ISSN : 2583-2646

Agentic AI-Driven Quality Engineering for Continuous Compliance and Adaptive Test Automation

ESP Journal of Engineering & Technology Advancements
© 2026 by ESP JETA
Volume 6  Issue 2
Year of Publication : 2026
Authors : Srikanth Chakravarthy Vankayala
:

Citation:

Srikanth Chakravarthy Vankayala, 2026. Agentic AI-Driven Quality Engineering for Continuous Compliance and Adaptive Test Automation  Volume 6 Issue 2: 158-163.

Abstract:

The increasing complexity of modern enterprise software systems, regulatory requirements, and continuous delivery environments has created significant challenges in maintaining software quality, compliance governance, and scalable test automation. Traditional quality assurance methodologies often rely on static testing strategies, manual compliance validation, and rule-based automation frameworks that struggle to adapt to rapidly evolving application ecosystems.

References:

[1] LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y., & Hinton, G. (2015). Deep learning. Nature, 521(7553), 436–444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539

[2] Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (2018). Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction (2nd ed.). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNN.1998.712192[3] Devlin, J., Chang, M. W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. Proceedings of NAACL-HLT, 4171–4186. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1423

[3] Devlin, J., Chang, M. W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019). BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. Proceedings of NAACL-HLT, 4171–4186. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/N19-1423

[4] Burns, B., Grant, B., Oppenheimer, D., Brewer, E., & Wilkes, J. (2016). Borg, Omega, and Kubernetes. Communications of the ACM, 59(5), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1145/2890784

[5] Chen, L. (2015). Continuous delivery: Huge benefits, but challenges too. IEEE Software, 32(2), 50–54. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2015.27

[6] Shahin, M., Ali Babar, M., & Zhu, L. (2017). Continuous integration, delivery and deployment: A systematic review. IEEE Access, 5, 3909–3943. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2685629

[7] Ebert, C., Gallardo, G., Hernantes, J., & Serrano, N. (2016). DevOps. IEEE Software, 33(3), 94–100. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2016.68

[8] Xu, W., Huang, L., Fox, A., Patterson, D., & Jordan, M. I. (2009). Detecting large-scale system problems by mining console logs. Proceedings of SOSP, 117–132. https://doi.org/10.1145/1629575.1629587

[9] He, S., Zhu, J., He, P., & Lyu, M. R. (2016). Experience report: System log analysis for anomaly detection. ISSRE 2016, 207–218. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSRE.2016.21

[10] Dragoni, N., Giallorenzo, S., Lafuente, A. L., Mazzara, M., Montesi, F., Mustafin, R., & Safina, L. (2017). Microservices: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Present and Ulterior Software Engineering, 195–216. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67425-4_12

[11] Jamshidi, P., Pahl, C., Mendonça, N. C., Lewis, J., & Tilkov, S. (2018). Microservices: The journey so far and challenges ahead. IEEE Software, 35(3), 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2018.2141039

[12] Balalaie, A., Heydarnoori, A., & Jamshidi, P. (2016). Microservices architecture enables DevOps. IEEE Software, 33(3), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2016.64

[13] Taibi, D., Lenarduzzi, V., & Pahl, C. (2019). Continuous architecting with microservices and DevOps. arXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1908.10337

[14] Kruchten, P. (1995). Architectural blueprints—The “4+1” view model of software architecture. IEEE Software, 12(6), 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.469759

[15] Armbrust, M., Fox, A., Griffith, R., Joseph, A. D., Katz, R., Konwinski, A., Lee, G., Patterson, D., Rabkin, A., Stoica, I., & Zaharia, M. (2010). A view of cloud computing. Communications of the ACM, 53(4), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1145/1721654.1721672

[16] Dean, J., & Barroso, L. A. (2013). The tail at scale. Communications of the ACM, 56(2), 74–80. https://doi.org/10.1145/2408776.2408794

[17] Dean, J., & Ghemawat, S. (2008). MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters. Communications of the ACM, 51(1), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1145/1327452.1327492

[18] Brewer, E. A. (2012). CAP twelve years later: How the rules have changed. Computer, 45(2), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2012.37

[19] Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M., Regnell, B., & Wesslén, A. (2012). Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2

[20] Feitelson, D. G., Frachtenberg, E., & Beck, K. L. (2013). Development and deployment at Facebook. IEEE Internet Computing, 17(4), 8–17. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIC.2013.25

[21] Spinellis, D. (2012). Git. IEEE Software, 29(3), 100–101. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2012.61

[22] Cito, J., Leitner, P., Fritz, T., & Gall, H. C. (2015). The making of cloud applications. Proceedings of ESEC/FSE, 393–403. https://doi.org/10.1145/2786805.2786826

[23] Fehling, C., Leymann, F., Retter, R., Schupeck, W., & Arbitter, P. (2014). Cloud Computing Patterns. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7091-1568-8

[24] Kratzke, N., & Peinl, R. (2017). ClouNS—A cloud-native application reference model for enterprise architects. arXiv Preprint. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1709.04883

[25] Vaswani, A., Shazeer, N., Parmar, N., Uszkoreit, J., Jones, L., Gomez, A. N., Kaiser, Ł., & Polosukhin, I. (2017). Attention is all you need. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 30. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762

Keywords:

Agentic AI, Quality Engineering, Continuous Compliance, Adaptive Test Automation, Autonomous Testing Systems, Artificial Intelligence in Software Testing, Intelligent Quality Assurance, Policy-Aware AI, Autonomous AI Agents, Self-Governing Quality Systems, AI-Driven Test Automation, Compliance Automation, Continuous Quality Engineering