Test Automation Feasibility Scoring for Resource-Efficient QA

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for determining test automation feasibility are time-consuming, prone to bias, and lack a reliable framework for deciding between manual and automated testing, which varies by company and test case.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that calculates test automation feasibility indices using a questionnaire with weighted questions about ease and impact of automation, processed through AI models to provide quantitative indices and recommendations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If automated testing is implemented, then testing speed and accuracy are improved, but resource consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting speedVSAvoidresource consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameters for decision-making by introducing a feasibility index calculation that weighs multiple factors (ease of automation, impact, resource requirements) to determine the optimal testing approach for each test case, allowing resource-efficient automation selection

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Measurement precision

If manual assessment of automation feasibility is performed for every test case, then assessment accuracy is improved, but time consumption increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveassessment accuracyVSAvoidtime consumption
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service assessment by allowing users to input responses to standardized questionnaire items about test cases, which are then automatically processed through weighted calculations to generate feasibility indices, eliminating the need for time-consuming manual expert assessment while maintaining accuracy

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transforms the assessment process by changing from subjective manual evaluation to objective quantitative scoring using weighted questionnaire parameters, enabling rapid and consistent feasibility determination across all test cases

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If automated testing is applied without systematic assessment, then testing efficiency is improved, but decision reliability decreases due to bias and error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting efficiencyVSAvoiddecision reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements feedback mechanisms through standardized questionnaires that capture user responses about test case characteristics, which are then processed through weighted calculations to generate actionable feasibility indices, ensuring reliable and bias-free automation decisions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes the decision-making parameters by introducing a structured scoring model that objectively evaluates automation feasibility based on multiple weighted factors, replacing subjective judgment with quantitative analysis for reliable automation decisions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS12566689B2Method and system for calculation of test automation feasibility indices
Publication Date: 2026.03.03 INFOSYS LTD
  • US12566689B2 patent drawing
  • US12566689B2 patent drawing
  • US12566689B2 patent drawing

AI summary

This disclosure relates to method and system for calculation of test automation feasibility indices. The method includes receiving input data comprising user responses to a questionnaire associated with a test case. The questionnaire includes a first set of questions associated with an ease of test case automation, and a second set of questions associated with an impact of test case automation, and each of the plurality of questions comprises a corresponding weightage. The method further includes computing an ease of automation index based on the user responses and a first set of weightages corresponding to the first set of questions, and an impact of automation index based on the user responses and a second set of weightages corresponding to the second set of questions.