{"ID":2838643,"CreatedAt":"2026-06-01T04:54:23.091178241Z","UpdatedAt":"2026-06-01T04:54:23.091178241Z","DeletedAt":null,"paper_url":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.17303","arxiv_id":"2511.17303","title":"Framework Matters: Energy Efficiency of UI Automation Testing Frameworks","abstract":"We examine per action energy consumption across four web user interface (UI) automation testing frameworks to determine whether consistent tendencies can guide energy-aware test design. Using a controlled client-server setup with external power metering, we repeat each UI action (refresh, click variants, checkbox, drag\u0026drop, input-text, scroll) 35 times. Across each of the actions, energy costs vary by both framework and action. Puppeteer is the most efficient for left-click, right-click, double-click, checkbox, and input-text; Selenium is the most efficient for refresh and scroll; Nightwatch is generally the least energy efficient. The energy cost of performing the same action varied by up to a factor of six depending on the framework. This indicates that providing transparency of energy consumption for UI automation testing frameworks allows developers to make informed, energy-aware decisions when testing a specific UI action.","short_abstract":"We examine per action energy consumption across four web user interface (UI) automation testing frameworks to determine whether consistent tendencies can guide energy-aware test design. Using a controlled client-server setup with external power metering, we repeat each UI action (refresh, click variants, checkbox, drag...","url_abs":"https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.17303","url_pdf":"https://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.17303v1","authors":"[\"Timmie M. R. Lagermann\",\"Kristina Sophia Carter\",\"Su Mei Gwen Ho\",\"Luís Cruz\",\"Kerstin Eder\",\"Maja H. Kirkeby\"]","published":"2025-11-21T15:18:01Z","proceeding":"cs.SE","tasks":"[\"cs.SE\"]","methods":"[]","has_code":false}