GUI Control Event and Input Coverage Metrics

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing testing methods for computer applications do not provide a reliable indication of the thoroughness of graphical user interface (GUI) testing, as they focus on source code coverage rather than GUI control instances, making it difficult for testing personnel to assess the completeness of event and input coverage.

Innovation Solution

A method to determine event and input coverage metrics for GUI control instances by accessing interaction data during testing, calculating event coverage as the proportion of invoked event types and input coverage as the proportion of input data values, and outputting these metrics in a report to provide a comprehensive assessment of testing thoroughness.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If source code coverage tools are used to track test coverage, then code-level coverage information is obtained, but GUI control instance coverage cannot be effectively assessed

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetest coverage measurementVSAvoidGUI testing assessment

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent introduces an intermediary mapping system that connects source code elements to GUI control instances. Test coverage data from source code is transformed through this mapping layer into meaningful GUI control instance coverage metrics, allowing testing personnel to assess GUI testing thoroughness without needing to understand source code directly.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual GUI testing assessment with an automated system that collects test data, maps it to GUI control instances, and generates coverage metrics automatically. This substitution eliminates the need for testing personnel to manually track and evaluate which GUI controls have been tested.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Productivity

If tests focus exclusively on a small portion of the application, then test execution is efficient, but the reliability of application quality indication deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetest execution efficiencyVSAvoidapplication quality indication

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism that provides testing personnel with quantitative coverage metrics for each GUI control instance. This feedback reveals whether tests are adequately covering all GUI controls, enabling teams to adjust their testing strategy to achieve better coverage while maintaining efficiency through targeted testing of previously uncovered controls.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Measurement precision

If detailed tracking of all GUI control instances is implemented, then testing thoroughness can be assessed, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

ImproveGUI control coverage measurementVSAvoidtesting system complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent performs preliminary actions by automatically generating the mapping between source code and GUI control instances during application development or initial analysis. This pre-computed mapping structure is then reused during testing, eliminating the need to create and maintain complex tracking relationships manually during each test cycle.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS10318122B2Determining event and input coverage metrics for a graphical user interface control instance

Publication Date: 2019.06.11 MICRO FOCUS LLC

AI summary

Examples disclosed herein relate to determining event and input coverage metrics for a graphical user interface (GUI) control instance. Examples include accessing event and input occurrence data identifying interactions performed on a GUI of an application, determining an event coverage metric for the given GUI control instance based on the event occurrence data, and determining an input coverage metric for the given GUI control instance based on the input occurrence data.