Pillar 1

Intelligent Automation Architecture

Self-healing test automation, LLM-based test generation, and an AI governance rail that lets every model call be audited. Papers D & E.

Pillar 2

Predictive Analytics for Software Quality

Process-metric-based defect prediction at scale; cross-repository transfer; honest feature-importance analysis under the corrected dataset. Papers A & B.

Pillar 3

Research-to-Production Translation

Risk-based prioritisation deployed as a real microservice on real CI/CD; empirical study of post-execution defect attribution (under review at Springer EMSE). Papers C & F.

Research questions driving the program

The questions are deliberately narrow and falsifiable; nothing on this page is speculative.

RQ1

How predictive are process metrics at scale?

Answered in Paper A: six classifiers, 296,457 instances, RF AUC 0.8998. The corrected file_age_days changes signal distribution; commit_frequency jumps from near-zero contributor to a meaningful secondary signal.

RQ2

Do those models transfer across projects?

Answered in Paper B: yes, with caveats. Cross AUC 0.867, cross F1 0.631, and an AUC–F1 asymmetry that practitioners must account for when using the model for ranking versus binary classification.

RQ3

Does prediction translate to operational lift?

Answered in Paper C: top 10% of files capture 43.82% of defects — a 4.37× risk-vs-random lift and 81.4% of the oracle ceiling at the 18.61% base defect rate.

RQ4

Can locator failures be auto-recovered?

Addressed in Paper D: tree-ensemble ranking over eight DOM feature families across 2,400 mutation events. Confidence gating decides auto-heal vs. flag-for-review.

RQ5

Can LLMs replace manual test authoring?

Addressed in Paper E: 312 reqs / 3 domains, 68% effort reduction, 94.1% req coverage, 96.3% first-pass verification — with deterministic rule verification as a non-LLM safety net.

RQ6

Can we attribute failures, not just predict them?

Addressed in Paper F: an empirical comparison of four post-execution attribution methods on 6,000 synthetic failure events, fusing dynamic failure signals with repository priors to produce triage suggestions instead of ranked file lists.