AI-Driven Decision Intelligence for Agile Software Lifecycle Governance: An Architecture-Centered Framework Integrating Machine Learning Defect Prediction and Automated Testing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9246.IJETCSIT-V4I4P118Keywords:
Decision Intelligence, Agile Software Governance, Machine Learning Defect Prediction, Automated Software Testing, Architecture-Centered Frameworks, AI-Driven Software Lifecycle, Microservices Architecture, Risk-Driven Testing, Software Reliability Engineering, Intelligent DevopsAbstract
Agile enterprise software teams are expected to deliver new functionality rapidly while maintaining high reliability and compliance. Traditional governance practices struggle to keep pace with the volume and complexity of decisions that must be taken across modern microservice-based systems. Prior work introduced a decision-intelligence methodology for AI-driven agile lifecycle governance and architecture-centered project management [1]. Another study discussed how machine-learning models are becoming pervasive artefacts across the software development lifecycle [15]. Reliability implications of automated testing frameworks in Java enterprise systems have also been examined [16]. Building on these foundations, this paper proposes a Decision-Intelligent Agile Governance Framework (DI-AGF) that integrates decision intelligence with machine-learning-based software defect prediction and automated testing. DI-AGF organizes the lifecycle into four layers: (i) observability and data engineering, (ii) analytics and machine learning, (iii) decision intelligence and policy, and (iv) execution and feedback. Governance decisions such as release readiness, test scope selection, and technical-debt remediation are treated as explicit decision assets that consume defect risk scores, architectural criticality metrics, and test evidence. The paper describes the architectural structure of DI-AGF, outlines how ML defect prediction and automated testing are orchestrated in a risk-driven manner, and illustrates the framework in the context of a Java microservices platform. An evaluation strategy and research agenda are also proposed. The contribution is a consolidated, architecture-centered reference model for operationalizing decision intelligence in agile software governance.
References
[1] Gunda SK, Yettapu SDR, Bodakunti S, Bikki SB. Decision Intelligence Methodology for AI-Driven Agile Software Lifecycle Governance and Architecture-Centered Project Management. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Data Science in Machine Learning, 4(1), 102–108, 2023. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9262.IJAIDSML-V4I1P112
[2] Omri S, Sinz C. Deep Learning for Software Defect Prediction: A Survey. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops, 2020, pp. 209–214. https://doi.org/10.1145/3387940.3391463
[3] Akimova EN, Bersenev AY, Deikov AA, Kobylkin KS, Konygin AV, Mezentsev IP, Misilov VE. A Survey on Software Defect Prediction Using Deep Learning. Mathematics, 9(11):1180, 2021. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9111180
[4] Pandey S, Kumar K. Software Fault Prediction for Imbalanced Data: A Survey on Recent Developments. Procedia Computer Science, 218, 1815–1824, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2023.01.159
[5] Gudi SR. Enhancing Reliability in Java Enterprise Systems through Comparative Analysis of Automated Testing Frameworks. International Journal of Emerging Trends in Computer Science and Information Technology, 4(2), 151–160, 2023. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9246.IJETCSIT-V4I2P115
[6] Stradowski S, et al. Machine Learning in Software Defect Prediction: A Business Perspective. Information and Software Technology, 2023.
[7] Nagabushanam D.S., Dharinya S., Vijayasree D., Roopa N.S., Arun A. A Review on the Process of Automated Software Testing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.03069, 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2209.03069
[8] Umar MA, Chen Z. A Study of Automated Software Testing: Automation Tools and Frameworks. International Journal of Computer Science Engineering, 8(6), 217–225, 2019. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3924795
[9] Gamido HV, Gamido MV. Comparative Review of the Features of Automated Software Testing Tools. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 9(5), 4473–4478, 2019. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v9i5.pp4473-4478
[10] Anjum H, Babar MI, Jehanzeb M, Khan M, Chaudhry S, Sultana S, Shahid Z, Zeshan F, Bhatti SN. A Comparative Analysis of Quality Assurance of Mobile Applications Using Automated Testing Tools. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 8(7), 2017. https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2017.080733
[11] Bae GH, Kim JK, Park SH. A Machine Learning-Based Decision Support System for Project Management. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 51(2), 814–823, 2021.
[12] Chan AH, Yang LH, Ho TT. Predictive Analytics in Project Management: An AI-Driven Approach. IEEE Access, 9, 1332–1343, 2021.
[13] Thota S, et al. AI-Assisted Project Management: Enhancing Decision-Making and Forecasting. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 3, 146–171, 2023.
[14] Gunda SKG. The Future of Software Development and the Expanding Role of ML Models. International Journal of Emerging Research in Engineering and Technology, 4(2), 126–129, 2023. https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-922X.IJERET-V4I2P113
[15] Marianne O. Decision Intelligence: Why It Is a Life-Mattering Skill and How We Can Make Better Decisions. DataDrivenInvestor, 2023.
