This disclosure relates generally to system and method of automating error checking for a software application, and more particularly for a software application configured to operate on a portable computing system, such as a smart phone.
Application development has become a major industry worldwide. The industry has grown as the demand for portable phones, has increased. Today, more and more applications are being written at a faster and faster pace as developers try to fill the demand.
One major cost to application developers includes costs associated with staffing of sufficient programmers to provide adequate error and bug checking. Further, when testing code executing on phones, an additional cost includes the cost of purchasing sufficient variety of phone models to ensure Mot free code for most end users. This is a particular problem for developers because of the great plurality of phones and operating system versions that have been released. Designing an application to run on all platforms requires significant error checking. Releasing an application with too many errors often can be disastrous for company. In response to the needs of the developers, many companies offer manual error and bug testing services for application developer companies. These companies hire programmers to apply series of test protocols in order to discover errors or bugs in the application and to report a bug to the developers. While the error testing firms are able to reduce the staffing costs of the application developers, such companies typically charge hourly rates for software testing, so the costs associated with error testing remain high.
In the following description, the use of the same reference numerals in different drawings indicates similar or identical items.
Embodiments of systems and methods are disclosed below that provide an automated and/or remote error testing for application software intended for a plurality of devices and operating systems. The system is configured such that the application may be added or uploaded to an application source. A test system is able to access the application, install the application on to one or more devices, provide a data stream including at least one command to the application, and record test and error records as the application executes the data stream. The test system is configured to install the application on the one or more devices and execute new sequences of random commands. Each time an error occurs; the test system logs the error and attempts to reproduce the error under the same conditions, before trying to reproduce the error on other types of devices and operating systems connected to the test system. An example of a software application testing system is described below with respect to
Application source 106 may be a database, a code repository system (such as the Kiln® or FogBugz® systems commercially available through www.fogcreek.com), a user interface, a website, or other system for receiving and storing applications. Application source 106 may include code versioning or other application tracking features.
In one example, the application source 106 may be a memory in test system 102. In one embodiment, test system 102 accesses application source 106 to see if any applications have been uploaded, or if any changes to existing applications have been uploaded for error testing. If test system 102 finds an application ready for testing in application source 106 it downloads the application through network 104. Test system 102 selects one of the portable devices 120 and clears the memory before installing the application on the portable device 120. Test system 102 may select the portable device 120 based on a random selection algorithm, by checking the availability of the plurality of the portable devices, or by selecting a portable device on which the application has not previously been tested.
Once the application has been installed, test system 102 generates a random data stream including at least one command, and provides the data stream to the application. While the application executes the command, test system 102 monitors the execution of the application and the state of the portable device to generate a test record. The test record may include the data stream, the device make and manufacture, the operating system name and version, the start and end state of the portable device, any error including error messages, and the results produced by the application after processing the data stream. Test system 102 then stores the test record in a log which is made available to the user directly through the test system 102, the application source 106, or email.
In an embodiment, test system 102 is a client system and application source 106 is a web interface or website accessible by a user for the uploading, testing, versioning, and tracking of software application code. Application source 106 is configured to provide the applications uploaded by a user to test system 102 which preforms the error testing. In this way system 100 is able to provide a software application testing service over the internet or other networks. In another embodiment, test system 102 may be an executable file that may be run to install the test system program on a user computer. In this embodiment, application source 106 may a memory location on the user computer or provided as a remote database which the test system program is able to access through a network. Thus, test system 102 may be sold as software program or a software program bundled with code versioning and backup services.
Error log 206 includes error records generated by test system 102 while running an application on at least one of the plurality of portable devices 120. Test log 208 includes test records that resulted from running a series data streams on the plurality of portable devices. It should be understood that error log 206 and test log 208 may be a single combined log.
Instructions 204, when executed by processor 210, and cause processor 210 to fetch an application from application source 106, select one of portable device 120 coupled to input/output interface 220, and install the application on the selected portable device. Instructions 204 further cause processor 210 to initiate execution of the application on the selected portable device 120, generate a random data stream including at least one command, and provide the data stream to the selected portable device through the input/output interface 220. In-addition to the at least one command, the data stream may also include additional commands, instructions, random data, and/or memory addresses. In one example, the data stream is generated randomly. In another example, the data stream is predetermined by a user.
Instructions 204 further cause processor 210 to monitor the execution of the application as it processes the data stream. Instructions 204 also cause processor 210 to generate a test record including the device make and manufacture information, operating system information including version, start and end state of portable device 120, any error with messages that may have occurred, and the results. Processor 210 then stores the test record as an entry in test log 208. If an error occurred, instructions 204 further cause processor 210 to generate an error record including the data stream, the error, and the make, model, and operating system version and store such data in error log 206 in addition to recording the test record in test log 208.
In one embodiment, after the error record is entered in error log 206, instructions 204 cause processor 210 to uninstall the application from the selected portable device 120 returning to a clean state. Thus, processor 210 re-installs the application and provides the application the same data stream that caused the error. If the error occurs once again, then processor 210 marks the error as repeatable in the error record. By placing the portable device 120 into a clean state before running every test, test system 102 is able to ensure that the every error detected is actually caused by the application responding to the data stream and not because of the effects of previous test. It should be understood, that test system 102 when returning the portable device 120 to a clean state may return the device all the way back to the manufacturing settings. It should also be understood, that test system 102 may place portable device 120 in a clean state between tests even if an error did not occur.
If the error does not occur once again, than test system 102 may do several things. In one example, processor 210 uninstall the application from the selected portable device 120 returning to a clean state, installs the application, launches the application, provides the application the data stream, and monitors the application. This provides verification that there were no anomalies in during the second attempt. In another example, processor 210 may run the test on another of the portable devices 120 identical to the selected portable device 120 to confirm that there is not a hardware issue.
In another embodiment, after the error record is entered in error log 206, instructions 204 cause processor 210 to select a second portable device 120 of different make, manufacture, or operating system version than the previously selected portable device 120. Processor 210 then clears the memory of the second device, installs the application, and provides the application the same data stream that caused the error. If the error occurs again on the second device then processor 210 marks the error as repeatable and the additional make, model, or operating system version of the second device in the error record.
After the error record is recorded in error log 206 proceeds to 318 and method 300 of
At 504, test system 102 selects one of the available portable devices as a second test device and proceeds to 506 where test system 102 clears memory and returns the second test device to a clean state. Advancing to 510, test system 102 installs and activates the application on the second test device and proceeds to 512 where test system 102 provides the same data stream that caused the error to the second test device. Advancing to 514, test system 102 monitors the second. test device to determine if the error re-occurs on the second test device. If the error does not occur, method 500 proceeds to 516 and test system 102 modifies the error record to indicate that the error does not occur on the make, model, and operating system of the second test device and method 500 returns to 302. However, if the error does occur, test system 102 modifies the error record to indicate that the error reoccurred on the make, model, and operating system of the second test device. Test system 102 may also include any differences that occurred in the state, error message, or result between the selected portable device and the second test device. After modifying the error record, method 500 returns to 502.
It should be understood that in one particular embodiment of method 300, method 300 in combination with method 400, or method 300 in combination with method 500 may be implemented as a continuous loop, such that at 318, 412 or 502 the methods may return to 302 and begin another test. In this embodiment, the method may be ended when a threshold number of errors have occurred, test system 102 has lost connection with all of the portable devices, a timer expires, or a user enters a command to end the testing.
Although the present invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments, workers skilled in the art will recognize that changes may be made in form and detail without departing from the scope of the invention.
This application is a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 13/708,522, filed Dec. 7, 2012 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,355,017), which is a non-provisional of and claims priority to Provisional Application No. 61/583,926 filed on Jan. 6, 2012 and entitled “AUTOMATED ERROR CHECKING SYSTEM FOR A SOFTWARE APPLICATION,” which are incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4947432 | Topholm | Aug 1990 | A |
4972487 | Mangold et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5721783 | Anderson | Feb 1998 | A |
6381604 | Caughran et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6741712 | Bisgaard et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
7080357 | Foster et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7334162 | Vakrat et al. | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7480907 | Marolia et al. | Jan 2009 | B1 |
7519194 | Niederdränk et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7594220 | Kodosky et al. | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7630708 | So et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7712083 | Coppert et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7735065 | Jain et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7933419 | Roeck et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8141043 | Jones et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8359580 | Gonzales et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8379871 | Michael et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8413118 | Kodosky et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8457335 | Imamura et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8516446 | Williams et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8526649 | Foo et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8566648 | Schroeder et al. | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8578338 | Nguyen et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8611570 | Neumeyer et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8620305 | Singh et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8621434 | Campion et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8649538 | Apfel et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8654999 | Mindlin et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8661411 | Agapi et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8683462 | Goldman et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8739125 | Petrovický et al. | May 2014 | B2 |
8761421 | Apfel et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8787603 | Fichtl et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8810392 | Teller et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
8826240 | Lachwani et al. | Sep 2014 | B1 |
9032371 | Hansson | May 2015 | B2 |
9191756 | Neumeyer et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9355017 | Neumeyer et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
20020143997 | Huang et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030008659 | Waters et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009740 | Lan | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030037316 | Kodosky et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030059076 | Martin et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030131285 | Beardsley et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030215105 | Sacha et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040059446 | Goldberg et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20050036637 | Janssen et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20060037002 | Vinberg et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060182294 | Grasbon et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060271915 | Stefik et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070064018 | Shoemaker et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070089091 | Larab et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070098195 | Holmes et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070234293 | Noller et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070255435 | Cohen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080052138 | Marsh et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080066080 | Campbell | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080127101 | Anafi et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080244532 | Arcese et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080288923 | Shimogori | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090328028 | O'Rourke et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100027822 | Dietz et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100146489 | Ortiz et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100255782 | Klemmensen et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100273452 | Rajann et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100299654 | Vaswani et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110029957 | Shufer et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110055815 | Squillace | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110185231 | Balestrieri et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110231936 | Williams | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120233235 | Allaire et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120266157 | Mun et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120317548 | Olsa et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130179858 | Mecke et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20150058826 | Hu et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2008071236 | Jun 2008 | WO |
2009001559 | Dec 2008 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Christain Murphy et al., Backstop: A Tool for Debugging Runtime Errors, 2008, ACM, retrieved on Dec. 10, 2001, pp. 173-177. Retrieved from the Internet: <URL: http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1360000/1352193/p173-murphy.pdf?>. |
“Good Practice Guidance for Adult Hearing Aid Fitting and Services,” prepared for International Society of Audiology, Nov. 2004, 8 pages. Exhibit 1012, Case IPR2017-00781. |
American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 5th edition, 2011, p. 1652. Exhibit 1011, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Aug. 16, 2013 Response to Jun. 4, 2013 Office Action in Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,611,570, 9 pages. Exhibit 1004, Case IPR2017-00367. |
Barron's Dictionary of Computer and Internet Terms, 11th edition, 2013, p. 457. Exhibit 1012, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Certified English language translation of German Patent Publication No. DE19542961, May 15, 1997, 16 pages. Exhibit 1009, Case IPR2017-00781. |
Certified English language translation of WIPO Patent Publication No. WO2009/001559 to Imamura et al., Dec. 31, 2008, 79 pages. Exhibit 1006, Case IPR2017-00367. |
Consumer Reports, “Hear Well in a Noisy World—features at a glance,” Jul. 2009, 2 pages. Exhibit 1009, Case IPR2017-00414. |
Declaration of Dr. Les Atlas, Exhibit 1008, Case IPR2017-00781 Jan. 26, 2017 145 pages. |
Declaration of Dr. Robert E. Morley, Jr., Exhibit 1002, Case IPR2017-00496. Dec. 21, 2016, 87 pages. |
Declaration of Dr. Robert K. Morrow, Exhibit 1003, Case IPR2017-00783. Jan. 27, 2017, 85 pages. Exhibit 1003, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Declaration of Dr. Sayfe Kiaei, Exhibit 1002, Case IPR2017-00367 Dec. 4, 2016, 102 pages. |
Declaration of Les Atlas PhD, Exhibit 1003, Case IPR2017-00414. Dec. 6, 2016, 111 pages. |
Dillon et al., “The trainable hearing aid: What will it do for clients and clinicians?” The Hearing Journal, vol. 59, No. 4, Apr. 2006, 6 pages. Exhibit 1014, Case IPR2017-00781. |
Jul. 10, 2013 Response to May 30, 2013 Office Action in Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,761,421, 13 pages. Exhibit 1008, Case IPR2017-00496. |
Kasoff, B., “A Closer Look: The Evolution of the Smart Phone,” Sep. 19, 2014, 2 pages. <blog.wipp.org/2014/09/a-closer-look-the-evolution-of/> Exhibit 1016, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Keidser, Gitte et al., “Variation in preferred gain with experience for hearing-aid users,” 2008, International Journal of Audiology 47:10, 621-635. Exhibit 1013, Case IPR2017-00781. |
Mar. 1, 2013 Response to Dec. 12, 2012 Office Action in Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,761,421, 22 pages. Exhibit 1006, Case IPR2017-00496. |
Martin, T., “The evolution of the smartphone,” Jul. 29, 2014, 20 pages. <pocketnow.com/2014/07/28/the-evolution-of-the-smartphone> Exhibit 1014, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Mukherjee, S., “Smartphone Evolution: From IBM Simon to Samsung Galaxy S3,” May 8, 2012, p. 3. <ibtimes.com/smartphone-evolution-ibm-simon-samsung-galaxy-s3-697340> Exhibit 1015, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,649,538 to Apfel et al., 166 pages; patent application filed Feb. 8, 2011. Exhibit 1002, Case IPR2017-00414. |
Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,654,999 to Mindlin et al., 194 pages; patent application filed Apr. 12, 2011. Exhibit 1002, Case IPR2017-00781. |
Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 9,191,756 to Neumeyer et al., 71 pages; patent application filed Dec. 7, 2012. Exhibit 1002, Case IPR2017-00783. |
Rodriguez, Gary P. et al. “Preferred Hearing Aid Response Characteristics Under Acoustic and Telecoil Coupling Conditions,” American Journal of Audiology55, Nov. 1993, 5 pages. Exhibit 1011, Case IPR2017-00414. |
Sager, I., “Before IPhone and Android Came Simon, the First Smartphone,” Jun. 29, 2012, 3 pages. <bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-06-29/before-iphone-and-android-came-simon-the-first-smartphone> Exhibit 1013, Case IPR2017-00783. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, dated Dec. 12, 2012 Office Action from Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,761,421, 19 pages. Exhibit 1003, Case IPR2017-00496. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, dated Jun. 4, 2013 Office Action from Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,611,570, 6 pages. Exhibit 1003, Case IPR2017-00367. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, dated May 30, 2013 Office Action from Prosecution History of U.S. Pat. No. 8,761,421, 19 pages. Exhibit 1007, Case IPR2017-00496. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, K/S HIMPP v. III Holdings 4, LLC, Case IPR2017-00367 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,611,570), Petition for Inter Partes Review, dated Dec. 6, 2016, 81 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, K/S HIMPP v. III Holdings 4, LLC, Case IPR2017-00414 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,649,538), Petition for Inter Partes Review, dated Dec. 6, 2016, 84 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, K/S HIMPP v. III Holdings 4, LLC, Case IPR2017-00496 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,761,421), Petition for Inter Partes Review, dated Dec. 21, 2016, 91 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, K/S HIMPP v. III Holdings 4, LLC, Case IPR2017-00781 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,654,999), Petition for Inter Partes Review of claims 1-9 and 16-19, dated Jan. 27, 2017, 69 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, K/S HIMPP v. III Holdings 4, LLC, Case IPR2017-00782 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,654,999), Petition for Inter Partes Review of claims 10-15 and 20, dated Jan. 27, 2017, 56 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, K/S HIMPP v. III Holdings 4, LLC, Case IPR2017-00783 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,191,756), Petition for Inter Partes Review, dated Jan. 27, 2017, 79 pages. |
Valente, Michael, “Guideline for Audiologic Management of the Adult Patient,” Audiology Online 2016, Oct. 30, 2006, 8 pages. Exhibit 1011, Case IPR2017-00781. |
Widrow, Bernard et al. “Microphone Arrays for Hearing Aids: An Overview,” Journal of Speech Communication, Jan. 2003, pp. 139-146. Exhibit 1010, Case IPR2017-00414. |
Bhattacharya, et al., “An Empirical Analysis of Bug Reports and Bug Fixing in Open Source android Apps”; 2013 IEEE; [retrieved on Jan. 13, 2016]; Retrieved from Internet <URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6498462>; pp. 113-143. |
Choudhary, et al., “WEBDIFF: Automated Identification of Cross-browser Issues in Web Applications”; 2010 IEEEE; [retrieved on Jan. 13, 2016]; Retrieved from Internet <URL: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5609723>; pp. 1-10. |
Liu, Han, “Failure Proximity: A Fault Localization-Based Approach”; 2006 ACM; [retrieved on Jan. 13, 2016]; Retrieved from Internet <URL: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1181782&CFID=575059846&CFTOKEN=30592802>; pp. 46-56. |
Runeson, et al., “Detection of Duplicate Defect Reports Using Natural Language Processing”; 2007 ACM; [retrieved on Jan. 13, 2016]; Retrieved from Internet <URL: http://dl.acm/org/citation.cfm?id= 1248882&CFI D=575059846&CFTOKEN=30592802>; p. 1-10. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160306737 A1 | Oct 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61583926 | Jan 2012 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13708522 | Dec 2012 | US |
Child | 15134308 | US |