The DOI matches its DataCite record.
A/B Testing: A Systematic Literature Review
Open accessAbstract
In A/B testing two variants of a piece of software are compared in the field from an end user's point of view, enabling data-driven decision making. While widely used in practice, no comprehensive study has been conducted on the state-of-the-art in A/B testing. This paper reports the results of a systematic literature review that analyzed 141 primary studies. The results shows that the main targets of A/B testing are algorithms and visual elements. Single classic A/B tests are the dominating type of tests. Stakeholders have three main roles in the design of A/B tests: concept designer, experiment architect, and setup technician. The primary types of data collected during the execution of A/B tests are product/system data and user-centric data. The dominating use of the test results are feature selection, feature rollout, and continued feature development. Stakeholders have two main roles during A/B test execution: experiment coordinator and experiment assessor. The main reported open problems are enhancement of proposed approaches and their usability. Interesting lines for future research include: strengthen the adoption of statistical methods in A/B testing, improving the process of A/B testing, and enhancing the automation of A/B testing.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rasheed, Z., Waseem, M., Ahmad, A., Kemell, K., Wang, X., NguyenDuc, A., & Abrahamsson, P. (2025) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5149683 · Cited by 23
Integrating servitisation into the halal supply chain: a roadmap for sustainable business growth
Hassan, I. S., & Fernando, Y. (2024) · Journal of Islamic marketing · doi:10.1108/jima-01-2024-0028 · Cited by 18
Improving the User Interface and Experience of a Student PortalThrough the Eight Golden Rules
Sumari, A. D. W., Perdana, F. E., Nugraheny, D., & Lovrenčić, S. (2025) · Matrik Jurnal Manajemen Teknik Informatika dan Rekayasa Komputer · doi:10.30812/matrik.v24i3.4542 · Cited by 1
МЕТОДИКИ CRO НА ОСНОВІ МАШИННОГО НАВЧАННЯ
КОНОТОПЧИК, А., Мельник, К., & Лавренчук, С. (2024) · Information Technology Computer Science Software Engineering and Cyber Security · doi:10.32782/it/2024-1-5 · Cited by 1
Zhang, W., Wei, X., Huang, W.-C., Hui, Z., Wang, C., Gong, M., & Yu, P. S. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.25973
“In many production-level consumer applications, end-to-end evaluations like A/B testing (Quin et al., 2024) are preferred because they directly reflect user satisfaction.”
Metadata
- Authors
- Quin, F., Weyns, D., Galster, M., & Silva, C. C.
- Affiliations
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Linnaeus University (SE)
- University of Canterbury (NZ)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2308.04929
- OpenAlex
- W4385750259
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3
- FWCI
- 0.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Recommender Systems and Techniques
- Keywords
- A/B testing, user interface evaluation, data-driven decision making, stakeholder roles, feature selection, visual elements
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
