CTFL_Syll2018 ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (Syllabus 2018) Questions and Answers

This is the definition of a data driven approach to test automation design, which allows for reusability and maintainability of test scripts. Option A describes a keyword driven approach, which uses action words to describe the test steps and data. Option B is not related to test automation design, but rather to performance testing. Option C is also not related to test automation design, but rather to a testing technique.

Statement coverage and decision coverage are both less than 100%. Statement coverage is a criterion that requires every executable statement in the source code to be executed at least once by a test suite1. Decision coverage is a criterion that requires every decision (or branch) in the source code to take both true and false outcomes at least once by a test suite1. The flow graph below shows the logic of a program for which 100% statement coverage and 100% decision coverage is required on exit from component testing. The flow graph has 9 nodes (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I) and 10 edges (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10). The edges represent executable statements and the nodes represent decisions or branches.

!flow graph

The following test cases have been run:

• Test Case 1 covering path A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I
• Test Case 2 covering path A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H
• Test Case 3 covering path A-B-C-D-E-F
• Test case 4 covering path A-B-C-D-E

To calculate the statement coverage and decision coverage achieved by these test cases, we can use the following formulas:

• Statement coverage = (Number of statements executed / Total number of statements) x 100%
• Decision coverage = (Number of decisions exercised / Total number of decisions) x 100%

In this case, the number of statements executed by the test cases is 8 (edges 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9). The total number of statements in the flow graph is 10 (edges 1 to 10). Therefore, the statement coverage achieved by the test cases is:

• Statement coverage = (8 / 10) x 100% = 80%

The number of decisions exercised by the test cases is also 8 (nodes A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H). The total number of decisions in the flow graph is also 10 (nodes A to J). Therefore, the decision coverage achieved by the test cases is:

• Decision coverage = (8 / 10) x 100% = 80%

Therefore, statement coverage and decision coverage are both less than 100%. To achieve 100% statement coverage and decision coverage, two more test cases are needed to cover edges 8 and 10 and nodes I and J.

Software testing contributes to the quality of delivered software by identifying root causes of defects from past projects and using the lessons learned to improve processes and thus help to reduce the defect count. Software testing is a process of verifying and validating that a software product meets the specified requirements and expectations of the stakeholders1. Software testing can detect defects in the software product and provide information about its quality1. Software testing can also identify root causes of defects from past projects and use the lessons learned to improve processes and thus help to reduce the defect count1. This can be done by using techniques such as root cause analysis, defect prevention, causal analysis, process improvement, etc1. These techniques can help to identify and eliminate the sources of defects in the software development lifecycle and prevent them from recurring in future projects1. Therefore, software testing contributes to the quality of delivered software by identifying root causes of defects from past projects and using the lessons learned to improve processes and thus help to reduce the defect count.

 Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input domain of a system into partitions or classes that are expected to behave similarly or produce similar outputs2. A test case can cover one value from each partition, as it is assumed that all values in the same partition are equivalent for testing purposes2. In this question, the groups of numbers fall into different equivalence classes based on the amount of customs duty to be paid, as shown below:

Group

Equivalence Classes

$20,000 $20,001 $30,001

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000), 12% duty ($10,001-$30,000), 17% duty (above $30,000)

$2,000 $2,001 $10,000

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000), 12% duty ($10,001-$30,000)

$2,000 $8,000 $20,000

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000), 12% duty ($10,001-$30,000)

$1,500 $2,000 $10,000

No duty (up to $2,000), 10% duty ($2,001-$10,000)

Debugging the software to find the reason for defects is not a common objective of testing. Debugging is the process of finding, analyzing, and removing the causes of failures in software. Debugging is usually done by developers after testers have reported defects found during testing. Testing is the process of evaluating software by applying test cases to find defects and provide information on its quality. Testing has several common objectives, such as:

• Providing information on the status of the system, such as its readiness for release, its compliance with requirements, its risks and issues, etc.
• Preventing defects, by applying good practices throughout the software development lifecycle, such as reviews, inspections, static analysis, etc.
• Finding defects in the software, by applying test cases that cover different aspects of the software functionality, quality, performance, security, etc.

Therefore, statement D is not correct.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.1 and 1.2

Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is done on an existing system after modifications or migration, or to prevent deterioration or obsolescence. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various events or situations, such as:

• System migration from one platform to another, which can affect the functionality, performance, or compatibility of the system.
• Preparation for an audit of a system, which can require verifying the compliance of the system with standards or regulations.
• Modifications to a system, which can introduce new defects or affect existing ones.

Therefore, statements a, c, and d are correct.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.5

TC1 - £23 total charges including buggy hire; TC2 - £16 total charge but no buggy allowed. This answer can be derived from the decision table by matching the conditions of each test case with the corresponding rules and actions. For TC1, the conditions are: Loyalty Card holder = Y, 18 Holes = Y, Buggy/Cart Request = Y. These conditions match Rule 1, which has the actions: Green Fee = £18, Buggy Hire = £5, Total Charge = £23. For TC2, the conditions are: Loyalty Card holder = N, 18 Holes = N, Buggy/Cart Request = Y. These conditions match Rule 3, which has the actions: Green Fee = £16, Buggy Hire = Not Allowed, Total Charge = £16

Exhaustive testing is a technique that covers all possible combinations of inputs and preconditions2. However, it is not recommended to perform exhaustive testing, as it is usually impractical and impossible due to the large number of test cases required2. Instead, risk analysis and priorities should be used to focus testing efforts on the most important and critical aspects of the system under test2.

The main reason for using a pilot project to introduce a testing tool into an organization is C. To assess whether the tool will be cost-effective. A pilot project is a small-scale trial or experiment that is used to evaluate the feasibility, benefits, risks, and challenges of introducing a testing tool into an organization. A pilot project can help to assess whether the tool will be cost-effective, by comparing the costs of acquiring, deploying, using, and maintaining the tool with the benefits of using the tool, such as increased efficiency, effectiveness, quality, etc. A pilot project can also help to identify any technical, organizational, or human factors that may affect the successful adoption of the tool, and plan for any necessary actions or changes to address them. A detailed explanation of pilot projects can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 115-1161.

Static analysis is a technique to find defects in software source code and software models, performed without executing code. Static analysis can be done manually or automatically using tools that examine the code or design of a software system without running it. Static analysis can help identify and prevent defects, measure complexity, check compliance, or improve quality.

The other statements are not correct definitions of static analysis because they describe different concepts related to testing. For example:

• A. The decision between using white or black box test techniques: This statement describes a test strategy, which is an approach or method for designing and executing test cases based on various factors, such as scope, objectives, risks, resources, etc.
• B. Executing software to validate the most common path through the code: This statement describes dynamic testing, which is a technique to find defects in software by executing it under various conditions and inputs and comparing the actual results with the expected results.
• D. It is a testing technique used during system testing: This statement describes a test level, which is a group of test activities that are organized and managed together based on some criteria, such as objectives, scope, target audience, etc.

You can find more information about static analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 6, Section 6.3.

Reviewing tests developed by others would not typically be performed by a tester, but rather by a test leader or a peer reviewer1 . Reviewing tests developed by others is an activity that involves checking the quality and completeness of the test cases or procedures and providing feedback or suggestions for improvement1 . The other options are tasks that would typically be performed by a tester. Option A is a task that would typically be performed by a tester, because it involves preparing and acquiring the test data that are needed for executing the test cases or procedures1 . Option B is a task that would typically be performed by a tester, because it involves setting up and checking the test environment that supports the execution of the test cases or procedures1 . Option C is a task that would typically be performed by a tester, because it involves writing test summary reports that document the results and outcomes of the test execution1 .

 According to the syllabus, product risks are risks that affect the quality of the software product, such as defects, failures, or non-compliance with requirements or standards. Product risks can be identified and analyzed during the test planning phase, and mitigated by appropriate test design and execution. The answer C is correct because it lists three product risks: failure prone software delivered, software does not perform its intended functions, and poor data integrity and quality. The other answers are incorrect because they include project risks, which are risks that affect the management and control of the testing process, such as insufficient staff, test environment issues, or schedule delays.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.1.1, page 20-21.

A consideration when deploying test execution tools is B. Recorded manual tests may become unstable in use. Test execution tools can record manual tests performed by a tester and replay them automatically on demand. However, recorded manual tests may become unstable or unreliable in use, due to various factors, such as changes in the system under test, changes in the test environment, changes in the user interface, timing issues, synchronization issues, etc. Therefore, recorded manual tests may require frequent maintenance or modification to keep them up to date and consistent with the system under test. A detailed explanation of recorded manual tests can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 112-113

 S2 and O2 are the finishing state and the output(s) from the test case1. The question asks about a test case that starts at S1 and triggers 4 events in sequence: E1, E4, E5, E7. The question refers to a state diagram that shows the logic of a system with six states (S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6) and seven events (E1, E2, E3, E4, E5, E6, E7). The state diagram also shows four outputs (O1, O2, O3, O4) that are produced by some events. The state diagram is shown below:

!state diagram

To answer this question, we need to follow the path of the test case on the state diagram and observe the state transitions and outputs that occur. The path of the test case is:

• Start at S1
• Trigger E1
• Transition to S2
• Trigger E4
• Transition to S3
• Trigger E5
• Transition to S2
• Output O2
• Trigger E7
• Transition to S6

Therefore, the finishing state of the test case is S2 and the output(s) from the test case is O2. Hence, D is the correct answer.

Screen-dialog flows are sequences of screens and dialogs that represent the user interface and interaction of a system. Use case testing is a technique that uses use cases as a test basis to derive test cases1. A use case is a description of interactions between actors and a system to achieve a goal1. Use case testing is the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it can capture the user requirements, scenarios, and expected outcomes of the system. Boundary value testing is a technique that uses boundary values as a test basis to derive test cases1. A boundary value is an input value or output value on the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest or largest value of a range1. Boundary value testing is not the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it is more suitable for testing numerical inputs and outputs. Statement testing and coverage is a technique that uses statements in the source code as a test basis to measure the coverage achieved by a test suite1. A statement is a minimal executable unit of source code1. Statement testing and coverage is not the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it is more suitable for testing the internal logic and structure of the code. State transition testing is a technique that uses state transition diagrams as a test basis to derive test cases1. A state transition diagram shows the states of a system and the transitions between them triggered by events or conditions1. State transition testing is not the most effective technique in testing screen-dialog flows, as it is more suitable for testing systems that have complex or dynamic behavior based on different states.

When an organization considers the use of testing tools, they should C. Perform analysis of the test process and then assess whether it can be supported through the introduction of tool support. Testing tools can provide many benefits to the test process, such as increased efficiency, effectiveness, consistency, quality, etc. However, testing tools also have some challenges and risks associated with them, such as cost, learning curve, compatibility, maintenance, etc. Therefore, before introducing any testing tool, an organization should analyze their current test process and identify their needs, goals, expectations, constraints, etc., and then evaluate whether a tool can support them or not. A detailed explanation of testing tools can be found in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, pages 193-1983.

Independent testing is important because C. Independent testers can verify assumptions made during specification and implementation of the system. Independent testing refers to testing performed by testers who are not involved in the development or use of the system or component under test. Independent testers can provide an unbiased and objective view of the quality of the system or component under test. Independent testers can also verify assumptions made by developers or users during specification and implementation of the system or component under test. Assumptions are statements that are believed to be true without proof or verification. Assumptions can lead to errors or defects if they are incorrect or inconsistent with reality. Independent testers can help to identify and validate assumptions by using different sources of information, such as requirements, specifications, standards, regulations, etc., and by applying different testing techniques, such as black-box techniques, white-box techniques, etc. A detailed explanation of independent testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 9-10.

According to the syllabus, state transition testing is a technique that tests the behaviour of a system or component based on its transitions between states. A state transition diagram is a graphical representation of the states and transitions of a system or component. A test case that uses valid transitions to exercise all states should cover all the nodes and edges in the diagram. The answer D is correct because it covers all the four states (SS, S1, S2, S3) and all the five transitions (SS-S1, S1-S3, S3-S2, S2-SS, SS-S3) in the diagram. The other answers are incorrect because they either miss some states or transitions or use more transitions than necessary.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.4.1, page 47-48.

The test case execution effort is dependent on the build quality, because if the build quality is low, then more defects will be found and more re-testing will be required, which will increase the test execution effort. On the other hand, if the build quality is high, then fewer defects will be found and less re-testing will be required, which will reduce the test execution effort.

 Integration testing is a test level that accurately defines the integration testing test level1. Integration testing is a type of testing that verifies that different components or systems work together correctly and consistently1. The test basis for integration testing includes software and system design documents that specify how the components or systems are integrated and interact with each other1. The test objects for integration testing include interfaces between components or systems that enable data exchange or communication1. The tests for integration testing concentrate on the interactions between different parts of a system and check for functional, performance, reliability, security, compatibility, and interoperability issues1. Therefore, integration testing is a test level that accurately defines the integration testing test level.

These are the four test levels defined for a common V-model testing approach, according to the ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus. Unit testing is another term for component testing, and maintenance testing is not a test level, but a type of testing that can be performed at any level.

Functional and structural testing can both be applied at all test levels, from component testing to acceptance testing1 . Functional testing verifies whether the software meets the specified requirements and user expectations, while structural testing verifies whether the software meets the specified design and code standards1 . Both types of testing can be useful at any stage of the software development life cycle, depending on the test objectives and scope1 . The other options are incorrect, because they limit the application of functional and structural testing to certain test levels only.

The diagram lists various types of operating systems (LNX, W2K, WSP), databases (ORA, MSQ, SQL), and application servers (JBS, WSP) supported by the application under test. To test all possible combinations of these types, we need to multiply the number of options in each category. In this case, we have:

• 3 options for operating systems
• 3 options for databases
• 2 options for application servers

Therefore, we have 3 x 3 x 2 = 18 possible combinations to test.

However, if we look closely at the diagram, we can see that some combinations are not valid or feasible because they are not connected by lines. For example, we cannot test LNX with WSP as an application server because there is no line between them. Similarly, we cannot test W2K with JBS as an application server because there is no line between them. Therefore, we need to exclude these invalid combinations from our calculation.

If we count only the valid combinations that are connected by lines in the diagram, we get:

• 5 combinations for LNX (LNX-ORA-JBS, LNX-ORA-WSP, LNX-MSQ-JBS, LNX-MSQ-WSP, LNX-SQL-JBS)
• 5 combinations for W2K (W2K-ORA-WSP, W2K-MSQ-WSP, W2K-SQL-WSP)
• 5 combinations for WSP (WSP-ORA-JBS, WSP-ORA-WSP, WSP-MSQ-JBS, WSP-MSQ-WSP)

Therefore, we have 5 + 5 + 5 = 15 valid combinations to test.

You can find more information about testing combinations in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 4, Section 4.22.

The Cambrian Pullman Express has special ticketing requirements represented by the partial decision table below. The decision table has six columns representing six rules and eight rows representing eight conditions or actions. The table is filled with “Y” and “N” values indicating whether a particular condition is met for a particular rule.

!decision table

Carol has a student railcard and is travelling on a Flexible Standard Class ticket. James has a senior railcard and is travelling on a super saver ticket. The question asks which of the options represents the correct actions for these two test cases. To answer this question, we need to find the matching rule for each test case and then look at the corresponding actions. For Carol, the matching rule is rule 2, as she has a student railcard (Y) and a Flexible Standard Class ticket (Y). The actions for rule 2 are: OK to travel (Y), eligible to upgrade (Y), and concessionary fare (N). Therefore, Carol is OK to travel and eligible to upgrade, but not entitled to a concessionary fare. For James, the matching rule is rule 6, as he has a senior railcard (Y) and a super saver ticket (N). The actions for rule 6 are: OK to travel (N), eligible to upgrade (N), and concessionary fare (N). Therefore, James cannot use the service, is not eligible to upgrade, and is not entitled to a concessionary fare. Among the options given in this question, only A correctly represents these actions. A says that Carol is eligible to upgrade and James cannot use the service. Therefore, A is the correct answer.

 Likelihood of failure = 10%, potential cost of impact = $500,000. The level of risk to the project can be calculated by multiplying the likelihood of failure by the potential cost of impact. This gives us the following values for each option:

A. 1% x $1m = $10,000 B. 10% x $500,000 = $50,000 C. 20% x $150,000 = $30,000 D. 5% x $500,000 = $25,000

The total number of combinations of valid equivalence classes of age and gender is eight. There are four valid equivalence classes for the age parameter, based on the criteria given in the image: size 1 (0 < age <= 4 months), size 2 (4 < age <= 8 months), size 3 (8 < age <= 15 months), and size 4 (15 < age <= 24 months). There are two valid equivalence classes for the gender parameter, based on the note given in the image: boy and girl. The total number of combinations of valid equivalence classes can be calculated by multiplying the number of valid equivalence classes for each parameter: 4 x 2 = 8.

B, C, and D are incorrect answers. B implies that there are two invalid equivalence classes for the age parameter: age <= 0, and age > 25, which is not true as there are three invalid equivalence classes: age <= 0, age > 0 and age <= 4 months, and age > 24 months. C implies that all combinations of valid equivalence classes could be covered with four test cases, which is not true as there are eight combinations of valid equivalence classes. D implies that all valid equivalence classes could be covered with six test cases, which is not true as there are four valid equivalence classes for the age parameter and two valid equivalence classes for the gender parameter.

According to the syllabus, an independent test team is a group of testers who are not involved in the development of the software system under test. They perform testing activities from an external perspective, without any bias or influence from the developers or users. An independent test team can have various benefits and drawbacks, depending on the context and situation. The answer C is correct because it lists two benefits and two drawbacks of an independent test team. The benefits are:

• Independent testers can find different defects, because they have a different view and knowledge of the system than the developers or users.
• Independent testers can verify assumptions made during the specification of a system, because they can challenge and validate the requirements and design decisions.

The drawbacks are:

• Developers may put less emphasis on quality, because they may rely on the independent testers to find and fix the defects.
• Independent testers can be seen as the reason for delayed projects, because they may report defects late in the development cycle or demand more time for testing.

The other answers are incorrect because they mix benefits and drawbacks or list incorrect statements.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.4.1, page 14-15.

 Testers identify defects, developers locate and correct defects, testers confirm the correction has cleared the original defect. Debugging is the process of finding and fixing defects in a software product by analyzing its code or behavior. Debugging is usually performed by developers who have access to and knowledge of the code or structure of the software product. Debugging involves locating and correcting defects identified by testers during testing activities, and verifying that the correction has cleared the original defect without introducing new defects. Testers can also participate in debugging by providing information about how to reproduce defects, what are the expected results, what are the actual results, etc., and by confirming that defects have been fixed after debugging. A detailed explanation of debugging can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], page 6.

Testers should be involved in reviewing a UAT specification as soon as the UAT specification has been drafted1. UAT stands for user acceptance testing, which is a type of testing that verifies that the software product meets the acceptance criteria and expectations of the end users or customers1. A UAT specification is a document that defines the scope, objectives, approach, and criteria for UAT1. Testers should be involved in reviewing a UAT specification as soon as the UAT specification has been drafted, as this can help to ensure that the UAT specification is clear, complete, consistent, testable, and aligned with the user requirements1. Testers can also provide feedback and suggestions to improve the UAT specification and avoid potential issues or conflicts during UAT execution1. Therefore, testers should be involved in reviewing a UAT specification as soon as the UAT specification has been drafted.

 These are some of the factors that should be considered to determine whether enough testing has been performed. The exit criteria define the specific goals and requirements for testing completion. The budget limits the resources and time available for testing. The product’s risk profile indicates the areas of highest priority and impact for testing. Sufficient details of the system status allow decisions on whether further testing is needed or not. The other options are not relevant factors for determining enough testing.

Use-case testing is a technique that uses use-cases as a test basis to derive test cases2. A use-case is a description of interactions between actors and a system to achieve a goal2. An actor represents a type of user or anything that interacts with the system2. Use-cases are not the most common test basis for unit testing, as they are more suitable for higher levels of testing such as system or acceptance testing3. An actor is not always a human user, as it can also be another system or device2. Test cases can be based on use-case scenarios, which are sequences of actions and events that occur during a use-case execution2. Use-case testing will often identify gaps not found by testing individual components, as it can reveal missing or incorrect requirements, integration issues, and usability problems.

 Test objectives are specific goals or targets that define what testing activities should achieve or accomplish1. Test objectives for systems testing of a safety critical system include completion of all outstanding defect correction. Regression testing is required following defect correction at all test levels. Therefore, to determine whether this test objective has been met, two metrics that would be most suitable are:

• Regression tests run and passed in systems testing: This metric measures how many regression tests have been executed and passed in systems testing1. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes or defect corrections1. This metric can indicate whether all outstanding defect corrections have been completed and verified in systems testing.
• Incidents raised and closed at all levels of testing: This metric measures how many incidents have been reported and resolved at all levels of testing1. An incident is any event occurring during testing that requires investigation1. This metric can indicate whether all defects have been identified and corrected at all levels of testing.

The effective ways to improve the communication and relationship between testers and others are A. a and b. Communicating factual information in a constructive way and trying to understand how the other person feels and why they react the way they do are both important skills for testers to have. Testers often have to report defects and problems that may not be well received by developers or users. Therefore, testers should communicate in a clear, objective, and respectful manner, avoiding personal attacks or blame. Testers should also empathize with the other person’s perspective and emotions, and try to resolve any conflicts or misunderstandings in a positive way. A detailed explanation of communication skills for testers can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 107-108.

An item or event that could be verified by one or more test cases. A test condition is a general term that refers to anything that can be tested by a test case, such as a requirement, a function, a feature, a use case, a user story, etc. A test condition is derived from the test basis (the source of information for testing) and serves as an input for test design and test case creation. A test condition can be expressed in natural language or in a formal notation. A detailed explanation of test condition can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 17-18.

Test cases derived from the knowledge of the testers and the knowledge of testers, developers and users are used to drive testing apply to experience-based techniques1. Experience-based techniques are techniques that use the skill, intuition, and experience of testers, developers, and users to derive test cases, using error guessing and exploratory testing1. Error guessing is a technique that uses common sense and previous experience to guess where defects might occur in a system1. Exploratory testing is an approach that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution1. Experience-based techniques are typically used when there is insufficient information or time to apply other more formal techniques1. Therefore, test cases derived from the knowledge of the testers and the knowledge of testers, developers and users are used to drive testing apply to experience-based techniques.

The statement that BEST describes the relationship between test planning and test execution is A. Test planning ensures the level of detail in test procedures is appropriate for test execution. Test planning is the process of defining the objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, risks, and deliverables for testing activities. Test planning also involves designing and creating test cases and test procedures for test execution. Test procedures are detailed instructions on how to execute each test case and record the results. Test planning ensures that the level of detail in test procedures is appropriate for test execution, by considering factors such as complexity of the system under test, skills and experience of testers, availability of tools and environments, etc. Test planning also ensures that test procedures are consistent with the test objectives and cover all relevant aspects of testing (such as functional testing, non-functional testing, regression testing etc.). A detailed explanation of test planning can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 13-151.

 The other details that should be included in the incident report when it is first submitted are B. Status of the incident, degree of impact, Test Case Number. These details are important to provide information about the current state of the incident, the severity of its effect on the system or user, and the test case that detected the incident. Other details, such as suggested solution, priority, history, related defects, expected fix time, line of code, etc., can be added later during the incident management process. A detailed explanation of incident report can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 99-1001.

Decision testing is a white box (structure-based) test case design technique1. White box (structure-based) test case design techniques are techniques that use the structure or logic of the source code as a test basis to derive test cases and measure test coverage1. Decision testing is a technique that uses decisions (or branches) in the source code as a test basis to measure the coverage achieved by a test suite1. A decision (or branch) is a point in the source code where the control flow can take two or more alternative paths based on a condition1. Decision testing requires every decision (or branch) in the source code to take both true and false outcomes at least once by a test suite1. Therefore, decision testing is a white box (structure-based) test case design technique.

Metrics are quantitative measures that can be used to monitor and control various aspects of software testing processes and products1. Metrics can be used to monitor progress along with test preparation and execution by providing information about the status of testing activities, such as test planning, test design, test execution, test evaluation, defect management, etc1. Among the options given in this question, only C is a suitable metric for monitoring progress along with test preparation and execution. The failure rate in testing already completed is a metric that measures how many tests have failed out of the total number of tests executed1. This metric can indicate the quality of the software product under test and the effectiveness of the test cases1. It can also help to identify areas that need more attention or improvement in testing1. Therefore, this metric can be used to monitor progress along with test preparation and execution.

The test organization that has the highest level of independence is C. Independent test specialists for specific test types, such as usability, performance or certification test specialists. Test independence refers to the degree of separation between the tester and the developer or user of the system or component under test. Test independence can help to reduce bias and increase objectivity in testing. Independent test specialists are testers who have specialized skills and knowledge in specific test types or domains and who are not involved in the development or use of the system or component under test. Independent test specialists can provide more reliable and accurate results than testers who are part of the development team or user community. A detailed explanation of test independence can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 9-10.

A limitation in the use of static analysis tools is C. Static analysis tools always generate large numbers of warning messages when applied to new code, even if the code meets coding standards. Static analysis tools are tools that analyze the code or other software artifacts without executing them, and report any defects, errors, vulnerabilities, or violations of coding standards or conventions. Static analysis tools can help to improve the quality and maintainability of the code or other software artifacts. However, static analysis tools also have some limitations, such as generating large numbers of warning messages when applied to new code, even if the code meets coding standards or conventions. This can make it difficult for developers or testers to identify and prioritize the most important or critical issues to fix or address. A detailed explanation of static analysis tools can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 109-1101.

These are examples of exit criteria, which are the conditions that must be met before testing can be completed. Exit criteria may also include test coverage measures, residual risk assessment, or stakeholder approval. The other options are not exit criteria, but rather test planning activities.

The statement that BEST describes when test planning should be performed is D. Test planning is performed continuously in all life cycle processes and activities. Test planning is the process of defining the objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, risks, and deliverables for testing activities. Test planning is not a one-time activity that is done only at the beginning of the life cycle or at each test level. Test planning is a continuous activity that is done throughout the life cycle in all processes and activities that involve testing. Test planning should be aligned with the development process and should be updated regularly to reflect any changes or feedback from previous testing activities. Test planning should also consider different levels of testing (such as unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing, etc.) and different types of testing (such as functional testing, non-functional testing, regression testing, etc.). A detailed explanation of test planning can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 13-15.

 A role of a formal review is B. Moderator. A formal review is a type of static technique that involves a structured process of examining code or other software artifacts by a team of reviewers who follow predefined roles and rules. A formal review has four main phases: planning, preparation, meeting, and follow-up. A formal review has five main roles: author (the person who created the code or other software artifact under review), moderator (the person who leads and facilitates the review process), reviewer (the person who examines the code or other software artifact under review and provides feedback), scribe (the person who records the issues and outcomes of the review meeting), and manager (the person who monitors and controls the review process). A moderator is a key role in a formal review because he or she is responsible for planning, organizing, conducting, and reporting the review activities and ensuring that the review objectives are met. A detailed explanation of formal reviews can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 35-37.

 System integration testing and acceptance testing are two different levels of testing that have different objectives and stakeholders. System integration testing is the process of testing the interactions and interfaces between different components or systems that form a larger system. System integration testing verifies that the system meets its functional and non-functional requirements and works as expected in its intended environment. System integration testing is usually done by testers or developers who have access to the system architecture and design specifications. Acceptance testing is the process of testing the system by the end users or customers to determine if it satisfies their needs and expectations and is ready for deployment or delivery. Acceptance testing verifies that the system complies with the user requirements and business processes and provides value to the stakeholders. Acceptance testing is usually done by users or customers who have access to the user requirements and business scenarios. You can find more information about system integration testing and acceptance testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 2, Sections 2.2 and 2.31.

The testing effort required to test a software product depends on various factors, such as the size and complexity of the product, the quality of the requirements and design documents, the testability of the product, the test strategy and scope, the test environment and tools, the skills and experience of the testers, and the quality expectations and standards of the stakeholders1. Among these factors, the requirements for reliability and security in the product will most affect the testing effort required to test a software product1. Reliability and security are quality attributes that measure how well a software product performs its intended functions under specified conditions and protects itself from unauthorized access or harm1. Testing for reliability and security requires more rigorous and thorough testing techniques, such as reliability testing, security testing, penetration testing, stress testing, etc1. These techniques may require more time, resources, tools, and skills to perform effectively1. Therefore, the requirements for reliability and security in the product will most affect the testing effort required to test a software product.

Memory leaks are errors that occur when a program does not release memory that it has allocated, causing the system to run out of memory and slow down or crash. Memory leaks cannot be detected by structure-based testing techniques, which are based on the code structure and logic. Structure-based testing techniques can only find errors that are related to the control flow, data flow, or logic of the program. For example, they can find errors such as features that are only partially implemented, data structures that are used before initialization, or division by zero. To detect memory leaks, you need dynamic analysis tools that monitor the memory usage of the program during execution. You can find more information about structure-based testing techniques and dynamic analysis tools in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Sections 4.2 and 4.31.

A tool type is a category of tools that have similar features and functions and can be used for similar purposes. A test manager is a person who is responsible for planning, monitoring, controlling, and reporting the test activities and results. A test manager needs to use tools that can help them with these tasks and provide them with useful information and insights. Some examples of tool types that are useful for a test manager are:

• Defect tracking tool: This tool type allows the test manager to record, track, manage, and report the defects found during testing. It also helps the test manager to communicate with developers, testers, and other stakeholders about the defect status and resolution.
• Test management tool: This tool type allows the test manager to organize, manage, and control the test process and its outcomes. It also helps the test manager to define the test strategy, plan the test activities, allocate the test resources, schedule the test execution, monitor the test progress, and evaluate the test results.
• Requirements management tool: This tool type allows the test manager to manage and trace the requirements of the system under test. It also helps the test manager to ensure that the test objectives are aligned with the user needs and expectations and that the test coverage is adequate and complete.

The other tool types mentioned in the question are not as useful for a test manager as they are for other roles or purposes. For example:

• Modeling tool: This tool type allows the user to create graphical or textual representations of software systems or processes. It can be used for design, analysis, simulation, or documentation purposes.
• Static analysis tool: This tool type allows the user to examine the code or design of a software system without executing it. It can be used for finding defects, measuring complexity, checking compliance, or improving quality.
• Coverage measurement tool: This tool type allows the user to measure how much of the code or design of a software system has been exercised by a set of test cases. It can be used for evaluating the effectiveness or completeness of testing.

You can find more information about tool types in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 61.

A software company decided to buy a commercial application for its accounting operations. As part of the evaluation process, the company decided to assemble a team to test a number of candidate applications. The most suitable team for this goal would be a team with a mix of software testers and experts from the accounting department. This team would have the following advantages:

• Software testers have the skills and experience to design, execute, and evaluate test cases based on the requirements and criteria of the company. They can also use tools and techniques to support their testing activities and provide reliable and objective information about the quality and risk level of each candidate application.
• Experts from the accounting department have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the functionality and usability of each candidate application. They can also provide feedback and suggestions for improvement based on their needs and expectations as end users or customers.

The other teams mentioned in the question are not as suitable for this goal as they are for other purposes or scenarios. For example:

• A team from an outsourcing company which specializes in testing accounting software: This team might have the skills and experience to test accounting software, but they might not have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the specific requirements and criteria of the company that wants to buy the application. They might also lack the communication and collaboration with the stakeholders of the company who are involved in the evaluation process.
• A team of users from the accounting department that will need to use the application on a daily basis: This team might have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the functionality and usability of each candidate application, but they might not have the skills and experience to design, execute, and evaluate test cases based on the requirements and criteria of the company. They might also lack the tools and techniques to support their testing activities and provide reliable and objective information about the quality and risk level of each candidate application.
• A team from the company’s testing team, due to their experience in testing software: This team might have the skills and experience to design, execute, and evaluate test cases based on the requirements and criteria of the company, but they might not have the knowledge and expertise to understand and validate the functionality and usability of each candidate application. They might also lack the feedback and suggestions for improvement based on the needs and expectations of the end users or customers.

The term ‘Pesticide paradox’ refers to the phenomenon where the effectiveness of test cases that are repeated and focused on the same scenarios decreases over time because they tend to find the same defects or no defects at all. This is because the system under test becomes more resistant or immune to the existing test cases, just like pests become more resistant or immune to pesticides over time. To overcome the pesticide paradox, test cases should be regularly reviewed and updated to cover new or changed requirements, scenarios, risks, or defects. Test cases should also be designed to cover different aspects and perspectives of the system under test, such as functionality, usability, performance, security, etc. You can find more information about the pesticide paradox in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.11.

A requirements management tool may be considered as a test support tool because it can help support or enhance some aspects of testing activities or processes. A requirements management tool is a tool that allows users to manage and trace the requirements of a software system. A requirements management tool can help support or enhance testing activities or processes by:

• Providing a clear and consistent definition of what needs to be tested based on user needs and expectations
• Enabling traceability between requirements and test cases to ensure adequate and complete test coverage
• Supporting change management and impact analysis by identifying and tracking changes in requirements and their effects on testing activities and results

Pair programming is a software development technique where two programmers work together on the same code at the same workstation. One programmer, called the driver, writes the code while the other programmer, called the navigator, reviews the code and provides feedback and suggestions. Pair programming is not only a coding technique but also an informal review method because it involves constant communication and collaboration between the programmers who check each other’s work and share their knowledge and skills. Pair programming can improve the quality and productivity of software development by reducing defects, increasing code readability, enhancing learning opportunities, and fostering creativity and innovation. Pair programming is usually used in agile methods such as Extreme Programming (XP), Scrum, or Kanban. It is not an alternative term for code inspection, which is a formal review method where a group of reviewers examine a piece of code in a structured and systematic way following predefined rules and roles. It is also not done with developer and tester pairing together because pair programming requires both programmers to have similar levels of expertise and familiarity with the code they are working on. You can find more information about pair programming in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 31.

A decision table is a specification-based test technique that involves creating a table that shows the combinations of inputs and outputs for a system under test based on certain conditions and rules. A decision table can be used to design test cases that cover all possible scenarios and outcomes for a system under test. Some statements about decision tables are:

• I. Generally, decision tables are generated for low risk test items: This statement is false because decision tables can be generated for any level of risk test items depending on the complexity and variability of the system under test. Decision tables are especially useful for testing systems that have many inputs, outputs, conditions, and rules that affect their behavior or performance.
• II. Test cases derived from decision tables can be used for component tests: This statement is true because decision tables can be used to design test cases for any level or type of testing, including component tests. Component tests are tests that verify individual components or units of software in isolation from other components or systems.
• III. Several test cases can be selected for each column of the decision table: This statement is true because each column of the decision table represents a unique combination of inputs and outputs for the system under test based on certain conditions and rules. Therefore, each column can be used as a basis for selecting one or more test cases that cover that combination.
• IV. The conditions in the decision table represent negative tests generally: This statement is false because the conditions in the decision table can represent both positive and negative tests depending on the requirements and expectations of the system under test. Positive tests are tests that verify that the system under test behaves as expected under valid or normal inputs or conditions. Negative tests are tests that verify that the system under test handles errors or exceptions gracefully under invalid or abnormal inputs or conditions.

You can find more information about decision tables in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The Test Analysis and Design activity of the test process is the activity where test conditions and test cases are identified and specified based on the test objectives and criteria. The Test Analysis and Design activity also involves identifying and preparing the necessary test data and test environment to support the test execution. Some of the tasks of the Test Analysis and Design activity are:

• Reviewing the test basis: This task involves reviewing the requirements, specifications, design documents, or other sources of information that form the basis for testing.
• Identifying test conditions: This task involves identifying what needs to be tested based on the test basis and objectives.
• Designing and prioritizing test cases: This task involves designing specific scenarios or steps to verify each test condition and assigning priorities to them based on their importance or risk level.
• Identifying necessary test data to support the test conditions and test cases: This task involves identifying what data is needed to execute each test case and how to obtain or generate it.
• Identifying and preparing the test environment: This task involves identifying what hardware, software, network, data, tools, etc., are needed to execute the test cases and how to set up and maintain them.

Measuring the percentage of prepared test cases with what was actually prepared is not a task of the Test Analysis and Design activity because it does not involve identifying or specifying anything related to testing. Rather, it is a task of the Test Monitoring and Control activity, which involves measuring and reporting the progress and status of testing against the planned activities and criteria. You can find more information about the Test Analysis and Design activity in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 31.

Functional testing is an example of black-box dynamic testing. Functional testing is the process of testing the functionality or behavior of a software system based on its requirements or specifications. Functional testing does not require any knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system under test; it only focuses on what the system does rather than how it does it. Functional testing is also an example of dynamic testing because it involves executing the software system with selected inputs and observing its outputs and effects on the environment. Dynamic testing is different from static testing, which involves examining the software system without executing it, such as code inspection, static analysis, etc. You can find more information about functional testing and dynamic testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 21.

Test metrics are quantitative measures that are used to monitor, control, and improve the test process and its outcomes. Test metrics can be collected at different levels of testing (test case, test suite, test project, etc.) and can be used for different purposes (planning, estimation, execution, evaluation, etc.). Some examples of common test metrics are:

• Percentage of work done in test environment creation: This metric indicates how much effort has been spent on setting up and maintaining the test environment, which includes hardware, software, network, data, tools, etc., that are required for conducting the test activities.
• Number of test cases run: This metric indicates how many test cases have been executed during a given period or phase of testing.
• Deviation from test milestone dates: This metric indicates how much delay or ahead of schedule the test activities are compared to the planned dates.
• Defect density: This metric indicates how many defects have been found per unit of size or functionality of the system under test.

Average number of expected defects per requirement is not a common test metric because it is not easy to estimate or measure how many defects are likely to be found for each requirement. Moreover, this metric does not provide useful information for improving the test process or evaluating the test results. You can find more information about test metrics in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 5, Section 5.41.

Test techniques are methods or procedures that can be used to design, execute, or evaluate test cases. Test techniques can be classified into two categories: specification-based and structure-based. Specification-based test techniques, also known as black-box test techniques, are based on the requirements, specifications, or expectations of the system under test. They do not require any knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system. Some examples of specification-based test techniques are use case testing, state transition testing, decision table testing, etc. Structure-based test techniques, also known as white-box test techniques, are based on the code, architecture, or design of the system under test. They require some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system. Some examples of structure-based test techniques are control flow testing, data flow testing, branch testing, statement testing, etc. You can find more information about test techniques in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 41.

Test estimation is the process of predicting the effort, time, and resources required for testing a software system. Test estimation depends on several factors that influence the scope, complexity, and quality of testing. Some of these factors are:

• Characteristics of the product: This factor indicates how difficult or challenging it is to test the software system based on its size, functionality, reliability, usability, performance, security, etc.
• Characteristics of the development process: This factor indicates how well or poorly the software system is developed based on the development methodology, standards, tools, techniques, etc.
• Characteristics of the test process: This factor indicates how effective or efficient the testing process is based on the test strategy, plan, design, execution, evaluation, etc.
• Characteristics of the test team: This factor indicates how skilled or experienced the test team is based on their knowledge, competence, motivation, communication, collaboration, etc.

The outcome of testing of previous test cycle is not a factor on which test estimation is dependent upon because it does not affect the effort, time, or resources required for testing the current test cycle. Rather, it is an outcome or consequence of test estimation that can provide feedback and lessons learned for improving future test estimations. You can find more information about test estimation in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 22.

A use case is a description of how a user interacts with a system to achieve a goal or perform a task. A use case typically consists of a sequence of steps or actions that the user and the system perform to complete the goal or task. A use case can be used as a basis for designing test cases that verify the functionality and usability of the system under test. A test sequence that represents a possible use case should follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction and cover the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions. For example, based on the test cases given for a Library Management System, we can identify the following use cases:

• UC1: Add a new borrower to the system
• UC2: Update a borrower’s data
• UC3: Remove a borrower from the system
• UC4: Loan a book to a borrower
• UC5: Return a book from a borrower
• UC6: Reserve a book for a borrower
• UC7: Send “reservation ready” message to a borrower

The test sequence that represents a possible use case is D. 1-2-6-7-4-5-3. This test sequence follows the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction and covers the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions. For example:

• TC1: Add a new borrower to the system -> This is the first step of the use case, where the user registers as a new borrower in the system.
• TC2: Update a borrower’s data -> This is a possible variation of the use case, where the user updates their personal or contact information in the system.
• TC6: Reserve a book for a borrower -> This is the second step of the use case, where the user reserves a book that they want to borrow from the library.
• TC7: Send “reservation ready” message to a borrower -> This is the third step of the use case, where the system sends a message to the user informing them that their reserved book is ready for pickup.
• TC4: Loan a book to a borrower -> This is the fourth step of the use case, where the user picks up their reserved book from the library and loans it from the system.
• TC5: Return a book from a borrower -> This is the fifth step of the use case, where the user returns their borrowed book to the library and returns it to the system.
• TC3: Remove a borrower from the system -> This is a possible exception of the use case, where

the user decides to cancel their membership and remove their account from the system.

The other test sequences do not represent possible use cases because they do not follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction or they do not cover the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions. For example:

• A. 1-4-2-7-5-6-3 -> This test sequence does not follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction because it performs some steps before or after they are supposed to happen. For example, it performs TC4 (Loan a book to a borrower) before TC6 (Reserve a book for a borrower), which does not make sense because the user cannot loan a book that they have not reserved yet.
• B. 1-6-2-5-7-4-3 -> This test sequence does not follow the logical order and flow of the user-system interaction because it performs some steps before or after they are supposed to happen. For example, it performs TC5 (Return a book from a borrower) before TC4 (Loan a book to a borrower), which does not make sense because the user cannot return a book that they have not loaned yet.
• C. 1-6-4-7-5-3-2 -> This test sequence does not cover the main scenario and possible variations or exceptions because it omits some steps that are essential for completing or terminating the use case. For example, it omits TC2 (Update a borrower’s data), which is a possible variation of the use case that allows the user to change their personal or contact information in the system.

You can find more information about use cases and test sequences in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The fundamental test process activity where the sufficiency of testing and resulting information are assessed is Evaluating exit criteria and reporting. This activity involves checking whether the test objectives have been met and whether there are any unresolved issues or risks that could affect the release or deployment decision. This activity also involves preparing and communicating a test summary report that summarizes the test activities and results and provides recommendations and feedback for improvement. You can find more information about Evaluating exit criteria and reporting in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 3, Section 3.5.

The requirement given in

the image specifies

the charge for

a money transfer based on

the amount

of money transferred.

The amount can be anywhere from 1 to 5000 euros, with different charges applied for different ranges of amounts.

To test this requirement, we can use equivalence partitioning, which is a specification-based test technique that involves dividing the input or output values into groups or partitions that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify the following equivalence partitions for the input amount:

• EP1: Amount < 1 (invalid)
• EP2: 1 <= Amount <= 1999 (valid, charge = 10 euros)
• EP3: 2000 <= Amount <= 5000 (valid, charge = 15 euros)
• EP4: Amount > 5000 (invalid)

The set of amounts that covers all equivalence partitions is C. 0-100-2000-6000. This set of amounts includes one value from each equivalence partition and ensures that all possible scenarios are tested. For example:

• TC1: Amount = 0 -> Invalid input
• TC2: Amount = 100 -> Valid input, charge = 10 euros
• TC3: Amount = 2000 -> Valid input, charge = 15 euros
• TC4: Amount = 6000 -> Invalid input

The other sets of amounts do not cover all equivalence partitions because they either include values that belong to the same partition or exclude values that belong to different partitions. For example:

• A. 0-1999-2000-5000 -> This set of amounts does not cover all equivalence partitions because it includes two values that belong to EP2 (1999 and 2000) and excludes any value that belongs to EP3.
• B. 1-2000-5001-10000 -> This set of amounts does not cover all equivalence partitions because it includes two values that belong to EP4 (5001 and 10000) and excludes any value that belongs to EP2.
• D. 99-1-2000-4999.99 -> This set of amounts does not cover all equivalence partitions because it includes a value that is not an integer (4999.99), which violates the assumption that only integer values can occur.

You can find more information about equivalence partitioning in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Component testing is a part of the V-Model, which is a development life cycle model that shows the relationship between each phase of development and its corresponding phase of testing. In this model, each level of testing (unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing) has a corresponding level of development (component design, component integration, system design, requirements analysis). Component testing is the process of testing individual components or units of software in isolation from other components or systems. Component testing verifies that the components meet their functional and non-functional requirements and work as expected in their intended environment. Component testing is usually done by developers who have access to the component design and code specifications. You can find more information about component testing and the V-Model in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 22.

The requirement given in the image specifies an additional fee of $3 that is charged during the weekend, with some exceptions and discounts based on the age of the visitors. To test this requirement, we can use boundary value analysis, which is a specification-based test technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an equivalence partition. An equivalence partition is a set of values that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify the following equivalence partitions for the input age:

• EP1: Age < 0 (invalid)
• EP2: Age = 0 (valid, no charge)
• EP3: 0 < Age < 7 (valid, no charge)
• EP4: Age = 7 (valid, 20% discount)
• EP5: 7 < Age < 13 (valid, 20% discount)
• EP6: Age = 13 (valid, 20% discount)
• EP7: 13 < Age < 65 (valid, full charge)
• EP8: Age = 65 (valid, 50% discount)
• EP9: Age > 65 (valid, 50% discount)

The boundary values for each equivalence partition are the values at or near the edges of the partition. For example, the boundary values for EP3 are 1 and 6. The boundary values for EP4 are 6 and 7. The boundary values for EP5 are 7 and 12. And so on.

To test this requirement using boundary value analysis, we need to select one value from each boundary and test it with different combinations of weekend and weekday. For example, we can select the following values:

• BV1: Age = -1 (from EP1)
• BV2: Age = 0 (from EP2 and EP3)
• BV3: Age = 6 (from EP3 and EP4)
• BV4: Age = 7 (from EP4 and EP5)
• BV5: Age = 12 (from EP5 and EP6)
• BV6: Age = 13 (from EP6 and EP7)
• BV7: Age = 64 (from EP7 and EP8)
• BV8: Age = 65 (from EP8 and EP9)
• BV9: Age = 66 (from EP9)

We can then create test cases using these values and different combinations of weekend and weekday. For example:

• TC1: Age = -1, Weekend = Yes -> Invalid input
• TC2: Age = -1, Weekend = No -> Invalid input
• TC3: Age = 0, Weekend = Yes -> No charge
• TC4: Age = 0, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC5: Age = 6, Weekend = Yes -> No charge
• TC6: Age = 6, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC7: Age = 7, Weekend = Yes -> $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)
• TC8: Age = 7, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC9: Age = 12, Weekend = Yes -> $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)
• TC10: Age = 12, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC11: Age = 13, Weekend = Yes -> $2.40 ($3 - 20% discount)
• TC12: Age = 13, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC13: Age = 64, Weekend = Yes -> $3
• TC14: Age = 64, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC15: Age = 65, Weekend = Yes -> $1.50 ($3 - 50% discount)
• TC16: Age = 65, Weekend = No -> No charge
• TC17: Age = 66, Weekend = Yes -> $1.50 ($3 - 50% discount)
• TC18: Age =

66, Weekend = No -> No charge

Therefore, we need a minimum of 18 valid test cases to achieve 100% boundary value coverage based on input age.

$3.01 is not a valid output boundary value because it is not a possible output value based on the requirement. The output values can only be $0, $1.50, $2.40, or $3 depending on the input age and weekend status.

You can find more information about boundary value analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Multiple condition coverage is a structure-based test technique that aims to achieve a high level of coverage by testing all possible combinations of conditions and outcomes in each decision point of the code or design of the system under test. Multiple condition coverage verifies that each condition in a decision point has an effect on the outcome and that there are no hidden defects or logical errors in the code or design. Multiple condition coverage requires some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the system under test; it focuses on how the system does what it does rather than what it does. Multiple condition coverage is one of the most rigorous and complex structure-based test techniques because it can generate a large number of test cases for each decision point, especially if there are many conditions involved. You can find more information about multiple condition coverage in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.3.

Risk-based testing is an approach to testing that prioritizes and focuses on testing activities based on the level of risk associated with each feature or function of the system under test. Risk-based testing aims to optimize the use of time, resources, and techniques for testing by identifying and addressing the most critical and likely sources of failure or harm in the system under test. Some examples of typical risk-based testing activities are:

• Brainstorming sessions are held with a wide variety of stakeholders to identify possible failures in the system: This activity is part of the risk identification process, which involves gathering information and opinions from different perspectives and sources to discover potential risks in the system under test.
• Tests are prioritized to ensure that those associated with critical parts of the system are executed earlier: This activity is part of the risk analysis and evaluation process, which involves assessing the probability and impact of each risk and ranking them according to their severity and importance.
• The focus of testing is shifted to an area in the system where tests find more defects than expected: This activity is part of the risk mitigation and monitoring process, which involves taking actions to reduce or eliminate the risks and tracking their status and progress.

The evaluation of a risk-management tool to decide which tool to use for future projects is not an example of a typical risk-based testing activity because it is not directly related to testing the system under test based on its risks. Rather, it is an example of a tool selection or evaluation activity, which involves comparing and choosing a tool that can support or enhance the testing process based on criteria such as functionality, usability, reliability, compatibility, cost, etc. You can find more information about risk-based testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 3, Section 3.4.

Testing has several objectives that aim to provide information and confidence about the quality and risk level of the software product and to support decision-making and improvement processes. Some of these objectives are:

• Finding defects: Testing is the process of finding defects or failures in the software product that do not meet its requirements or expectations.
• Providing information for decision-making: Testing is the process of providing information about the quality and risk level of the software product based on the observed behavior and results under certain conditions and assumptions. This information can help stakeholders make informed decisions about releasing, deploying, accepting, or improving the software product.
• Gaining confidence about the level of quality of the software: Testing is the process of gaining confidence that the software product meets its requirements and expectations and provides value to the users and customers.
• Analyzing and removing the cause of failures: Testing is not only the process of finding defects but also the process of analyzing and removing the cause of failures that lead to defects. This objective is related to debugging, which is a development activity that involves locating, diagnosing, and fixing errors in the code or design of the software product.

You can find more information about the objectives of testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 1, Section 1.2.

Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is the process of testing a defect that has been fixed to verify that it has been resolved and does not affect other parts of the system. Confirmation testing is usually done by the same tester who reported the defect and using the same test case that revealed the defect. You can find more information about confirmation testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 3, Section 3.21.

The V-model is a development life cycle model that shows the relationship between each phase of development and its corresponding phase of testing. In this model, each level of testing (unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing) has a corresponding level of development (component design, component integration, system design, requirements analysis). The model also shows that testing activities should start as early as possible in the development process and that each level of testing should be planned and designed in parallel with its corresponding level of development. Therefore, one of the roles of a tester in a software company that adopts the V-model is to coordinate the test strategy with the project managers who are responsible for planning and managing each phase of development. This role involves defining the scope, objectives, approach, resources, schedule, risks, and deliverables of each level of testing in alignment with the development plan and the project requirements. You can find more information about the V-model and test planning in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 22.

The ‘Standard for Software Test Documentation’ specification (IEEE 829) is a standard that defines a set of documents that can be used to document the test process and its outcomes. The standard provides an outline for each document, specifying its purpose, content, and format. However, the standard does not prescribe how to apply it in different contexts or projects. It is up to each organization or project to decide how to adapt the standard to their specific needs and situation. Therefore, the standard is not a rigid or mandatory requirement that must be followed strictly by all testers. Rather, it is a flexible and adaptable guideline that can be used as a reference or a starting point for creating test documentation regimes. You can find more information about IEEE 829 and test documentation in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 51.

Beta testing is a type of acceptance testing that is normally performed by customers or potential customers at their own locations. Beta testing is done after the software product has passed the internal testing and quality assurance processes and is ready for release or deployment. Beta testing allows the customers or users to evaluate the software product in their real environment and provide feedback and suggestions for improvement. Beta testing can also help identify defects, compatibility issues, usability problems, or performance bottlenecks that might not have been detected during the internal testing. You can find more information about beta testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 2, Section 2.3.

A configuration management tool is a tool that allows users to manage and control the versions and changes of software artifacts, such as code, documents, test cases, etc. A configuration management tool can help prevent the loss of Sam’s updates by:

• Providing a centralized repository where Sam can store and retrieve his test cases and other artifacts
• Keeping track of the history and status of each artifact and allowing Sam to compare and revert to previous versions if needed
• Supporting collaboration and communication among team members by allowing them to share and access the latest versions of the artifacts

The other tools mentioned in the question are not relevant for this scenario because they do not provide the same functionality or benefits as a configuration management tool. For example:

• A. Incident management tool: This tool type allows users to record, track, manage, and report the defects found during testing. It does not help with managing or controlling the versions or changes of test cases or other artifacts.
• C. Test execution tool: This tool type allows users to execute test cases automatically or semi-automatically and compare the actual results with the expected results. It does not help with managing or controlling the versions or changes of test cases or other artifacts.
• D. Backup tool: This tool type allows users to create copies of data or files and store them in a different location or device for recovery purposes. It does not help with managing or controlling the versions or changes of test cases or other artifacts.

You can find more information about configuration management tools in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 6, Section 6.4.

Regression testing is a type of testing that is performed after a software system has been changed or modified to verify that the changes have not introduced any new defects or adversely affected the existing functionality of the system. Regression testing can be performed when the software system undergoes different types of changes, such as:

• Corrective changes: Changes that fix defects or errors in the software system
• Adaptive changes: Changes that adapt the software system to new platforms or environments
• Perfective changes: Changes that improve the performance or usability of the software system
• Preventive changes: Changes that avoid potential problems or issues in the software system

In this case, the software system was re-deployed because the backend database was changed from one vendor to another, which is an example of an adaptive change. Therefore, the test manager decided to perform some functional tests on the re-deployed system to ensure that the change did not affect the functionality of the system. This is an example of regression testing.

The other types of testing mentioned in the question are not relevant for this scenario. For example:

• Non-functional testing: This type of testing verifies the non-functional aspects of the software system, such as reliability, performance, security, usability, etc.
• Structural testing: This type of testing verifies the internal structure or implementation of the software system, such as code, architecture, design, etc.
• Unit testing: This type of testing verifies individual components or units of software in isolation from other components or systems.

You can find more information about regression testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 2, Section 2.4.

One of the basic principles of testing is that for a software system, it is not possible under normal conditions to test all input and output combinations because they are too many and too complex to cover within a reasonable time and budget. Therefore, testers have to select a subset of inputs and outputs that are representative and relevant for testing based on criteria such as requirements, risks, priorities, etc. This principle implies that testing cannot prove that a software system is defect-free or has a certain level of quality because there might be some untested inputs or outputs that could reveal defects or failures. Testing can only provide information about the quality and risk level of a software system based on the observed behavior and results under certain conditions and assumptions. You can find more information about the basic principles of testing in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 11.

Testing tools can be used by both developers and testers for different purposes and at different stages of the software development life cycle. For example, developers can use tools such as unit testing frameworks, code coverage tools, debugging tools, static analysis tools, etc., to improve the quality of their code and find defects early. Testers can use tools such as test management tools, test design tools, test execution tools, test data preparation tools, performance testing tools, etc., to support their testing activities and increase their efficiency and effectiveness. The use of testing tools does not necessarily imply test automation, which is the use of software to perform or support test activities that would otherwise require manual intervention. Test automation is a complex and costly process that requires careful planning, design, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation. The use of testing tools also does not change the role of the test team, which is still responsible for defining the test strategy, designing the test cases, analyzing the test results, reporting the defects, etc. You can find more information about testing tools and test automation in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 61.

Statement testing is part of structure-based testing, which is a type of testing that verifies the internal structure or implementation of a software system, such as code, architecture, design, etc. Statement testing is a structure-based test technique that involves testing every statement in the code at least once to ensure that there are no syntax errors, logical errors, or hidden defects in the code. Statement testing requires some knowledge of the internal structure or implementation of the software system; it focuses on how the system does what it does rather than what it does.

The other types of testing mentioned in the question are not related to statement testing because they do not verify the internal structure or implementation of a software system. For example:

• A. Experience-based testing: This type of testing relies on the skills, knowledge, intuition, and creativity of testers to design and execute test cases based on their experience with similar systems or situations.
• B. Decision testing: This type of testing verifies every decision point in the code by testing all possible outcomes or branches of each decision point to ensure that there are no logical errors or hidden defects in the code.
• C. Specification-based testing: This type of testing verifies the external behavior or functionality of a software system based on its requirements, specifications, design documents, or other sources of information.

You can find more information about statement testing and structure-based testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.3.

To achieve 100% statement coverage, you need to execute every statement in the code at least once. In this case, you need two test cases: one where condition A is true and one where condition A is false. This way, you can cover both the DO B statement and the END IF statement. You can find more information about statement coverage in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.31.

The statement that does not describe how testing contributes to higher quality is “The testing of software demonstrates the absence of defects”. This statement is false because testing cannot prove that a software system is defect-free or has a certain level of quality because there might be some untested inputs or outputs that could reveal defects or failures. Testing can only provide information about the quality and risk level of a software system based on the observed behavior and results under certain conditions and assumptions. The other statements describe how testing contributes to higher quality by:

• Performing a review of the requirement specifications before implementing the system can enhance quality: This statement is true because reviewing the requirement specifications can help identify and prevent defects, ambiguities, inconsistencies, or incompleteness in the requirements before they are implemented in the system, which can save time and effort and improve customer satisfaction.
• Properly designed tests that pass reduce the level of risk in a system: This statement is true because passing tests can increase confidence that the system meets its requirements and expectations and provides value to the users and customers. Passing tests can also reduce the probability or impact of failures or defects in the system that could cause harm or loss.
• Software testing identifies defects, which can be used to improve development activities: This statement is true because identifying defects can help analyze and remove their causes and prevent them from recurring in future development activities. Identifying defects can also help improve development processes, methods, standards, tools, techniques, etc., by providing feedback and lessons learned.

You can find more information about how testing contributes to higher quality in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 1.

The extent of testing required for a software product or feature depends on several factors that influence the level of quality and risk involved in delivering or deploying it. Some of these factors are:

• Budget to do testing: This factor indicates how much money is available or allocated for conducting the test activities, which affects the scope, depth, duration, and resources of testing.
• Time available to do testing: This factor indicates how much time is available or allocated for conducting the test activities, which affects the schedule, frequency, speed, and coverage of testing.
• Level of risk of the product or feature: This factor indicates how much impact or harm a failure or defect in the product or feature can cause to the users, customers, stakeholders, or environment, which affects the priority, intensity, complexity, and rigor of testing.
• Complexity of the product or feature: This factor indicates how difficult or challenging it is to understand, design, implement, or maintain the product or feature, which affects the effort, skill, technique, and tool required for testing.

A particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor in determining the extent of testing required because it does not affect the quality or risk level of the product or feature being tested. Rather, it is an outcome or consequence of deciding how much testing is needed based on other factors such as budget, time, risk, and complexity. You can find more information about determining the extent of testing in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 2, Section 2.12.

Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed after a software product has been delivered and deployed to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after changes have been made to it or to its environment. Changes can include corrective changes (fixing defects), adaptive changes (adapting to new platforms or environments), perfective changes (improving performance or usability), or preventive changes (avoiding potential problems). One of the appropriate reasons for maintenance testing is to verify that the software product works as expected after upgrading the operating system, which is an example of an adaptive change. Other reasons for maintenance testing can include verifying that the software product works as expected after fixing defects, adding new features, improving performance, or preventing future issues. You can find more information about maintenance testing in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, Chapter 12.

The requirement given in the image specifies a field asking for the number of group members, which can be anywhere from 2 to 20 visitors. To test this requirement, we can use boundary value analysis, which is a specification-based test technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an equivalence partition. An equivalence partition is a set of values that are expected to be treated in the same way by the system under test. For example, based on the requirement, we can identify two equivalence partitions for the input group size:

• EP1: Group size < 2 (invalid)
• EP2: Group size = 2 (valid)
• EP3: 2 < Group size < 20 (valid)
• EP4: Group size = 20 (valid)
• EP5: Group size > 20 (invalid)

The boundary values for each equivalence partition are the values at or near the edges of the partition. For example, the boundary values for EP1 are -1 and 1. The boundary values for EP2 are 1 and 2. The boundary values for EP3 are 2 and 19. And so on.

To test this requirement using boundary value analysis, we need to select one value from each boundary and test it with different combinations of valid and invalid inputs. For example, we can select the following values:

• BV1: Group size = -1 (from EP1)
• BV2: Group size = 1 (from EP1 and EP2)
• BV3: Group size = 2 (from EP2 and EP3)
• BV4: Group size = 19 (from EP3 and EP4)
• BV5: Group size = 20 (from EP4 and EP5)
• BV6: Group size = 21 (from EP5)

We can then create test cases using these values and different combinations of valid and invalid inputs. For example:

• TC1: Group size = -1 -> Invalid input
• TC2: Group size = 1 -> Invalid input
• TC3: Group size = 2 -> Valid input
• TC4: Group size = 19 -> Valid input
• TC5: Group size = 20 -> Valid input
• TC6: Group size = 21 -> Invalid input

Therefore, we need a minimum of 6 valid test cases to achieve 100% boundary value coverage based on input group size.

You can find more information about boundary value analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The question asks which of the test cases will ensure that the statement ‘Print ‘Hold’’ is exercised. The statement ‘Print ‘Hold’’ is executed when X > Y and Z < Y. Therefore, to exercise this statement, we need to choose a test case that satisfies these conditions. Among the options given in this question, only C satisfies these conditions. X = 42 > Y =43 and Z =42 < Y =43. Therefore, C is the correct answer.

Use case testing is a specification-based test technique that is based on the use cases or scenarios that describe how users interact with the system under test. Use case testing aims to find defects in the process flow or functionality of the system under test by verifying that it behaves as expected according to the use cases or scenarios. Use case testing does not require any knowledge of the data flow or structure of the system under test; it only focuses on what the system does rather than how it does it. Use case testing can be done by professional testers or real users, depending on the level and purpose of testing. Use case testing can also be designed by customers or end users, developers, testers, analysts, or anyone who has access to the use case specifications or user requirements. You can find more information about use case testing in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The ideal number of regression test cycles is as many as time and budget allow, because regression testing is done to ensure that no new defects have been introduced by changes or fixes in the software, and that all previously fixed defects are still fixed. Therefore, more regression test cycles can increase the confidence in the software quality and reliability.

Functional testing is the most appropriate type of testing to review first, after a record of poor-quality software releases. Functional testing is a type of testing that verifies the functionality and behavior of the software against its requirements and specifications. Functional testing can help detect defects such as incorrect menu selection options, new features that do not work, users allowed to change security levels without administrator rights, etc. Functional testing can also help improve the user satisfaction and confidence in the software. Therefore, functional testing should be reviewed first to ensure that it is done effectively and efficiently, and that it covers all the relevant aspects of the software functionality.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.3 and 5.2.2

To cover 100% statement coverage, we need to execute every statement in the code at least once. To cover 100% decision coverage, we need to execute every branch in the code at least once. The minimum number of test cases required to achieve both statement and decision coverage is 4 for statement and 5 for decision. Here is one possible set of test cases:

| Test Case | Input | Output | Statement Coverage | Decision Coverage | | TC1 | Walking = True, Midnight = False, Raining = False, Running = False | Take umbrella | S1, S2, S3, S4, S5 | D1-T, D2-T | | TC2 | Walking = False, Midnight = True, Raining = False, Running = False | Search light | S1, S2, S6, S7 | D1-F, D3-T | | TC3 | Walking = False, Midnight = False, Raining = True, Running = False | Take umbrella and search light | S1, S2, S6, S8, S9 | D1-F, D3-F, D4-T | | TC4 | Walking = False, Midnight = False, Raining = False, Running = True | Keep doing what you were doing | S1, S2, S6, S8, S10 | D1-F, D3-F, D4-F |

The correct answer is B, as it defines risk level correctly. Risk level is determined by the likelihood of an event happening and the impact or harm from that event4. Likelihood is the probability or frequency of the event occurring4. Impact is the severity or consequence of the event occurring4. Risk level can be calculated by multiplying likelihood and impact, or by using a risk matrix that assigns risk levels based on different combinations of likelihood and impact4. Option A is incorrect, as it does not define risk level correctly. Risk level is not calculated by adding the probabilities of all planned risks to a project, but by assessing the likelihood and impact of each individual risk4. Option C is incorrect, as it does not define risk level correctly. Risk level is not calculated by dividing the sum of all known risks by the sum of all unknown risks, but by assessing the likelihood and impact of each individual risk4. Option D is incorrect, as it does not define risk level correctly. Risk level is not determined by calculating the absolute value of the sum of all potential issues that may occur on the project, but by assessing the likelihood and impact of each individual risk4. References: 4, Section 2.8

Regression testing is testing of an already tested program after modification to discover any defects introduced or uncovered as a result of changes in software or its environment. Regression testing ensures that previously working functionality still works after changes are made3 defines regression testing as follows:

Regression Testing is defined as a type of software testing to confirm that a recent program or code change has not adversely affected existing features.

Regression Testing is nothing but full or partial selection of already executed test cases which are re-executed to ensure existing functionalities work fine.

I, III, IV, and V are incorrect statements about regression testing. Retesting of a fixed defect (I) is not regression testing, but confirmation testing or rework testing, which verifies that a specific defect has been resolved. Testing of new functionality in a program (III) is not regression testing, but functional testing or new feature testing, which verifies that new requirements are met by new code. Regression testing applies only to functional testing (IV) is not true, as regression testing can also apply to non-functional aspects such as performance or security. Tests that do not have to be repeatable, because they are only used once (V) are not regression testing, but exploratory testing or ad hoc testing, which are based on learning and discovery rather than predefined test cases.

Black-box test techniques are test techniques that are based on an analysis of the test basis without reference to the internal structure of the system under test. Decision table testing is a black-box test technique that uses a table showing combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). Use case testing is a black-box test technique that uses scenarios based on use cases (descriptions of sequences of events that a system performs that yield an observable result of value to a particular actor). State transition testing is a black-box test technique that uses models of the state transitions and events of a system to design test cases.

Explanation of Correct Answer: Priority indicates the level of business importance assigned to the defect, while severity indicates the degree of impact that a defect has on the development or operation of a component or system. Urgency is not a standard term used in defect reporting, and difficulty refers to the effort required to fix the defect.

References: Section 1.4.3.2, Section 5.3.2

The correct matching of the descriptions with the different categories of test techniques is as follows:

• Black-box test techniques: Test cases are based on the test basis which may include the requirements, use cases and user stories (1), Test cases can show deviations from the requirements (3), These test techniques are applicable to both functional and non-functional testing (4)
• White-box test techniques: Test cases are based on the test basis which may include the software architecture or code (2)
• Experience-based test techniques: Tests are based on knowledge of developers, users and other stakeholders (5)

Therefore, option D is the correct answer. Options A, B, and C are incorrect, as they do not match the descriptions with the different categories of test techniques correctly.

References: , Section 4.2

 Equivalence partitioning is a black box test design technique2. A black box technique is a technique that uses the external behaviour or specification of a system as a test basis to derive test cases without referring to its internal structure or logic2. Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input domain of a system into partitions of equivalent data2. Each partition should contain data that is expected to be treated the same by the system2. Therefore, only one test case input from each partition is needed to test the system’s behaviour2. Therefore, equivalence partitioning is a black box test design technique.

Defect density is a metric that measures the number of defects identified in the system under test divided by the size of the system. The size of the system can be measured in different ways, such as lines of code, function points, or modules. Defect density can be used to compare the quality of different systems or different versions of the same system.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 8.3.1

The correct answer is C, as it is an example of a project risk. A project risk is a risk that affects the management and control of the testing project, such as planning, budget, schedule, resources, quality, or scope1. Team members’ skills may not be sufficient for the assigned work is a project risk, as it affects the quality and efficiency of the testing activities1. Option A is incorrect, as it is an example of a product risk. A product risk is a risk that affects the quality of the software product under test, such as functionality, reliability, usability, security, or performance1. A system architecture may not support some non-functional requirements is a product risk, as it affects the reliability and performance of the software product1. Option B is incorrect, as it is an example of a defect. A defect is a flaw in the software product that causes it to produce incorrect or unexpected results or behavior1. A computation is not always performed correctly in some situations is a defect, as it causes the software product to produce incorrect results1. Option D is incorrect, as it is an example of a defect. A defect is a flaw in the software product that causes it to produce incorrect or unexpected results or behavior1. Specific modules do not adequately meet their intended functions according to the user is a defect, as it causes the software product to produce unexpected behavior1. References: 1, Section 2.8

The cost of testing performed so far is not a test exit criteria, as it does not reflect the quality or completeness of the testing process. Test exit criteria are usually based on factors such as the number of unfixed defects, the confidence of testers in tested code, the test coverage achieved, and the test schedules

According to the syllabus, regression testing is a type of software testing that verifies that previously developed and tested software still performs as expected after a change. A change can be any modification in the software product or system, such as bug fixes, enhancements, configuration changes, etc. Regression testing helps to ensure that the change does not introduce new defects or affect existing functionality. Confirmation testing is a type of software testing that verifies that a specific defect has been fixed after a change. Confirmation testing is also known as re-testing. Confirmation testing helps to ensure that the change has resolved the defect and does not introduce new defects. The answer C is correct because it best matches the type of testing with the testing scenario. Testing to ensure the application of a new version of the operating system does not have any unintended side-effects on the system (1) is an example of regression testing, as it verifies that the change in the operating system does not affect the functionality of the system. Testing due to the application of a security patch (2) is also an example of regression testing, as it verifies that the change in the security patch does not affect the functionality of the system. Testing due to the application of a new version of the database management system (3) is another example of regression testing, as it verifies that the change in the database management system does not affect the functionality of the system. Testing to ensure the fix to the payroll system truly works (4) is an example of confirmation testing, as it verifies that the change in the payroll system has fixed a specific defect. The other answers are incorrect because they do not match the type of testing with the testing scenario correctly.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.1.1, page 56-57.

Test implementation and execution is the activity in the fundamental test process that includes test script generation. Test script generation is the process of creating executable test cases from test conditions and test data2 defines this activity as follows:

Test implementation and execution has the following major tasks:

• Develop and prioritize test cases, creating test data and writing test procedures.
• Check test environment has been set up correctly.
• Execute test cases, evaluate results and document deviations from expected results.
• Use exit criteria to report on suitability of system under test.

Test closure activities (A) include finalizing and archiving test results, evaluating the test process, identifying areas for improvement, and celebrating achievements. Test analysis and design (B) include reviewing test basis, identifying test conditions, designing high-level test cases, and defining exit criteria. Test planning and control © include defining test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, risks, and metrics.

Using boundary analysis for x, the test cases are required to cover the values on and around the boundaries of x > 0 and x < 100. Therefore, the test cases should include -1, 0, 1, 99, 100, and 101. The value 0.1 is not a boundary value, and the values -500 and 500 are too far from the boundaries to be relevant.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) Syllabus - ASTQB, Section 4.2.2, Page 34

(0, 12, 13,18,19) represent boundary values for the age groups. Boundary value analysis is a technique to test the values at the boundaries of an input domain or equivalence partition. explains this as follows:

Boundary value analysis (BVA) is based on testing the boundary values of valid and invalid partitions. The behavior at the edge of each equivalence partition is more likely to be incorrect than the behavior within the partition, so boundaries are an area where testing is likely to yield defects.

(-1,0,11,12,13,14,18,19) (B) are not boundary values, but include some boundary values and some non-boundary values. (4,5,15,20) © are not boundary values at all. (-1.0,12,13,18,19) (D) are not boundary values either, as -1.0 is not an integer value.

Providing developers with information to isolate the failure is the incident report objective that this excerpt satisfies. The excerpt provides the name and location of the test file that was used to recreate the failure, which can help developers to reproduce and debug the failure in their own environment. defines this objective as follows:

One of the objectives of an incident report is to provide developers with information to isolate the failure. This means providing enough details and evidence for developers to understand what caused the failure and how to fix it. This may include information such as:

• Steps to reproduce: A sequence of steps that can be followed to recreate the failure.
• Test data: The inputs that were used to execute the test case that caused the failure.
• Test environment: The configuration and settings of the hardware and software that were used to execute the test case that caused the failure.
• Attachments: Any screenshots, logs, files, or other artifacts that can help to demonstrate or explain the failure.

B, C, and D are incorrect answers. Providing ideas for test process improvement (B) is not an incident report objective that this excerpt satisfies, as it does not provide any suggestions or feedback on how to improve the test process or prevent similar failures in the future. Not belonging in an incident report © is not true, as this excerpt belongs in an incident report as part of the incident details section. Providing test leaders with information to report test progress (D) is not an incident report objective that this excerpt satisfies, as it does not provide any metrics or indicators on how much testing has been done or how many failures have been found.

Explanation of Correct Answer: A key characteristic of informal reviews is that they are low cost, as they do not require much documentation, preparation, or follow-up. Therefore, option D is correct. Option A is incorrect, as metrics analysis is not a part of informal reviews. Option B is incorrect, as kick-off meeting is a part of formal reviews. Option C is incorrect, as individual preparation is not required for informal reviews.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 3.2.1

The correct answer is B, as it achieves the highest equivalence partition coverage. Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test technique that divides the input domain into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived1. In this case, the input domain is the numerical grades, and the partitions are the ranges of grades that correspond to different letter grades. Option B covers all five partitions, as it includes test inputs from each range. Option A covers only four partitions, as it does not include any test input from the range above 89. Option C covers only three partitions, as it does not include any test input from the ranges above 79 and below 60. Option D covers only two partitions, as it does not include any test input from the ranges below 79. References: 1, Section 4.2.3

II, III, and V are true statements about test reports. Test reports shall give stakeholders information as basis for decisions (II), as they provide an overview of the test results, the test coverage, the remaining risks, and the recommendations for the next steps. Test reports shall summarize what happened through a period of testing (III), as they describe the test activities, the test objectives, the test methods, the test environment, and the test incidents. Test reports shall include information about remaining risks (V), as they identify the areas of uncertainty or potential failure that may affect the quality or performance of the system under test1 defines a test report as follows:

A test report is a document that summarizes and communicates the outcomes of testing to stakeholders. A test report typically includes the following information:

• Test summary: A brief overview of the testing process, including the scope, objectives, approach, and results.
• Test evaluation: An evaluation of the testing process against the exit criteria and quality standards, including the test coverage, defect status, and risk assessment.
• Test conclusion: A conclusion on the suitability of the system under test for release or deployment, based on the test results and evaluation.
• Test recommendations: A recommendation on the actions to be taken after testing, such as fixing defects, conducting further testing, or implementing improvements.

I and IV are false statements about test reports. Test reports shall not be approved by the test team (I), as they are usually approved by a higher authority or a designated stakeholder who has the responsibility and authority to make decisions based on the test report. Test reports shall not be approved by the development team, the test team and the customer (IV), as this may cause conflicts of interest or delays in decision making.

Error, fault, failure is the option that describes the causal chain in the correct sequence1 . The causal chain is a model that explains how defects are introduced and manifested in software1 . An error is a human action or decision that produces an incorrect result1 . A fault is a defect in the software caused by an error1 . A failure is an incorrect behaviour of the software caused by a fault1 . The other options do not describe the causal chain in the correct sequence. Option B uses synonyms for error (mistake), fault (bug), and failure (defect), but does not follow the correct order. Option C uses synonyms for error (mistake) and fault (failure), but does not follow the correct order and confuses fault with failure. Option D uses synonyms for fault (bug) and error (error), but does not follow the correct order and confuses failure with error.

A typical characteristic of the walkthrough review type is that the meeting is led by the author. A walkthrough is a type of informal review that involves a presentation of a work product by the author to peers and other stakeholders for feedback and comments. The author leads the meeting and explains the work product to the participants, who can ask questions and make suggestions for improvement. The author may also record any issues or action items during the meeting. A walkthrough does not require formal preparation or follow-up by the participants, nor does it have defined entry and exit criteria.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 3.2.2

Use case testing is a technique that uses scenarios based on use cases to test the functionality and usability of a system from the user’s perspective. A use case is a description of how a system interacts with one or more actors (users or other systems) to achieve a specific goal. A typical benefit of use case testing is finding failures in the business process flows, which highlight system use in the real world. This is because use case testing focuses on how the system is used by different actors in different situations, rather than on individual components or features of the system.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.5.2