IP Library Granted Patent US 12,271,291
Granted Patent B1
US 12,271,291 · App. 18/061,153 · Granted Apr 8, 2025

Test coverage for workflows

Inventors: Azita Asefi (Vacaville, CA); David A. Friedlander (Petaluma, CA); Timothy O'Donoghue (Charlotte, NC)
Assignee: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
G06F11/3676G06F11/3688
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,271,291
App. No.
18/061,153
Granted
Apr 8, 2025
Kind
B1
Abstract

An example computer system for managing test coverage for a workflow can include: one or more processors; and non-transitory computer-readable storage media encoding instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the computer system to create: a workflow execution engine programmed to execute the workflow, including a plurality activities, using a test case; an activity identification engine programmed to identify each time one of the plurality of activities is invoked by the workflow using the test case; and a test coverage engine programmed to determine the test coverage for the workflow based upon identification by the activity identification engine of the plurality of activities invoked by the workflow.

Claims (23)

1. A computer system for managing test coverage for a workflow, comprising:

one or more processors; and

non-transitory computer-readable storage media encoding instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the computer system to create:

a workflow execution engine programmed to execute the workflow, including a plurality of activities, using a test case;

an activity identification engine programmed to identify each time one of the plurality of activities is invoked by the workflow using the test case by capturing a global unique identifier associated with each invocation; and

a test coverage engine programmed to:

determine the test coverage for the workflow based upon identification by the activity identification engine of the plurality of activities invoked by the workflow using the global unique identifier associated with each invocation;

determine a frequency of invocation of each of the plurality of activities over a specified time period; and

identify redundant testing of activities based upon the frequency of invocation of the plurality of activities over the specified time period as compared to other time periods.

2. The computer system of claim 1 , comprising further instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the computer system to execute the workflow using multiple test cases.

3. The computer system of claim 1 , wherein the test coverage is a percentage of the plurality of activities that are invoked for the test case.

4. The computer system of claim 1 , comprising further instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, causes the computer system to create a test modification engine programmed to modify the test case to optimize the test coverage.

5. The computer system of claim 4 , wherein the test case is modified by the test modification engine to: invoke a greater number of the plurality of activities; or reduce redundancy of invocation of the plurality of activities.

6. A method for managing test coverage for a workflow, comprising:

executing the workflow, including a plurality of activities, using a test case;

identifying each time one of the plurality of activities is invoked by the workflow using the test case by capturing a global unique identifier associated with each invocation;

determining the test coverage for the workflow based upon identification of the plurality of activities invoked by the workflow using the global unique identifier associated with each invocation;

determining a frequency of invocation of each of the plurality of activities over a specified time period; and

identifying redundant testing of activities based upon the frequency of invocation of the plurality of activities over the specified time period as compared to other time periods.

7. The method of claim 6 , further comprising executing the workflow using multiple test cases.

8. The method of claim 6 , wherein the test coverage is a percentage of the plurality of activities that are invoked for the test case.

9. The method of claim 6 , further comprising creating a test modification engine programmed to modify the test case to optimize the test coverage.

10. The method of claim 9 , wherein the test case is modified by the test modification engine to: invoke a greater number of the plurality of activities; or reduce redundancy of invocation of the plurality of activities.

Assignments (2)
STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF ASSIGNEE Recorded Jun 17, 2025
From: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
To: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 071679/0784 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jan 13, 2023
From: ASEFI, AZITA; FRIEDLANDER, DAVID A.; O'DONOGHUE, TIMOTHY
To: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 062370/0339 →
References Cited (39)
US 7739325B1 · Okita · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 7840857B2 · Breiter · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 8527327B1 · Lawrence · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 9946983B1 · Shashi · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 9990274B2 · Shufer et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10114737B2 · Ramakrishna et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10282281B2 · Mallya · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10394532B2 · Bar-Or et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10896035B1 · Abdulhayoglu · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11100075B2 · Maloy et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11163544B2 · Lee · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11240344B2 · Swope et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11275754B2 · Wilson et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11334472B2 · Elges et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11593740B1 · Chan · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20050228683A1 · Saylor · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20050288956A1 · Speicher · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20060005140A1 · Crew · 2006 [cited by examiner]
US 20080313281A1 · Scheidl · 2008 [cited by examiner]
US 20100123930A1 · Tomizawa · 2010 [cited by examiner]
US 20120005659A1 · Bonanno · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20140165043A1 · Pasala · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20150286555A1 · Neravati · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20200201689A1 · Laethem · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210042215A1 · Edwards et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210141616A1 · Kane · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210263833A1 · Reisner et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220164279A1 · Stocker · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20220179834A1 · Rachniowski et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20230236910A1 · Marinovici · 2023 [cited by examiner]
US 20240177092A1 · Kushwah · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20240312559A1 · Woodley · 2024 [cited by examiner]
CN 114490379A · 2022 [cited by examiner]
CN 114647495A · 2022 [cited by examiner]
EP 3901865A1 · 2021 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2018050243A1 · 2018 [cited by examiner]
WO 2021225881A1 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
Faezeh Khorram, Jean-Marie Mottu, Gerson Sunye, Challenges & opportunities in low-code testing, MODELS '20: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems: Co… [cited by applicant]
Nicolas Kicillof, Wolfgang Grieskamp, Nikolai Tillmann, Victor Braberman, Achieving both model and code coverage with automated gray-box testing, A-MOST '07: Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Advances in … [cited by applicant]