MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098933948 · doi:10.1109/icstw.2010.35

Supporting Test-Driven Development of Graphical User Interfaces Using Agile Interaction Design

2010· article· en· W2098933948 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware Testing and Debugging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGraphical user interfaceGraphical user interface testingAgile software developmentScripting languageHuman–computer interactionTest (biology)User interfaceTest scriptTest-driven developmentSoftware engineeringTest Management ApproachFidelityProgramming languageTest caseUser interface designSoftware developmentSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Test-driven development of GUIs is currently very difficult. On the one hand, to avoid frequent updates of the tests, test-driven development requires a degree of stability in the application under development, whereas GUIs are very likely to change during development. On the other hand, the easiest way of creating GUI tests - using a capture/replay tool - requires the GUI to exist. This paper introduces a new approach to user-interface test-driven development, wherein a capture-replay tool is used to record test scripts from low-fidelity prototypes. This allows GUI tests to be written simply and without requiring that the GUI exist first.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoftware Testing and Debugging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207