How is the product different from the other test generation tools? How do you check if the are testing the intended behavior. My experience with automated testing solutions has been lukewarm so far.
I agree! My experience with test generation tools was also lukewarm which is why we founded Checksum.
> How is the product different from the other test generation tools
We train our models based on real user sessions. So our tests are:
1. Completely auto-generated
2. Achieve high coverage of real user flows, including detecting edge cases
3. Automatically maintained and execute with our models so they are less flakey.
> How do you check if the are testing the intended behavior
Our models are trained on many real sessions so it learns how your website (and others) should behave. In that sense, it's similar to a manual QA tester which can detect bugs. To supplement for functionality that is not obvious by the UI, we are now looking at adding LLMs to parse code, but most of the functionality can be inferred from the UI
So you are saying that your system needs me to do all the testing (it is infeasible to watch our users, because we test the product before it is released to any users) so it can learn how to test?
How can it know, by watching my clicks, how I decide if the behavior is correct on the backend?
> How is the product different from the other test generation tools
We train our models based on real user sessions. So our tests are: 1. Completely auto-generated 2. Achieve high coverage of real user flows, including detecting edge cases 3. Automatically maintained and execute with our models so they are less flakey.
> How do you check if the are testing the intended behavior
Our models are trained on many real sessions so it learns how your website (and others) should behave. In that sense, it's similar to a manual QA tester which can detect bugs. To supplement for functionality that is not obvious by the UI, we are now looking at adding LLMs to parse code, but most of the functionality can be inferred from the UI