Code Change Prioritization via Merging Similar Requests

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current systems for managing code change requests are resource-intensive, inefficiently process requests in sequence, leading to overtaxed processing power, redundant modifications, and suboptimal memory usage, failing to prioritize requests based on severity and impact, and require multiple code base openings for similar changes.

Innovation Solution

A code change request prioritization system that assigns a total weighted percentile score to each request using various factors, identifies high-priority requests, and uses machine learning to detect similar requests, allowing for simultaneous resolution across multiple code bases.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of time

If code change requests are processed in sequence of receipt, then each request is handled individually, but processing time increases and productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveprocessing timeVSAvoidcode change resolution efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

Loss of timeVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent merges multiple similar code change requests into a single consolidated request. The system identifies requests that affect the same code base or similar code patterns and combines them into one unified change operation, thereby reducing the total number of separate processing operations and decreasing overall processing time while maintaining productivity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary analysis and grouping of code change requests before actual processing. By pre-identifying similar requests and consolidating them in advance, the system prepares optimized batch operations that reduce subsequent processing time and improve resolution efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Device complexity

If each code change request is handled individually, then processing is simple, but processing power is overtaxed and resource usage increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveprocessing complexityVSAvoidprocessing power consumption

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The system combines multiple individual code change operations into consolidated batch operations. By merging similar requests that modify the same code base or follow similar patterns, the system reduces the total number of separate processing tasks, thereby lowering processing power consumption while maintaining manageable complexity through automated identification and grouping.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

3Quantity of substance

If code change requests are processed sequentially, then resource usage is manageable, but memory space is reduced and computer optimizations are degraded

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvememory space availabilityVSAvoidcode optimization efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

Quantity of substanceVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary consolidation of code change requests before processing, grouping similar requests together in advance. This pre-processing step organizes the workload into optimized batches that can be executed more efficiently, improving code optimization efficiency while managing memory space through structured batch processing rather than individual sequential operations.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

4Reliability

If similar code change requests are not identified, then each request is processed separately, but redundant modifications occur and processing efficiency decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecode modification accuracyVSAvoidcode change resolution efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system identifies and merges similar code change requests by analyzing code patterns, affected files, and change types. This consolidation ensures that similar modifications are performed once rather than redundantly multiple times, improving code modification accuracy by preventing duplicate changes while significantly improving resolution efficiency through reduced processing overhead.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

5Ease of operation

If multiple code bases are opened separately for similar changes, then each code base is handled independently, but processing time increases and productivity decreases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecode base management simplicityVSAvoidtotal processing time

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system merges processing operations across multiple code bases by identifying similar change patterns. Instead of opening and processing each code base separately, the system consolidates similar operations into unified batch processing tasks that can be applied across multiple code bases simultaneously or in optimized sequences, thereby maintaining operational simplicity while significantly reducing total processing time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Data Source

PatentUS11733997B2Code change request analysis and prioritization tool

Publication Date: 2023.08.22 CERNER INNOVATION INC

AI summary

A code change request prioritization tool that uses weighting values specific to pre-determined factors to concurrently calculate a total weighted prioritization score, is disclosed. The total weighted prioritization score may be calculated using a percentile score for factors as inputs in the calculation. Once a solution is found for a highest priority code change request, similar code defects may be identified so as to provide solutions to all similar defects, simultaneously.