Automated Language Testing in CI/CD Pipelines

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current language testing processes are time-consuming and inefficient, particularly in continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) environments, due to the need for manual intervention and sequential phases that prevent parallel processing.

Innovation Solution

An automated and intelligent language testing application that integrates with a web-based development environment, allowing for continuous feature delivery by automating various parts of the language testing process, minimizing manual interaction, and enabling parallel execution of test cases across different languages.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If manual language testing is performed to ensure quality and cultural accuracy, then testing reliability is improved, but testing time increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvelanguage testing qualityVSAvoidtesting duration

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The testing process is divided into distinct phases: automated pre-testing (functional checks, translation verification), manual cultural/language testing, and post-testing validation. This segmentation allows parallel execution of automated tasks while preserving manual quality assurance, reducing overall testing time without compromising reliability

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Automated testing procedures are performed before manual testing to verify basic functionality, check translation accuracy, and validate UI elements. This preliminary action eliminates the need for manual re-testing of already-verified aspects, allowing manual testers to focus solely on cultural and linguistic nuances, thereby reducing total testing duration while maintaining quality

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Reliability

If sequential testing phases are used to ensure thorough validation, then testing completeness is improved, but productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetesting completenessVSAvoidtesting throughput

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The testing workflow is segmented into independent phases (automated functional testing, translation validation, cultural testing, UI verification) that can execute in parallel. Each phase has clearly defined entry and exit criteria, ensuring thorough validation while enabling concurrent execution to improve overall productivity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

While automated testing phases are executing, manual testers simultaneously perform their validations on different language versions. The system maintains continuous testing activity across multiple phases and languages without idle waiting time, maximizing resource utilization and testing throughput while preserving completeness

Inventive Principle:

Principle #20Continuity of useful action

3Productivity

If automated testing is implemented to reduce manual intervention, then productivity is improved, but testing precision may deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetesting efficiencyVSAvoidlanguage validation accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

Automated testing scripts and validation tools serve as intermediaries that handle objective, rule-based testing tasks (functional checks, translation verification, UI element validation) with high precision. Manual testers then focus on subjective cultural and linguistic nuances, combining the precision of automation with the judgment of human expertise to maintain overall testing accuracy while improving productivity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If comprehensive language testing is performed across all languages, then product quality is improved, but development time increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveproduct qualityVSAvoiddevelopment cycle time

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDuration of action of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

Automated testing performs preliminary validation of translations, UI elements, and basic functionality before manual testing. This early detection and correction of obvious errors prevents propagation of defects through subsequent testing phases, ensuring high product quality while reducing the time required for manual re-testing and iterations

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The testing system operates continuously across multiple languages and regions simultaneously, with automated and manual phases running in parallel rather than sequentially. This continuous testing approach validates all language versions comprehensively without extending the overall development cycle, maintaining product quality while accelerating time-to-market

Inventive Principle:

Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Data Source

PatentUS12293151B2AI-based language testing process for CI/CD

Publication Date: 2025.05.06 SAP SE

AI summary

Provided are systems and methods for automated language testing for use in continuous integration and continuous delivery software development. In one example, the method may include identifying language tests in a plurality of different natural languages to be performed for a software application, executing the language tests and validating the language tests based on results of executed scripts, automatically assigning the language tests among a plurality of language testers based on execution of a machine learning model which pairs together a language test with a language tester based on test attributes and tester attributes, and transmitting notifications to computing devices of the plurality of language testers with information about the automatically assigned language tests.