indicates the preset basic coverage width, which is set by the test specifications according to the controller type. This indicates that the boundary importance obtained in step 202 is derived from the critical trigger boundary model. The derivation logic of this formula is: based on the basic coverage width As the coverage scale of ordinary boundaries, then used Compress it; when An increase in width indicates a greater difference in response at the boundary, conditional coupling, or a higher degree of proximity between intervals; therefore, the test coverage width should be increased. The sampling points are reduced and more concentrated at the boundary locations. Nearby. During project implementation, the test specifications also set minimum and maximum coverage widths. If the calculated... If the coverage width is lower than the minimum resolution of the actuator, the minimum coverage width shall be used; if it is higher than the allowable range, the maximum coverage width shall be used. and All are width values ​​in a uniform proportional space. To proportionalize importance, the calculation relationships on both sides of the equation are consistent. Taking the trigger aiming and firing boundary as an example, if the base coverage width... The boundary importance is 0.12. If the value is 1.36, then the test coverage width is... Approximately 0.051; the importance of the skill release boundary if the function key and trigger combination triggers. If it is 2.1, then the test coverage width is... It is approximately 0.039. Therefore, the test actions for the combined trigger boundary are more concentrated near the critical switching positions, making them more suitable for exposing false triggers or missed triggers caused by deviations in the combined trigger interval.

[0082] Obtain test coverage width Then, the test equipment is positioned at the boundary. Construct a boundary test trajectory centered on the target area, with the trajectory coverage being... to .like Less than zero or If the value is greater than one, the test equipment will truncate the excess portion to an executable range of zero to one, and save the original calculated range and the actual executed range in the test record. If the boundary record belongs to the trigger pressure boundary, the test equipment will control the pressure actuator from... The corresponding pressure state gradually changes to The corresponding pressure state is recorded, and the data is maintained for a specified time at each sampling position. If the boundary record belongs to the rocker displacement boundary, the test equipment controls the two-dimensional displacement drive mechanism to move along the rocker direction recorded in step 202 from... Move to the corresponding position Corresponding position; if the boundary record belongs to the key duration boundary, the test equipment controls the key drive mechanism to generate from to The retention time sequence; if the boundary record belongs to the combined trigger interval boundary, the test equipment controls multiple actuators according to... to The trigger intervals are sequential. For example, if the right trigger is aimed at the boundary between the firing and firing positions... The calculated test coverage width is 0.65. If the value is 0.05, the testing equipment will generate a pressure trajectory between 0.60 and 0.70; the boundary between short press confirmation and long press confirmation is... The coverage width is 0.31. If the value is 0.02, the testing equipment generates a hold-up process between 0.29 and 0.33; if the combined skill triggers the boundary position... The coverage width is 0.05. If the value is 0.01, the test equipment generates a combined trigger interval trajectory between 0.04 and 0.06.

[0083] The testing equipment further determines the importance of the boundary. Determine the number of samples within each boundary trajectory. This approach is derived from the hierarchical sampling concept in engineering testing, which allocates more test points to critical areas. This scheme uses hierarchical sampling for game controller trigger boundary testing, so that the higher the boundary importance, the more test samples are available, thereby improving the ability to capture response jumps, response delays, and critical misjudgments. The number of test samples is determined according to the following formula:

[0084] ;

[0085] in, This represents the number of test samples corresponding to the current boundary, calculated by the test equipment and then expressed as an integer. This indicates the preset base sample size, set by the test specifications according to the controller's test accuracy. Integers greater than zero; This indicates that the boundary importance obtained in step 202 is derived from the critical trigger boundary model. The derivation logic of this formula is as follows: based on the basic sample size... As the minimum coverage amount for ordinary boundaries, then based on boundary importance Increase the number of samples; use rounding up to directly convert the calculated result into the actual number of test samples. To avoid the test task exceeding the fixture execution time or the game terminal playback capability, the test specification also sets a maximum number of samples for a single boundary, when the calculated result... If the threshold is exceeded, the upper limit will be applied, and the result will be recorded as a high importance boundary. This is based on the base sample size. Taking twenty as an example, the importance of the boundary between normal movement and sprint. When the value is 1.0, the number of test samples is obtained. The value is 40; the importance of skill release combo boundaries. When the value is 2.5, the number of test samples is obtained. The value is 70. Combining the aforementioned test coverage width calculation, the high importance boundary has both a narrower coverage area and a larger number of samples, thus forming a "narrow range, high density" boundary-specific test structure, which is more in line with the engineering characteristics of game controller critical triggering problems usually occurring near the boundary.

[0086] Determining the test coverage width and the number of test samples Afterwards, the testing equipment will to The boundary range is divided into The test fixture generates 40 executable sampling positions and converts each sampling position into an execution instruction for the test fixture. For trigger-type tests, the execution instructions include the pressure target position, pressure change direction, holding process, and release process; for joystick-type tests, the execution instructions include the joystick target displacement, direction angle, movement path, and holding process; for button persistence-type tests, the execution instructions include the press time, holding process, and release time; for combined trigger-type tests, the execution instructions include the participating input unit, trigger sequence, trigger interval, and synchronous holding process. Taking the sprint boundary of a handheld game console as an example, if the boundary position is 0.65, the test coverage width is 0.05, and the number of test samples is 40, then the test device generates 40 joystick displacement sampling positions in the range of 0.60 to 0.70 and controls the joystick drive mechanism to execute them sequentially; taking the skill release boundary of a video game console as an example, if the combined trigger interval range is 0.04 to 0.06 and the number of test samples is 70, then the test device generates 70 sets of interval operations between function keys and triggers, which are executed by the multi-input collaborative drive mechanism.

[0087] During execution, the test equipment associates and saves each controller operation with the human-computer interaction response returned by the game terminal. Boundary-specific test suite. Each test record includes boundary markers, input source, actual execution trajectory, sampling location, execution order, participating input units, trigger interval, expected responses on both sides of the boundary, expected response at the current sampling location, and the actual response from the game terminal. The expected responses on both sides of the boundary and the expected response at the current sampling location are derived from the critical trigger boundary model. The test sets define the boundary conditions and human-computer interaction responses. For trigger tests, the actual response can be aiming, firing, or no response; for joystick tests, the actual response can be normal movement, sprinting, or state transitions; for button persistence tests, the actual response can be short press confirmation, long press confirmation, or repeated triggering; for combined trigger tests, the actual response can be normal attack, skill release, or combined trigger failure. The final output is a boundary-specific test set. It includes the critical trigger boundary model The derived test actions and expected responses also include the game terminal response results obtained after the test fixture is actually executed, enabling step 204 to be directly based on... Determine if there are false triggers, missed triggers, boundary drift, boundary overlap, or inconsistent responses near the boundary.

[0088] In step 204, specifically, step 204 uses the boundary-specific test set output in step 203. As input. Test device reads. Each test record contains a boundary marker, input source, actual operation trajectory, sampling location, execution order, input unit, trigger interval, expected response on both sides of the boundary, expected response at the current sampling location, and actual response from the game terminal. The testing equipment groups the test records according to the boundary markers. Multiple records under the same boundary form a continuous response sequence. For example, the right trigger aiming and firing boundary corresponds to a pressure increment response sequence, the left joystick normal movement and sprint boundary corresponds to a displacement increment response sequence, the confirmation button short press and long press boundary corresponds to a hold time increment response sequence, and combined trigger boundaries correspond to a trigger interval change response sequence. With this processing, interaction consistency judgment no longer only considers whether a single operation is correct, but observes whether the response switches in the expected order during a continuous operation near the boundary.

[0089] The testing equipment calculates an interaction consistency score for each set of boundary test records. This score is based on the response matching concept in classic testing judgment: a match is considered complete when the actual response matches the expected response, and a mismatch is considered complete when they do not. It also incorporates the jump penalty concept from discrete sequence analysis, including common short-term repeated switching, boundary out-of-bounds triggering, and delayed triggering near the game controller boundary in the evaluation. Game controller boundary anomalies are often not errors in a single sampling point, but rather phenomena such as "repeated switching between normal movement and sprinting," "repeated switching between aiming and firing," and "occasional failure of combo skill triggering" when continuously applying operations. Therefore, a continuity deviation term is added to the response matching to ensure the score reflects the consistency of the interaction feel near the boundary.

[0090] ;

[0091] in, This represents the interaction consistency score corresponding to the current boundary, determined by the test equipment based on the boundary-specific test set. The actual response sequence was calculated. The number of samples corresponding to the current boundary is derived from the boundary-specific test set generated and executed in step 203. ; Indicates the first The response matching value at each sampling location, when the actual response of the game terminal at that sampling location matches... The current sampling position recorded in the data is set to 1 if it matches the expected response, and 0 if it does not match. Indicates the first The abnormal jump value of the response at each sampling position relative to the previous sampling position is set to zero when the actual response change direction of the adjacent sampling position is consistent with the expected response switching direction on both sides of the boundary, and is set to one when there is a reverse switching, repeated back-and-forth switching, or crossing the expected response state. This represents the jump penalty coefficient, which is set by the test specification according to the controller type. This indicates taking the larger of the calculated value within the parentheses and zero. (This is for scoring purposes.) The number of samples must be the actual number of samples that have been completed and whose responses have been obtained from the game terminal. If there are no valid sampling records at a certain boundary, the test equipment will not count them. Instead, it marks the boundary as an incomplete test and outputs the reason for the execution exception. This formula is derived from the average response matching. First, it sums the response matching at each sampling location, then subtracts the impact of abnormal jumps in consecutive sampling, and finally divides by the number of samples to obtain a uniform score; when the penalty for abnormal jumps exceeds the matching score, the score is recorded as zero. Because... , and All are proportional evaluation values. For the count value, the calculation result For proportional scoring.

[0092] Taking the right trigger aiming and firing boundary as an example, a certain test trajectory includes seven sampling positions, and the expected response sequence is "aiming, aiming, aiming, firing, firing, firing, firing, firing". The actual response sequence is completely consistent with the expected response sequence. Therefore, the seven sampling positions... All are one; continuous response changes occur only once, as expected, at the point of aiming and firing. All are zero, when When taking 0.5, It equals one. Taking the boundary between normal movement and sprint on the left joystick as an example, a test trajectory includes five sampling positions. The expected response sequence is "normal movement, normal movement, sprint, sprint, sprint," while the actual response sequence is "normal movement, sprint, normal movement, sprint, sprint." The third sampling position is inconsistent with the expectation, and there is a reverse jump from sprint back to normal movement between the second and third sampling positions. Therefore, the sum of the matching values ​​is four, and the sum of the abnormal jump values ​​is one. When taking 0.5, The result is equal to 0.7. This result reflects a problem of inconsistent response near the joystick boundary, rather than simply recording the boundary as a functional failure.

[0093] The testing equipment is processed in the manner described above. Record all boundary tests and write the interaction consistency score, actual response sequence, expected response sequence, anomaly sampling location, anomaly type, and corresponding operation trajectory for each boundary into the interaction consistency test results. For trigger-type boundaries, Record whether there is confusion between aiming and firing under pressure trajectory; for joystick-type boundaries, Record whether there are any abrupt changes in normal movement, sprinting, or directional states; for continuous key press boundaries, Record whether short press, long press, or repeated triggers meet expectations; for combined trigger categories, Record whether skill mis-triggering or trigger failure occurs under changes in input combination order and trigger interval. The final generated... It is used to characterize the consistency of human-computer interaction of the game controller under test near the critical trigger boundary, so that the test results can be directly applied to engineering problems such as false triggering, missed triggering, boundary drift, boundary overlap or response jump.

[0094] Figure 3 A block diagram of a human-computer interaction testing system for game controller triggering according to at least one embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0095] like Figure 3 As shown, the system includes:

[0096] The mapping set construction module is used to read the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, perform normalization processing, and generate a trigger rule mapping set. The trigger rule mapping set contains a set of trigger conditions and the corresponding human-computer interaction response.

[0097] The boundary model generation module is used to retrieve a set of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses based on the triggering rule mapping set, form candidate boundary rule pairs, calculate the candidate boundary position and boundary importance, and generate a key triggering boundary model.

[0098] The test set execution module is used to determine the test coverage width and the number of test samples based on the boundary importance in the critical trigger boundary model, construct the boundary test trajectory and control the execution of the test fixture, obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generate a boundary-specific test set.

[0099] The consistency evaluation module is used to calculate the interaction consistency score based on the actual response sequence in the boundary-specific test set and generate the interaction consistency test results.

[0100] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of the structure of a human-computer interaction test device for game controller triggering according to at least one embodiment of the present disclosure is shown.

[0101] like Figure 4 As shown, the device includes:

[0102] Memory, used to store computer programs;

[0103] A processor, used to execute a computer program, implements the steps of a human-computer interaction testing method triggered by a game controller as described in any of the above method embodiments.

[0104] At least one embodiment of this disclosure also provides a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the steps of a human-computer interaction testing method triggered by a game controller as described in any of the above method embodiments.

[0105] Through the above embodiments, this disclosure achieves the following technical effects:

[0106] First, the controller testing is expanded from single-function verification to interaction consistency testing around the boundaries of trigger rules. Through normalization, trigger conditions scattered in different configurations are integrated into a unified set of trigger rule mappings, eliminating hardware sampling differences and providing a unified benchmark for subsequent analysis.

[0107] Second, by extracting adjacent response rules with the same input source, and combining response differences, conditional coupling, and interval distance to calculate boundary importance, the key trigger boundaries that are prone to false triggering and missed triggering are accurately located, so that the testing focus shifts from typical functional points to high-risk boundary areas.

[0108] Third, the test coverage width and sampling density are dynamically adjusted according to the importance of the boundary, so that high-risk boundaries can obtain narrower range and higher density of special tests, and the continuous changing real operation trajectory is generated by physical fixtures to effectively cover critical switching states.

[0109] Fourth, by combining response matching and jump penalty calculation to obtain an interaction consistency score, we can accurately identify deep-seated problems such as boundary drift, response jumps, and combined trigger failures, and build a complete test chain, which significantly improves the detection rate and testing efficiency of boundary-type interaction problems in game controllers.

[0110] The above description represents the preferred embodiments of the present invention. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various improvements and modifications without departing from the principles of the present invention, and these improvements and modifications are also considered to be within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A human-computer interaction testing method triggered by a game controller, characterized in that, include: Read the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, perform normalization processing, and generate a trigger rule mapping set. The trigger rule mapping set includes a set of trigger conditions and the human-computer interaction response corresponding to the set of trigger conditions. Based on the trigger rule mapping set, a set of trigger conditions with the same input source is retrieved among different human-computer interaction responses to form candidate boundary rule pairs. The candidate boundary positions and boundary importance are calculated to generate a key trigger boundary model. Based on the boundary importance in the critical trigger boundary model, determine the test coverage width and the number of test samples, construct the boundary test trajectory and control the test fixture to execute, obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generate a boundary-specific test set; The interaction consistency score is calculated based on the actual response sequence in the boundary-specific test set, and the interaction consistency test results are generated.

2. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process of reading the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, performing normalization processing, and generating a trigger rule mapping set includes: Read the button status, joystick displacement range, trigger pressure range, duration range and combined trigger conditions, and use linear proportional mapping to convert the original trigger configuration value to a unified proportional range to obtain the normalized trigger feature value; For each triggering rule, a rule record is generated, which includes a set of triggering conditions and the corresponding human-computer interaction response; The rule records are merged according to the human-computer interaction response to generate the trigger rule mapping set.

3. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of retrieving a set of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses based on the triggering rule mapping set, forming candidate boundary rule pairs, calculating the candidate boundary positions and boundary importance, and generating a key triggering boundary model includes: Retrieve sets of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses to form candidate boundary rule pairs; Extract the nearest endpoints of two adjacent trigger intervals of continuous trigger conditions contained in the trigger condition set of the candidate boundary rule pair, and determine the center position of the nearest endpoints as the candidate boundary position.

4. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 3, characterized in that, The calculation of candidate boundary positions and boundary importance, and the generation of key trigger boundary models, also includes: Obtain the response difference value, the conditional coupling value, and the interval distance of the adjacent endpoints; The boundary importance is calculated based on the response difference value, the conditional coupling value, and the interval distance; The candidate boundaries are organized according to the input source, the candidate boundary location, and the boundary importance, and the corresponding candidate boundaries are generated to form the key trigger boundary model.

5. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process involves determining the test coverage width and the number of test samples based on the boundary importance in the critical trigger boundary model, constructing boundary test trajectories and controlling the execution of the test fixture, obtaining the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generating a boundary-specific test set, including: The preset basic coverage width is compressed according to the boundary importance to obtain the test coverage width; The number of test samples is obtained by increasing the preset base sample number according to the boundary importance. Using the candidate boundary location as the center, the sampling locations of the number of test samples are divided within the test coverage width to generate the boundary test trajectory.

6. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 5, characterized in that, The control test fixture is executed to obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal and generate a boundary-specific test set, including: The control pressure actuator, two-dimensional displacement drive mechanism, button drive mechanism, or multi-input collaborative drive mechanism shall perform operations according to the boundary test trajectory; Each operation is associated with and saved with the human-computer interaction response returned by the game terminal to generate the boundary-specific test set, which includes boundary identifiers, sampling locations, expected responses on both sides of the boundary, and actual responses.

7. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of calculating the interaction consistency score based on the actual response sequences in the boundary-specific test set and generating the interaction consistency test results includes: The test data contained in the boundary-specific test set are grouped according to the boundary identifier to obtain a continuous response sequence; Calculate the response matching value at each sampling position in the continuous response sequence, and the response anomalous jump value at adjacent sampling positions; The interaction consistency score is calculated based on the response matching value and the response anomalous jump value, and the interaction consistency test result is generated.

8. The human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering according to claim 7, characterized in that, The calculation of the response matching value at each sampling position in the continuous response sequence, and the response anomalous jump value at adjacent sampling positions, includes: When the actual response of the game terminal at the sampling location matches the expected response, the response matching value is taken as a first preset value; when they do not match, the second preset value is taken. When the actual response change direction of adjacent sampling positions is consistent with the expected response switching direction, the abnormal response jump value is taken as the third preset value. When reverse switching or repeated switching occurs, the abnormal response jump value is taken as the fourth preset value.

9. A human-computer interaction testing system triggered by a game controller, characterized in that, include: The mapping set construction module is used to read the preset trigger rules of the game controller under test and the standard response configuration of the game terminal, perform normalization processing, and generate a trigger rule mapping set. The trigger rule mapping set includes a set of trigger conditions and the human-computer interaction response corresponding to the set of trigger conditions. The boundary model generation module is used to retrieve a set of triggering conditions with the same input source among different human-computer interaction responses based on the triggering rule mapping set, form candidate boundary rule pairs, calculate the candidate boundary position and boundary importance, and generate a key triggering boundary model. The test set execution module is used to determine the test coverage width and the number of test samples based on the boundary importance in the key trigger boundary model, construct the boundary test trajectory and control the test fixture to execute, obtain the actual response returned by the game terminal, and generate a boundary-specific test set. The consistency evaluation module is used to calculate the interaction consistency score based on the actual response sequence in the boundary-specific test set and generate the interaction consistency test results.

10. A human-computer interaction testing device for game controller triggering, characterized in that, include: Memory, used to store computer programs; A processor, configured to implement the steps of the human-computer interaction testing method for game controller triggering as described in any one of claims 1 to 8 when executing the computer program.

Images