Software Testing Status Indicators via Segmented Data Visualization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current software testing methods lack effective tools for evaluating and presenting comprehensive project status indicators, such as test execution rates and defect prediction, which are crucial for project management and completion timelines.

Innovation Solution

A distributed computer system that collects and processes raw data from software testing projects to determine and visually present various project status indicators, including required test execution rates, schedule variances, and estimated defect numbers, using data visualization tools and a defect prediction function.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If comprehensive project status indicators are implemented, then project management quality is improved, but system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproject management qualityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments project status evaluation into multiple independent indicators including test execution rate, defect detection rate, schedule variance, and resource utilization. Each indicator is calculated and presented separately, allowing comprehensive project assessment without creating a monolithic complex system. This segmentation enables modular implementation and easier maintenance of the evaluation framework.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Measurement precision

If multiple project status indicators are tracked, then project assessment accuracy is improved, but data processing requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproject assessment accuracyVSAvoiddata processing requirements
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSQuantity of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent combines multiple data sources including test execution data, defect management data, schedule information, and resource tracking into a unified project status evaluation system. By merging these diverse data types through integrated processing, the system achieves comprehensive and accurate project assessment while avoiding the need for separate processing systems for each indicator type.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #5Merging (Combining)

Solution Approach 2:

The evaluation system is designed with multi-functional capabilities to handle various types of project data through a single processing framework. The system can simultaneously calculate test execution rates, defect detection rates, schedule variances, and resource utilization using universal processing logic, reducing overall data processing requirements compared to specialized systems for each indicator.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

3Productivity

If real-time project monitoring is implemented, then project control capability is improved, but computational load increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveproject control capabilityVSAvoidcomputational load
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements periodic calculation of project status indicators at defined intervals such as daily, weekly, or at milestone completions rather than continuous real-time computation. This periodic action maintains effective project control capability while significantly reducing computational load compared to continuous monitoring, as the system only processes and updates indicators when new significant data becomes available or at scheduled review points.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Data Source

PatentUS10901875B2Evaluating and presenting software testing project status indicators
Publication Date: 2021.01.26 TEACHERS INSURANCE & ANNUITY ASSOC OF AMERICA
  • US10901875B2 patent drawing
  • US10901875B2 patent drawing
  • US10901875B2 patent drawing

AI summary

Systems and methods for evaluating and presenting software testing project status indicators. An example method may comprise: determining, by a computer system, a plurality of project status indicators comprising one or more average test execution rates, a required test execution rate, a test execution schedule variance, an actual test completion ratio, and/or a test completion schedule variance; and causing one or more project status indicators to be displayed in a visual relation to each other, to a timeline, and/or to another project's status indicators.