Framework Matters: Energy Efficiency of UI Automation Testing Frameworks

Timmie M. R. Lagermann; Kristina Sophia Carter; Su Mei Gwen Ho; Luís Cruz; Kerstin Eder; Maja H. Kirkeby

Framework Matters: Energy Efficiency of UI Automation Testing Frameworks

Timmie M. R. Lagermann, Kristina Sophia Carter, Su Mei Gwen Ho, Luís Cruz, Kerstin Eder, Maja H. Kirkeby

Research output: Working paper › Preprint

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&drop, 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.

Original language	English
Publisher	arXiv.org
Publication status	Published - 21 Nov 2025

Bibliographical note

10 pages, 6 figures, submitted to The 41st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium On Applied Computing (SAC2026)

Research Groups and Themes

Trustworthy Systems

Keywords

cs.SE

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

Full-text PDF (pre-print)Submitted manuscript, 920 KBLicence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@techreport{1f7594b347fc442ab2219bf976a4ba59,

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\&drop, 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.",

keywords = "cs.SE",

author = "Lagermann, \{Timmie M. R.\} and Carter, \{Kristina Sophia\} and Ho, \{Su Mei Gwen\} and Lu{\'i}s Cruz and Kerstin Eder and Kirkeby, \{Maja H.\}",

note = "10 pages, 6 figures, submitted to The 41st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium On Applied Computing (SAC2026)",

year = "2025",

month = nov,

day = "21",

language = "English",

publisher = "arXiv.org",

address = "United Kingdom",

type = "WorkingPaper",

institution = "arXiv.org",

}

TY - UNPB

T1 - Framework Matters

T2 - Energy Efficiency of UI Automation Testing Frameworks

AU - Lagermann, Timmie M. R.

AU - Carter, Kristina Sophia

AU - Ho, Su Mei Gwen

AU - Cruz, Luís

AU - Eder, Kerstin

AU - Kirkeby, Maja H.

N1 - 10 pages, 6 figures, submitted to The 41st ACM/SIGAPP Symposium On Applied Computing (SAC2026)

PY - 2025/11/21

Y1 - 2025/11/21

N2 - 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&drop, 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.

AB - 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&drop, 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.

KW - cs.SE

M3 - Preprint

BT - Framework Matters

PB - arXiv.org

ER -

Framework Matters: Energy Efficiency of UI Automation Testing Frameworks

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Research Groups and Themes

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Handle.net

Fingerprint

Cite this