Automated Defect Sourcing in Cloud Workflows

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In distributed software development, defects introduced by independent teams are often not detected until they degrade production software, leading to customer issues and labor-intensive root cause analysis, requiring significant engineering resources and impacting product development.

Innovation Solution

A system that periodically executes test cases to detect deviations in software performance, identifies defects, and automatically maps them to the responsible source code updates by comparing output data sets to a performance model and tracking source code commits, notifying the relevant development teams.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If independent development teams update source code without centralized coordination, then development productivity increases, but defect detection capability deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevelopment speedVSAvoiddefect detection capability

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements automated feedback loops where test results are continuously fed back to development teams. When defects are detected in production, the system automatically notifies the responsible development team, creating a closed-loop feedback mechanism that maintains both rapid independent development and high defect detection capability.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

An automated testing and defect management system acts as an intermediary between independent development teams and the production environment. This intermediary automatically executes tests, detects defects, and coordinates communication between teams, enabling both independent rapid development and centralized quality control.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Measurement precision

If developers manually review source code revisions to locate defects, then defect sourcing accuracy improves, but time consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedefect sourcing accuracyVSAvoidtime to locate defect

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service defect sourcing by automatically tracking which development team's code changes caused each defect. The automated system correlates test failures with specific source code updates and notifications, eliminating the need for manual code review while maintaining high accuracy in identifying the responsible team.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The manual mechanical process of developers reviewing source code is replaced with an automated electronic system that uses algorithms to correlate test results with code commits. This substitution maintains defect sourcing accuracy while dramatically reducing the time required.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Productivity

If defects are allowed to persist until discovered, then development continuity is maintained, but customer experience deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedevelopment continuityVSAvoidcustomer experience impact

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary defect detection by continuously executing automated tests in the production environment before customers are significantly impacted. Defects are identified and notified to development teams in advance, allowing correction before they degrade customer experience, while maintaining continuous development operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system maintains continuous monitoring and testing of production software without interrupting development workflows. Automated tests run continuously in the background, enabling uninterrupted development while simultaneously providing ongoing defect detection to protect customer experience.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #20Continuity of useful action

4Reliability

If large numbers of developers are assigned to defect analysis, then defect detection capability improves, but engineering resource allocation deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedefect detection capabilityVSAvoidengineering resources

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The automated system performs defect detection and sourcing independently without requiring large teams of developers for manual analysis. The system self-manages test execution, result analysis, and developer notification, maintaining high defect detection capability while minimizing the engineering resources required for quality assurance.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentUS11042476B2Variability system and analytics for continuous reliability in cloud-based workflows

Publication Date: 2021.06.22 INTUIT INC

AI summary

The present disclosure relates to automatically detecting software defects and determining the source of the defect. An example method generally includes receiving an output data set from a host server executing a test operation and comparing the output data set to a performance model. A test system identifies that a defect exists in software executing on the host server based on determining that the output data set deviates from the performance model by more than a threshold. The test system retrieves a source code update from a source code repository that was committed to the source code repository before the execution of the test operation. The test system compares a scope of the source code update to the defect and notifies a development team related to the source code update of the defect upon determining that the scope of the source code update and the defect match.