Incentivized Distributed Code Testing Platform
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Complex software projects face challenges in thorough testing due to the enormous time and effort required, often leading to missed issues and bugs, as developers may not adequately test code they have written.
Innovation Solution
A code testing platform that allows developers to distribute code sets to groups of testers, incentivizing them with rewards for accurate feedback, enabling primary and peer testers to execute tests, provide feedback, and generate test reports, with developers making decisions on the accuracy of the feedback to distribute rewards.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If developers test code themselves, then they can quickly identify issues, but they may miss bugs due to lack of objectivity and thoroughness
Solution Approach 1:
The patent divides the testing task into segments by distributing code sets to multiple independent testers. Each tester evaluates the code separately, and their feedback is aggregated to form a comprehensive assessment. This segmentation allows thorough testing without requiring a single developer to spend excessive time, while maintaining objectivity through multiple perspectives.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements a feedback mechanism where testers provide structured feedback on code sets, and developers receive aggregated feedback from multiple testers. The feedback includes bug reports, suggestions, and evaluations that help improve code quality. This feedback loop enables developers to identify issues they might have missed while managing testing time efficiently.
2Reliability
If multiple testers are used to thoroughly test code, then more bugs are identified, but the coordination and management complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent introduces an intermediary testing platform that manages the interaction between developers and testers. The platform handles code distribution, feedback collection, aggregation, and presentation automatically. This intermediary system reduces the coordination complexity that would otherwise arise from direct multi-party interaction, while still enabling thorough testing by multiple testers.
Solution Approach 2:
The testing platform performs multiple functions within a single system: code distribution, test execution coordination, feedback collection, feedback aggregation, and result presentation. This multi-functionality reduces the need for separate systems for each task, thereby managing complexity while enabling comprehensive multi-tester evaluation.
3Reliability
If extensive testing is performed on complex software projects, then more bugs are found, but the time and effort required become enormous
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the testing process by distributing different code sets to multiple testers simultaneously. Instead of one tester examining all code sequentially, the testing workload is divided and executed in parallel across multiple testers. This segmentation maintains thorough testing coverage while significantly reducing the total time required compared to sequential testing.
Solution Approach 2:
The system enables each tester to focus on specific code sets or aspects of the software, performing partial testing that collectively achieves comprehensive coverage. Testers may perform slightly more focused testing on their assigned portions rather than attempting exhaustive testing of the entire codebase, which reduces individual time investment while maintaining overall software quality through aggregation of multiple partial assessments.
Data Source
AI summary
Systems and methods are provided for use in distributing code testing tasks among multiple testers, and incentivizing testing with rewards. One exemplary method includes testing, by a computing device, a code set, where the testing is performed by a tester associated with a profile, and receiving, by the computing device, peer tester feedback based on the testing of the code set, where the peer tester feedback is associated with at least one peer tester profile. The method also includes receiving, by the computing device, a developer decision based on the testing of the code set and/or the peer tester feedback, and rewarding, by the computing device, the profile of the tester and/or the at least one peer tester profile when the developer decision agrees with the testing of the code set and/or the tester feedback associated with the at least one peer tester profile.