Multi-Objective Explainable AI for Risk-Aware Test Selection in Multi-Layer Continuous Integration Systems

Continuous Integration (CI) pipelines for multi-layer software systems face a tension between validation completeness and execution efficiency. Regression test selection and learned prioritization address this tension but typically operate as black boxes, offering no interpretable justification for their decisions. This paper introduces MOX, a preliminary decision-support framework for risk-aware test selection that jointly optimizes four objectives: execution cost, fault-detection impact, affected-test coverage, and a proposed explainability score, formalized as a first-class, numerically optimizable objective (a structural traceability proxy, not a validated measure of human interpretability) and traded off within a Pareto-based selection mechanism governed by a configurable impact budget. We evaluate MOX retrospectively on two public industrial CI datasets from ABB, iofrol (1941 tests, 320 cycles) and paintcontrol (89 tests, 352 cycles), containing execution logs of integration-level regression tests for industrial robot software. No new tests are developed or executed: selections are replayed per historical cycle against the recorded pass/fail verdicts. Because the logs contain no code changes, each cycle’s change event is inferred from its failing tests, so detection figures must be read as retrospective retention of failed tests under a selection budget, not prospective fault detection. Under this protocol MOX retains 96.7% (iofrol) and 98.2% (paintcontrol) of recorded failures at 53.9–57.5% of full-suite cost over the evaluated failure-containing cycles and raises the Average Percentage of Faults Detected (APFD) from 0.507 to 0.626 and from 0.596 to 0.815; paired Wilcoxon tests are highly significant (p<10−13), with MOX ordering the recorded failures earlier than the informative prioritizing baselines, including the input-matched single-objective analogue, in roughly 70–80% of cycles. Within the protocol, an objective-removal ablation associates the ordering gains with the explainability objective, and the cheapest configurations also score highest on the proposed traceability measure.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Electronics
Published
2026-08-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics15173854
Primary Topic
Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Multi-Objective Explainable AI for Risk-Aware Test Selection in Multi-Layer Continuous Integration Systems

Alexandra Vultureanu‐Albişi, Nicolae Tapus, Mircea Bădoi, Alexandra Barcan
Electronics
Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
article

Multi-Objective Explainable AI for Risk-Aware Test Selection in Multi-Layer Continuous Integration Systems

Alexandra Vultureanu‐Albişi, Nicolae Tapus, Mircea Bădoi, Alexandra Barcan
article en

Abstract

Continuous Integration (CI) pipelines for multi-layer software systems face a tension between validation completeness and execution efficiency. Regression test selection and learned prioritization address this tension but typically operate as black boxes, offering no interpretable justification for their decisions. This paper introduces MOX, a preliminary decision-support framework for risk-aware test selection that jointly optimizes four objectives: execution cost, fault-detection impact, affected-test coverage, and a proposed explainability score, formalized as a first-class, numerically optimizable objective (a structural traceability proxy, not a validated measure of human interpretability) and traded off within a Pareto-based selection mechanism governed by a configurable impact budget. We evaluate MOX retrospectively on two public industrial CI datasets from ABB, iofrol (1941 tests, 320 cycles) and paintcontrol (89 tests, 352 cycles), containing execution logs of integration-level regression tests for industrial robot software. No new tests are developed or executed: selections are replayed per historical cycle against the recorded pass/fail verdicts. Because the logs contain no code changes, each cycle’s change event is inferred from its failing tests, so detection figures must be read as retrospective retention of failed tests under a selection budget, not prospective fault detection. Under this protocol MOX retains 96.7% (iofrol) and 98.2% (paintcontrol) of recorded failures at 53.9–57.5% of full-suite cost over the evaluated failure-containing cycles and raises the Average Percentage of Faults Detected (APFD) from 0.507 to 0.626 and from 0.596 to 0.815; paired Wilcoxon tests are highly significant (p<10−13), with MOX ordering the recorded failures earlier than the informative prioritizing baselines, including the input-matched single-objective analogue, in roughly 70–80% of cycles. Within the protocol, an objective-removal ablation associates the ordering gains with the explainability objective, and the cheapest configurations also score highest on the proposed traceability measure.

ElectronicsVol. 15(17)
Universitatea Națională de Știință și Tehnologie Politehnica București (RO), University of Craiova (RO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Software Testing and Debugging Techniques
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.