Test portfolio optimization system

• US 8,458,013 B2
• Filed: 04/12/2011
• Issued: 06/04/2013
• Est. Priority Date: 04/12/2011
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Bank of America Corp.
• Original Assignee: Bank of America Corp.
• Inventors: Kern, Daniel C.
• Primary Examiner(s): MARCUS, LELAND R
• Application Number:
  US13/085,116
• Publication Number:
  US 20120265566A1
• Time in Patent Office: 784 Days
• Field of Search: 705/7.38
• US Class Current: 705/7.38
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/04 Forecasting or optimisation specially adapted for administrative or management purposes, e.g. linear programming or "cutting stock problem" market predictions or forecasting for commercial activities G06Q30/0202
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/06 Asset management; Financial planning or analysis

Abstract

According to one example, a test portfolio optimization system includes a test repository, an activity repository, an exception repository, and an optimization engine. The optimization engine is operable to generate a plurality of test portfolios. Each test portfolio comprises different types of tests of a plurality of tests. The optimization engine is also operable to determine a test cost for each portfolio over the period of time. The test cost for each portfolio is equal to a sum of costs for each test type within the portfolio over the period of time. The optimization engine is also operable to determine an impact per portfolio period of time. The impact per portfolio is equal to a sum of impacts per test type for each test type over the period of time.

Claims

1. A test portfolio optimization system, comprising:

a non-transitory medium operable to store;

information identifying a plurality of tests associated with one or more policies that guide a enterprise'"'"'s performance of a activity, wherein each test comprises at least one test question that assesses the enterprise'"'"'s adherence to the policy;

information identifying an activity volume, wherein the activity volume represents a number of times the enterprise performs the activity; and

information identifying an impact per exception, wherein an exception is an event in which the enterprise'"'"'s performance of the activity fails to adhere to the policy, wherein the impact per exception is a number characterizing how one exception impacts the enterprise; and

an optimization engine comprising a processor communicatively coupled to the non-transitory medium, the optimization engine operable to;

generate a plurality of test portfolios, each test portfolio comprises different types of tests of the plurality of tests, each test type characterized by a sample size and a frequency, the frequency representing a number of times the test type is to be administered during a period of time;

determine a test cost for each portfolio over the period of time, the test cost for each portfolio is equal to a sum of costs for each test type within the portfolio over the period of time, the cost for each test type over the period of time is based on the sample size, cost to test each sample, and the frequency of the test type; and

determine an impact per portfolio over the period of time, the impact per portfolio representing an ability to reduce impact on the enterprise by identifying exceptions, the impact per portfolio is equal to a sum of impacts per test type for each test type over the period of time, the impact per test type over the period of time is based on the activity volume, the impact per exception, and an historical exception rate.

2. The system of claim 1, wherein the optimization engine is operable to generate the plurality of test portfolios by:

receiving a maximum exception impact for each test, the maximum exception impact comprising a numerical representation of a highest tolerable exception impact for each test over a second period of time;

defining the sample size for each test type such that the impact per test type is less than or equal to the maximum exception impact for the test corresponding to the test type; and

generating the plurality of test portfolios such that each test type is characterized by the defined sample size.

3. The system of claim 2, wherein the second period of time is less than the period of time.

4. The system of claim 2, wherein receiving the maximum exception impact for each test comprises:

receiving a maximum exception rate for each test, the maximum exception rate represents a highest tolerable percentage of exceptions per activity volume; and

determining the maximum exception impact for each test from the maximum exception rate for each test.

5. The system of claim 1, wherein the test cost is a test time representing the amount of time needed to administer a portfolio over the period of time, the system further comprising a selection tool operable to:

receive a maximum test time; and

receive a selection of a portfolio with the highest impact among the plurality of portfolios and with a test time less than or equal to the maximum test time.

6. The system of claim 1, wherein each test question presents an exclusive disjunction regarding whether the enterprise'"'"'s performance of the activity adheres to the internal policy.

7. The system of claim 1, wherein at least one portfolio comprises less test types than the number of the plurality of tests.

8. A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising logic for execution, the logic, when executed by a processor, operable to:

identify a plurality of tests associated with one or more policies that guide a enterprise'"'"'s performance of a activity, wherein each test comprises at least one test question that assesses the enterprise'"'"'s adherence to the policy;

determine an activity volume, wherein the activity volume represents a number of times the enterprise performs the activity;

determine an impact per exception, wherein an exception is an event in which the enterprise'"'"'s performance of the activity fails to adhere to the policy, wherein the impact per exception is a number characterizing how one exception impacts the enterprise;

generate a plurality of test portfolios, each test portfolio comprises different types of tests of the plurality of tests, each test type characterized by a sample size and a frequency, the frequency representing a number of times the test type is to be administered during a period of time;

determine a test cost for each portfolio over the period of time, the test cost for each portfolio is equal to a sum of costs for each test type within the portfolio over the period of time, the cost for each test type over the period of time is based on the sample size, cost to test each sample, and the frequency of the test type; and

determine an impact per portfolio over the period of time, the impact per portfolio representing an ability to reduce impact on the enterprise by identifying exceptions, the impact per portfolio is equal to a sum of impacts per test type for each test type over the period of time, the impact per test type over the period of time is based on the activity volume, the impact per exception, and an historical exception rate.

9. The computer readable medium of claim 8, the logic, when executed, being further operable to generate the plurality of test portfolios by:

receiving a maximum exception impact for each test, the maximum exception impact comprising a numerical representation of a highest tolerable exception impact for each test over a second period of time;

defining the sample size for each test type such that the impact per test type is less than or equal to the maximum exception impact for the test corresponding to the test type; and

generating the plurality of test portfolios such that each test type is characterized by the defined sample size.

10. The computer readable medium of claim 9, wherein the second period of time is less than the period of time.

11. The computer readable medium of claim 9, wherein receiving the maximum exception impact for each test comprises:

receiving a maximum exception rate for each test, the maximum exception rate represents a highest tolerable percentage of exceptions per activity volume; and

determining the maximum exception impact for each test from the maximum exception rate for each test.

12. The computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein the test cost is a test time representing the amount of time needed to administer a portfolio over the period of time, the logic, when executed, being further operable to:

receive a maximum test time; and

receive a selection of a portfolio with the lowest impact among the plurality of portfolios and with a test time less than or equal to the maximum test time.

13. The computer readable medium of claim 8, wherein each test question presents an exclusive disjunction regarding whether the enterprise'"'"'s performance of the activity adheres to the internal policy.

14. A method for prioritizing tests to determine compliance with policies of a enterprise, comprising:

identifying a plurality of tests associated with one or more policies that guide a enterprise'"'"'s performance of a activity, wherein each test comprises at least one test question that assesses the enterprise'"'"'s adherence to the policy;

determining an activity volume, wherein the activity volume represents a number of times the enterprise performs the activity;

determining an impact per exception, wherein an exception is an event in which the enterprise'"'"'s performance of the activity fails to adhere to the policy, wherein the impact per exception is a number characterizing how one exception impacts the enterprise;

generating, by a processor, a plurality of test portfolios, each test portfolio comprises different types of tests of the plurality of tests, each test type characterized by a sample size and a frequency, the frequency representing a number of times the test type is to be administered during a period of time;

determining, by a processor, a test cost for each portfolio over the period of time, the test cost for each portfolio is equal to a sum of costs for each test type within the portfolio over the period of time, the cost for each test type over the period of time is based on the sample size, cost to test each sample, and the frequency of the test type; and

determining, by a processor, an impact per portfolio period of time, the impact per portfolio representing an ability to reduce impact on the enterprise by identifying exceptions, the impact per portfolio is equal to a sum of impacts per test type for each test type over the period of time, the impact per test type over the period of time is based on the activity volume, the impact per exception, and an historical exception rate.

15. The method of claim 14, wherein generating the plurality of test portfolios comprises:

receiving a maximum exception impact for each test, the maximum exception impact comprising a numerical representation of a highest tolerable exception impact for each test over a second period of time;

defining the sample size for each test type such that the impact per test type is less than or equal to the maximum exception impact for the test corresponding to the test type; and

generating the plurality of test portfolios such that each test type is characterized by the defined sample size.

16. The method of claim 15, wherein the second period of time is less than the period of time.

17. The method of claim 15, wherein receiving the maximum exception impact for each test comprises:

receiving a maximum exception rate for each test, the maximum exception rate represents a highest tolerable percentage of exceptions per activity volume; and

determining the maximum exception impact for each test from the maximum exception rate for each test.

18. The method of claim 14, wherein the test cost is a test time representing the amount of time needed to administer a portfolio over the period of time, the method further comprising:

receiving a maximum test time; and

receiving a selection of a portfolio with the highest impact among the plurality of portfolios and with a test time less than or equal to the maximum test time.

19. The method of claim 14, wherein each test question presents an exclusive disjunction regarding whether the enterprise'"'"'s performance of the activity adheres to the internal policy.

20. The method of claim 14, wherein at least one portfolio comprises less test types than the number of the plurality of tests.