Wait what? "Intelligent testing" is not "AI-assisted testing"

(Kate) #1

When I took a look at a post claiming that the “era of intelligent testing is challenging the norms of QA” I figured I’d get something potentially interesting about AI-assisted testing and how it could impact the field.

Oh no… I’m not quite sure how it happened, but somehow Angie Jones’ article in Testing Trapeze about some of the challenges she encountered while writing test automation for a specific AI product got referenced as an example of “intelligent testing” - which the author describes as

the combination of machine learning and AI-enabled analytics, and continuous feedback that helps testing teams to predict outcomes and reduces time to market of software projects/products.

Um. I’ve got to say I’m not exactly happy with this notion. Does it mean those of us using exploratory techniques are using “dumb testing”? Or is traditional test automation now “dumb testing”? Sorry, author, but we’re all performing “intelligent testing” when we’re thinking about what we need to investigate, why we’re doing it and how we’re going to approach it. It doesn’t matter what tools we’re using, at least not in terms of whether we’re approaching the testing tasks intelligently or not.

I’d better stop here, lest I move from snarky to sarcastic (I’m told the next step is “poisonous” or possibly “scathing”).