Generative AI Test Planning for Adaptive Software Validation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional software testing processes, particularly in Agile development, are time-consuming and require significant human intervention, leading to increased costs and potential for errors, with challenges in maintaining and updating test plans and scripts.

Innovation Solution

Utilizing generative artificial intelligence (AI) to automatically create test plans and automation scripts, and adapt to evolving software requirements, with AI-driven error identification and resolution during execution.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual test plan creation and automation script generation are performed conventionally, then human expertise and control are maintained, but the process becomes time-consuming and costly

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetesting accuracyVSAvoidtest plan creation time

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service automated testing by allowing the testing system to automatically generate test plans, create automation scripts, and execute tests without requiring manual intervention for each step. The system serves itself by maintaining test repositories, generating code autonomously, and adapting to software changes automatically.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary actions by pre-generating test plans and automation scripts before actual software execution. Test cases are created in advance and stored in a test repository, allowing the system to be ready for automated execution without last-minute manual preparation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If manual correction of failed automation test scripts is performed, then human expertise ensures accurate fixes, but human error and increased costs occur

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvescript correction accuracyVSAvoidhuman error

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-correction of failed automation test scripts by automatically analyzing execution failures, identifying issues in test scripts, and generating corrected versions without human intervention. This eliminates human error in script correction while maintaining high accuracy through automated validation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system implements feedback loops where test execution results are automatically analyzed, and failure information is fed back to the system for automatic correction. The corrected scripts are then re-executed to validate the fixes, creating a continuous improvement cycle that eliminates human error.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Adaptability or versatility

If test plans and scripts are manually maintained and updated as projects evolve, then adaptability to changes is possible, but the development process is delayed

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetest plan adaptabilityVSAvoiddevelopment speed

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system dynamically adapts test plans and automation scripts to project changes by automatically detecting software modifications and updating corresponding test cases. The system continuously synchronizes with evolving software requirements without manual intervention, maintaining adaptability while preserving development speed.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary updates to test plans and scripts by proactively detecting changes in software code and automatically generating updated test cases before they are needed for execution. This prevents delays by having tests ready in advance.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

4Reliability

If significant human intervention is used in testing processes, then complex issues can be addressed with expertise, but costs and potential for error increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveproblem solving capabilityVSAvoidhuman resources required

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system addresses complex testing issues through self-service automation by automatically analyzing test failures, identifying root causes, and generating corrected scripts. The system maintains high problem-solving capability through intelligent automation while eliminating the need for continuous human intervention.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces manual human intervention with automated mechanical processes for test execution, script generation, and error correction. This substitution maintains problem-solving capability through algorithmic analysis while reducing human resource requirements.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentUS20260003770A1Systems and methods for testing, validating, and optimizing software

Publication Date: 2026.01.01 AT&T INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY I L P

AI summary

Aspects of the subject disclosure may include, for example, obtaining first information indicative of function(s) that a software application is designed to be capable of performing; obtaining second information indicative of acceptance criteria that define whether the software application has performed the function(s); generating (based upon the first and second information) a first prompt configured for input to a generative artificial intelligence (AI) mechanism; inputting the first prompt to the generative AI mechanism; receiving at least one test plan that was generated by the generative AI mechanism; and facilitating execution of the software application based upon the test plan. Other embodiments are disclosed.