6.0 KiB
Test Strategy: 6-Iteration Standard Convergence
Experiment: bootstrap-002-test-strategy Iterations: 6 (standard convergence) Time: 25.5 hours Result: V_instance=0.85, V_meta=0.82 ✅
Comparison case showing why standard convergence took longer.
Why Standard Convergence (Not Rapid)
Criteria Assessment
1. Clear Baseline Metrics ❌
- Coverage: 72.1% (but no patterns documented)
- No systematic test approach
- Fuzzy success criteria
- V_meta(s₀) = 0.04
2. Focused Domain ❌
- "Develop test strategy" (too broad)
- What tests? Which patterns? How much coverage?
- Required scoping work
3. Direct Validation ❌
- Multi-context validation needed (3 archetypes)
- Cross-language testing
- Deployment overhead: 6-8 hours
4. Generic Agents ❌
- Needed specialization:
- coverage-analyzer (30x speedup)
- test-generator (10x speedup)
- Added 1-2 iterations
5. Early Automation ✅
- Coverage tools obvious
- But implementation gradual
Prediction: 4 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 0 = 10 iterations Actual: 6 iterations (efficient execution beat prediction)
Iteration Timeline
Iteration 0: Minimal Baseline (60 min)
Activities:
- Ran coverage: 72.1%
- Counted tests: 590
- Wrote 3 ad-hoc tests
- Noted duplication
V_meta(s₀):
Completeness: 0/8 = 0.00 (no patterns yet)
Transferability: 0/8 = 0.00 (no research)
Automation: 0/3 = 0.00 (ideas only)
V_meta(s₀) = 0.00 ❌
Issue: Weak baseline required more iterations
Iteration 1: Core Patterns (90 min)
Created 2 patterns:
- Table-Driven Tests (12 min per test)
- Error Path Testing (14 min per test)
Applied to 5 tests, coverage: 72.1% → 72.8% (+0.7%)
V_instance: 0.72 V_meta: 0.25 (2/8 patterns)
Iteration 2: Expand & First Tool (90 min)
Added 3 patterns: 3. CLI Command Testing 4. Integration Tests 5. Test Helpers
Built coverage-analyzer script (30x speedup)
Coverage: 72.8% → 73.5% (+0.7%)
V_instance: 0.76 V_meta: 0.42 (5/8 patterns, 1 tool)
Iteration 3: CLI Focus (75 min)
Added 2 patterns: 6. Global Flag Testing 7. Fixture Patterns
Applied to CLI tests, coverage: 73.5% → 74.8% (+1.3%)
V_instance: 0.81 ✅ (exceeded target) V_meta: 0.61
Iteration 4: Meta-Layer Push (90 min)
Added final pattern: 8. Dependency Injection (Mocking)
Built test-generator (10x speedup)
Coverage: 74.8% → 75.2% (+0.4%)
V_instance: 0.82 ✅ V_meta: 0.67
Iteration 5: Refinement (60 min)
Tested transferability (Python, Rust, TypeScript) Refined documentation
Coverage: 75.2% → 75.6% (+0.4%)
V_instance: 0.84 ✅ V_meta: 0.78 (close)
Iteration 6: Convergence (45 min)
Final polish, transferability guide
Coverage: 75.6% → 75.8% (+0.2%)
V_instance: 0.85 ✅ ✅ (2 consecutive ≥ 0.80) V_meta: 0.82 ✅ ✅ (2 consecutive ≥ 0.80)
CONVERGED ✅
Comparison: Standard vs Rapid
| Aspect | Bootstrap-002 (Standard) | Bootstrap-003 (Rapid) |
|---|---|---|
| V_meta(s₀) | 0.04 | 0.758 |
| Iteration 0 | 60 min (minimal) | 120 min (comprehensive) |
| Iterations | 6 | 3 |
| Total Time | 25.5h | 10h |
| Pattern Discovery | Incremental (1-3 per iteration) | Upfront (10 categories in iteration 0) |
| Automation | Gradual (iterations 2, 4) | Early (iteration 1, all 3 tools) |
| Validation | Multi-context (3 archetypes) | Retrospective (1336 errors) |
| Specialization | 2 agents needed | Generic sufficient |
Key Differences
1. Baseline Investment
Bootstrap-002: 60 min → V_meta(s₀) = 0.04
- Minimal analysis
- No pattern library
- No automation plan
Bootstrap-003: 120 min → V_meta(s₀) = 0.758
- Comprehensive analysis (ALL 1,336 errors)
- 10 categories documented
- 3 tools identified
Impact: +60 min investment saved 15.5 hours overall (26x ROI)
2. Pattern Discovery
Bootstrap-002: Incremental
- Iteration 1: 2 patterns
- Iteration 2: 3 patterns
- Iteration 3: 2 patterns
- Iteration 4: 1 pattern
- Total: 6 iterations to discover 8 patterns
Bootstrap-003: Upfront
- Iteration 0: 10 categories (79.1% coverage)
- Iteration 1: 12 categories (92.3% coverage)
- Iteration 2: 13 categories (95.4% coverage)
- Total: 3 iterations, most patterns identified early
3. Validation Overhead
Bootstrap-002: Multi-Context
- 3 project archetypes tested
- Cross-language validation
- Deployment + testing: 6-8 hours
- Added 2 iterations
Bootstrap-003: Retrospective
- 1,336 historical errors
- No deployment needed
- Validation: 45 min
- Added 0 iterations
Lessons: Could Bootstrap-002 Have Been Rapid?
Probably not - structural factors prevented rapid convergence:
- No existing data: No historical test metrics to analyze
- Broad domain: "Test strategy" required scoping
- Multi-context needed: Testing methodology varies by project type
- Specialization valuable: 10x+ speedup from specialized agents
However, could have been faster (4-5 iterations):
Alternative Approach:
-
Stronger iteration 0 (2-3 hours):
- Research industry test patterns (borrow 5-6)
- Analyze current codebase thoroughly
- Identify automation candidates upfront
- Target V_meta(s₀) = 0.30-0.40
-
Aggressive iteration 1:
- Implement 5-6 patterns immediately
- Build both tools (coverage-analyzer, test-generator)
- Target V_instance = 0.75+
-
Result: Likely 4-5 iterations (vs actual 6)
When Standard Is Appropriate
Bootstrap-002 demonstrates that not all methodologies can/should use rapid convergence:
Standard convergence makes sense when:
- Low V_meta(s₀) inevitable (no existing data)
- Domain requires exploration (patterns not obvious)
- Multi-context validation necessary (transferability critical)
- Specialization provides >10x value (worth investment)
Key insight: Use prediction model to set realistic expectations, not force rapid convergence.
Status: ✅ Production-ready, both approaches valid Takeaway: Rapid convergence is situational, not universal