MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7162431690 · doi:10.65521/ijeecs.v14i2.2103

A Systematic Review of Combinatorial Testing Strategies for Cross-Border E-Commerce Platforms: Methods, Architectures, and Future Research Directions

2025· article· W7162431690 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

VenueInternational Journal of Electrical Electronics and Computer Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicE-commerce and Technology Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorrectnessIntegration testingTest strategyPairwise comparisonModel-based testingPaymentTest (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-border e-commerce platforms have significantly transformed global trade by enabling seamless transactions between buyers and sellers across diverse geographical regions. These platforms operate in complex environments characterized by varied user preferences, multiple payment gateways, diverse regulatory requirements, and multilingual interfaces, making reliability, scalability, and correctness critical challenges. Combinatorial testing has emerged as an effective approach to systematically evaluate interactions among multiple input parameters, reducing testing effort while maintaining high fault detection capability. This review examines combinatorial testing strategies applied to cross-border e-commerce systems, focusing on testing methods, architectural considerations, and emerging research trends. Techniques such as pairwise testing, t-way testing, constraint-based testing, and adaptive combinatorial testing are analyzed alongside modern architectures including microservices, cloud-based infrastructures, and distributed systems. The study highlights trends such as the integration of artificial intelligence, automated test generation, and optimization methods for large-scale applications. Despite its advantages, challenges related to handling complex constraints, scalability, and real-time testing persist. The findings underscore the need for hybrid testing strategies, enhanced tool support, and the incorporation of machine learning techniques to improve testing efficiency, with future directions emphasizing intelligent and adaptive testing frameworks.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.379 · 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