CTFL_Syll2018 Sample Questions Answers

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 testing design technique based in the system requirements. Decision table testing is a black-box testing technique that is used to test complex business rules or logic that involve multiple conditions and actions. Decision table testing uses a tabular format to represent all possible combinations of inputs (conditions) and outputs (actions) for a given decision. Decision table testing helps to ensure that all scenarios are covered and tested. A detailed explanation of decision table testing can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 47-511.

The application failed because of a defect in the purchase identification module caused by a programmer mistake or an error in the specification. A defect is a flaw or imperfection in a software product that causes it to fail to meet its requirements or expectations. A failure is an event or behavior of a software product that deviates from its requirements or expectations. An error is a human action or decision that produces a defect. A mistake is an incorrect action or decision that leads to an error. In this case, the application failed because it incorrectly counted purchase attempts, which was a defect in the purchase identification module. The defect was caused by either a programmer mistake (such as writing wrong code) or an error in the specification (such as defining wrong requirements). A detailed explanation of defects, failures, errors, and mistakes can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 5-6.

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.

Concerned with the behavior of a whole system/product as defined by the scope of a development project. System testing is a level of testing that evaluates the system as a whole against its requirements and specifications. System testing is performed after integration testing and before acceptance testing. System testing covers functional and non-functional aspects of the system, such as usability, performance, reliability, security, etc. A detailed explanation of system testing can be found in A Self-Study Guide For The ISTQB Foundation Exam Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) 2018 Syllabus, pages 75-782.

 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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

A test condition is an item or event of a component or system that can be verified by one or more test cases. A test condition can be derived from various sources of information, such as requirements, specifications, design documents, use cases, user stories, etc. A test condition can also be based on various aspects of a component or system, such as functionality, usability, performance, reliability, security, etc.

The other statements are not true about test conditions because they describe different concepts related to testing. For example:

• B. The grouping of a composite set of test cases which, when tested as a whole, reveal a positive or negative result: This statement describes a test suite, which is a collection of test cases that are intended to be executed together to achieve a specific test objective or goal.
• C. A testable component derived from business requirements: This statement describes a test basis, which is the source of information or data that provides the basis for designing and executing test cases.
• D. Applies to software testing only: This statement is false because test conditions can apply to any type of testing, not just software testing. Test conditions can also be used for testing hardware, systems, processes, etc.

You can find more information about test conditions in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 4, Section 4.1.

The statement that best characterizes maintenance testing is A. Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to delivered software and uses impact analysis to minimize the amount of regression testing needed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on a software product after it has been delivered to the customer or user, and aims to ensure that the software product still meets its requirements and expectations after any changes or modifications. Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to delivered software, such as bug fixes, enhancements, patches, updates, etc., and uses impact analysis to determine the scope and extent of regression testing needed. Impact analysis is a technique that analyzes the potential effects of changes on the existing software product and its components, dependencies, interfaces, etc., and identifies which parts of the software product need to be retested or modified. Impact analysis helps to minimize the amount of regression testing needed by focusing on the most affected or critical parts of the software product. A detailed explanation of maintenance testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 81-82.

A valid reason for writing test cases based on experience and intuition is C. Tests based on experience and intuition can supplement formal techniques. Experience and intuition are valuable sources of test ideas that can help testers to identify potential risks, errors, or scenarios that may not be covered by formal techniques. Formal techniques are systematic methods that use rules or algorithms to derive test cases from the test basis (such as specifications, code, etc.). Formal techniques include black-box techniques (such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, etc.) and white-box techniques (such as statement coverage, decision coverage, etc.). Formal techniques can provide a high level of coverage and consistency, but they may not be able to capture all possible situations or behaviors of the system or component under test. Therefore, tests based on experience and intuition can supplement formal techniques by adding more diversity and creativity to the test cases. A detailed explanation of experience-based testing techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 74-76.

The process that ensures that all items of testware are identified, version controlled, tracked for changes, so that traceability can be maintained throughout the test process is D. Configuration management process. Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains the integrity and consistency of all items of testware throughout the test process. Configuration management involves identifying, storing, controlling, tracking, and auditing all items of testware (such as test plans, test cases, test scripts, test data, test results, etc.) and their versions and changes. Configuration management helps to ensure that only authorized and approved items of testware are used for testing and that traceability can be maintained between them. A detailed explanation of configuration management can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 101-1021.

Performance, Load, Stress. Performance testing is a type of non-functional testing that measures how well the system performs under various conditions, such as response time, throughput, resource utilization, etc. Load testing is a type of performance testing that simulates a high volume of user requests or transactions on the system and measures its behavior under normal and peak load conditions. Stress testing is a type of performance testing that simulates extreme or abnormal conditions on the system and measures its behavior under stress or overload conditions. These test types would help verify the requirements such as minimum number of enquiries per hour, availability, and response time under peak loads. A detailed explanation of performance, load, and stress testing can be found in Software Testing Foundations: A Study Guide for the Certified Tester Exam, pages 187-1913.

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.

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.

To be based on an analysis of the structure of the component or system. White box testing techniques are based on the internal structure and code of the system, not on its specifications or functionality. White box testing techniques include statement coverage, decision coverage, branch coverage, path coverage, etc. White box testing techniques are usually performed at lower levels of testing, such as unit testing or component testing. A detailed explanation of white box testing techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 68-74.

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.

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.

Testing can demonstrate that there are defects in the software, by finding and reporting them. Testing cannot demonstrate that there are no defects, because it is impossible to test all possible scenarios and inputs. Testing cannot demonstrate that the software is correct, because correctness is a subjective and relative concept that depends on the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders. Testing cannot demonstrate that there are no hidden defects in the software, because hidden defects are those that are not detected by testing or other quality assurance activities.

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.

The fundamental test process is a generic model that describes the main activities and tasks involved in testing. The fundamental test process consists of five phases: planning and control, analysis and design, implementation and execution, evaluation of exit criteria and reporting, and test closure activities. Implementation and execution is the phase where test cases and test procedures are implemented according to test specifications and executed on the system or component under test using test tools or manual methods. Implementation and execution also involves verifying that the test environment set up is correct, which means ensuring that the test environment (such as hardware, software, network, data, etc.) is ready and suitable for testing the system or component under test. A detailed explanation of implementation and execution can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 19-21.

Event B from S2 is an invalid transition, because it does not exist in the state table. The state table shows the possible transitions between states based on events. For each state, there is a corresponding row that indicates the next state for each event. For example, for state S1, the next state for event A is S2, for event B is S3, and so on. However, for state S2, there is no next state for event B, which means that this transition is invalid

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

The introduction of a test management tool does not represent one of the three triggers for maintenance testing an operational system, because it does not affect the functionality or performance of the system itself. Maintenance testing is triggered by system modification (such as corrective, adaptive, perfective or preventive changes), data migration (such as moving data from one platform or format to another), or system retirement (such as decommissioning or replacing an old system)1 .

 According to the syllabus, there are two main approaches for estimating test effort: metrics-based and expert-based. The metrics-based approach uses metrics from previous similar projects or industry data to calculate the test effort based on the size and complexity of the software under test. The expert-based approach relies on the experience and judgment of the owners of the testing tasks or subject matter experts who provide their estimates based on their knowledge of the software under test. The answer B is correct because it accurately describes the expert-based approach. The other answers are incorrect because they either confuse the metrics-based and expert-based approaches or describe them incorrectly.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.3.1, page 24-25.

In a Scrum development life cycle model, regression testing is an increasingly important activity as the project progresses. Scrum is an agile framework that follows an iterative and incremental approach to software development, where the software is delivered in small units called sprints. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs as expected after changes or modifications. Regression testing is essential in Scrum, as new features or functionalities are added or modified in each sprint, which can introduce new defects or affect existing ones. Therefore, regression testing should be performed at the end of each sprint, as well as before releasing the software, to ensure that the software meets the quality standards and user expectations.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.3.2

Maintenance testing is triggered by changes, such as migration, retirement, or enhancement of a system1. Therefore, option A is the best example of a trigger for maintenance testing. Options B, C, and D are examples of triggers for development testing, not maintenance testing1. References: 1, Section 2.3.2

Regression testing is intended to find side-effects after changes have been applied to the system under test. Side-effects are unintended consequences of changes that may cause new defects or re-introduce previously fixed defects in parts of the system that were not directly modified. Regression testing can be done at any level of testing and can use any type of testing technique.

Component testing is concerned with testing the smallest bodies of software, such as functions, classes, procedures, or modules. Component testing is also known as unit testing or module testing. Feature testing is a type of functional testing that focuses on verifying a specific feature or functionality of a system. Functional testing is a type of black-box testing that verifies that the system meets its functional requirements and specifications. Subsystem testing is a type of integration testing that verifies that a group of components work together as expected. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Section 2.2

The user interface being complicated and confusing is not an appropriate part of an incident report covering the observation of a failure during testing, as it is a subjective opinion and not a factual description of the failure. An incident report should include objective and relevant information that can help to identify, reproduce, and resolve the failure3 defines an incident report as follows:

An incident report is a document that records the occurrence of an abnormal or unexpected event during testing, such as a deviation from expected results, a defect in the system under test, or a problem in the test environment. An incident report typically includes the following information:

• Identifier: A unique identifier for the incident report.
• Summary: A brief description of the incident.
• Incident details: A detailed description of the incident, including the inputs, expected results, actual results, environment, date and time, severity, priority, and any other relevant information.
• Steps to reproduce: A sequence of steps that can be followed to reproduce the incident.
• Attachments: Any screenshots, logs, files, or other artifacts that can help to understand or reproduce the incident.

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 .

A walkthrough is lead by a moderator and requires pre-meeting preparation and post meeting follow up is the statement that is not true about walkthroughs, because it describes a different type of review called inspection . A walkthrough is a type of informal review that involves the author of a document presenting it to a group of peers or stakeholders to establish a common understanding and to find possible defects . A walkthrough does not have a moderator, but rather an author who leads the review. A walkthrough does not require pre-meeting preparation or post meeting follow up, but rather relies on the author’s knowledge and skills . The other options are true statements about walkthroughs. Option B is true, because a walkthrough may take the form of scenarios, dry runs and peer group review, depending on the type and purpose of the document being reviewed . Option C is true, because the purpose of a walkthrough is to establish common understanding of a document and to find possible defects in it . Option D is true, because pre-meeting preparation, documentation and distribution of results are optional for a walkthrough, as they depend on the author’s discretion and preference .

Static testing and dynamic testing are two types of testing that differ in the way they evaluate the software or system under test. Static testing is a type of testing that does not involve executing the software or system under test, but rather analyzing it using various techniques, such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, static analysis tools, etc. Dynamic testing is a type of testing that involves executing the software or system under test using test cases and comparing the actual results with the expected results. Static testing techniques, such as reviews, can be undertaken before dynamic testing, making defects cheaper to remove. This is because static testing can help find defects and improve the quality of any work product at any stage of the software development lifecycle, before they become more costly and difficult to fix during dynamic testing or after deployment.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 3.1 and 3.2

Tests designed by a person in the development team other than the person who wrote the code is not the lowest level of independence. The lowest level of independence is tests designed by the person who wrote the code, as this may introduce bias or blind spots in testing. Tests designed by another person in the development team is one level higher than tests designed by the person who wrote the code, as this may provide a different perspective or expertise in testing. defines the levels of independence as follows:

The level of independence of testing is related to the degree of separation between those who are responsible for developing software and those who are responsible for testing software.

The following levels of independence can be distinguished:

• Level 0: No independent testing; tests are designed by the same person who wrote the code.
• Level 1: Tests are designed by another person in the development team; e.g., another programmer or software designer.
• Level 2: Tests are designed by a person from a different group within the organization; e.g., an independent test team or group.
• Level 3: Tests are designed by a person from a different organization or company; e.g., an outsourcing partner or contractor.

A, B, and C are correct statements. A test team with high level of independence may suffer from lower familiarity with the product (A), as they may not have access to all the information or knowledge about the system under test. Development team may find many defects since they are familiar with the code (B), as they may have more insight into how the system works internally and where potential problems may occur. Tests designed by a person from different group in the organization is the highest level of independence within an organization ©, as this provides maximum separation between development and testing activities.

The pesticide paradox principle of testing states that if we do not regularly review and revise our tests, we’ll stop finding defects, because the same tests will no longer be effective at detecting new or different defects in the software12. The other options do not explain the pesticide paradox principle of testing. Option B is false, because repeatedly running a set of tests will not ensure that a system is defect free, but rather that it meets the same quality criteria as before12. Option C is related to the defect clustering principle of testing, which states that defects are often contained in a small number of modules12. Option D is a metaphor that compares testing to spraying pesticide, but it does not explain the paradoxical effect of using the same tests over and over again

Explanation of Correct Answer: A benefit of running tests with a test automation tool is that the time spent on repetitive tasks is reduced, as the tool can execute tests faster and more reliably than humans. Therefore, option D is correct. Option A is incorrect, as test coverage is not increased by using a test automation tool, but by designing more effective test cases. Option B is incorrect, as the number of found bugs is not reduced by using a test automation tool, but by improving the quality of the software under test. Option C is incorrect, as the total cost of the test project does not always decrease by using a test automation tool, as there are costs associated with developing and maintaining the automated tests.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 6.1

Statement I is true, as test planning activities include defining the test object, which is the component or system to be tested. Statement II is false, as test strategy implementation is part of test planning and involves defining the test approach and test levels to be applied. Statement III is true, as test design activities include choosing appropriate test techniques to derive test cases from test conditions. Statement IV is true, as test planning activities include defining and updating the test schedule and exit criteria throughout the project lifecycle. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Section 2.1

Experience-based testing is the test design technique for which a document containing a classification of all the defects found during the system test phase and after the delivery in the production environment can be considered a test basis. Experience-based testing is a technique that relies on the knowledge and intuition of the testers to design and execute test cases based on their experience with similar systems, technologies, domains, or defects. A document containing a classification of all the defects found during the system test phase and after the delivery in the production environment can provide valuable information and insights for testers to identify potential defect-prone areas or scenarios and focus their testing efforts accordingly1 explains experience-based testing as follows:

Experience-based testing techniques are based on the tester’s experience, knowledge and intuition. These techniques leverage the tester’s skill in finding defects and designing tests that are effective in exposing failures. Experience-based testing techniques are often used when there is no or insufficient documentation available for the system under test, or when there is not enough time to apply more formal techniques.

Some examples of experience-based testing techniques are:

• Error guessing: The tester uses their personal experience or intuition to guess what functionality might fail or cause errors, and designs test cases accordingly.
• Exploratory testing: The tester simultaneously learns about the system, designs test cases, executes tests, and reports results, using an iterative and interactive approach.
• Checklist-based testing: The tester uses a list of items or tasks that need to be verified or completed during testing, based on previous experience or best practices.

A, C, and D are incorrect answers. Structure-based testing, decision coverage testing, and specification-based testing are not test design techniques for which a document containing a classification of all the defects found during the system test phase and after the delivery in the production environment can be considered a test basis. Structure-based testing is a technique that uses the information of the internal structure of the component or system to derive test cases. Decision coverage testing is a type of structure-based testing that aims to cover all the possible outcomes of each decision in the code (true and false) at least once. Specification-based testing is a technique that uses the requirements and functionality of the system to derive test cases. These techniques require access to the source code or documentation of the system under test, which are not provided by a document containing a classification of all the defects found during the system test phase and after the delivery in the production environment.

The correct answer is C, as it describes a benefit of test automation. Test automation is the use of software to control the execution of tests, the comparison of actual outcomes to predicted outcomes, the setting up of test preconditions, and other test control and test reporting functions1. Test automation can have many benefits, such as reduction in repetitive manual work1. This can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of testing by saving time, effort, and resources1. Option A is incorrect, as it does not describe a benefit of test automation, but a factor that influences the selection of test automation tools. Availability of the test automation tool vendor is a factor that affects the availability and support of the tool, which may affect the success of test automation1. Option B is incorrect, as it does not describe a benefit of test automation, but a misconception. Negligible effort to maintain the test assets generated by the tool is not true, as test automation requires regular maintenance and update of the test scripts, data, and expected results to cope with changes in the software under test1. Option D is incorrect, as it does not describe a benefit of test automation, but a drawback. More subjective assessment is not a benefit, as test automation may introduce bias and errors in the test results due to human factors such as lack of skills, knowledge, or experience1. References: 1, Section 2.10

Data-driven is the type of automation test design that is used in the example below. Data-driven testing is a technique to separate the test data from the test scripts and store them in external sources, such as text files, databases, spreadsheets, etc. Data-driven testing allows the test scripts to read the test data from these sources during test execution, which makes the test scripts more reusable and maintainable1 explains data-driven testing as follows:

Data-driven testing is a software testing methodology that is used in the automation testing framework to store the test data in a table or spreadsheet format. This allows automation engineers to have a single test script that can execute tests for all the test data in the table.

Data-driven testing helps to increase the efficiency of automated testing by reducing the number of test scripts required for different scenarios. It also helps to improve the quality of testing by covering more variations of input data and expected results.

A, C, and D are incorrect answers. Dynamic test design, keyword-driven, and data coverage analysis are not types of automation test design that are used in the example below. Dynamic test design is a technique to generate test cases based on dynamic analysis of the system behavior or output during test execution. Keyword-driven testing is a technique to create test scripts using keywords that represent actions or commands that can be executed by an automation tool. Data coverage analysis is a technique to measure and evaluate how much of the input domain or data set has been covered by the test cases.

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.

A test harness is a test environment comprised of stubs and drivers needed to execute a test, especially when testing components or interfaces. Therefore, option D is correct. Option A is incorrect, as a test harness is not a topic for the final Test Report. Option B is incorrect, as a test harness is not a general name for test data. Option C is incorrect, as a test harness is not a detailed description of a test case.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.3

According to the syllabus, decision coverage is a technique that measures the percentage of decision outcomes that have been exercised by a test suite. A decision outcome is the result of evaluating a boolean expression in a control structure, such as an if statement or a switch statement. The goal of decision coverage testing is to cover and validate all the accessible source code by checking and ensuring that each branch of every possible decision point is executed at least once. The answer C is incorrect because it is not a valid use of decision coverage testing. Decision coverage testing does not check that all decisions are based on a numeric value, as there can be other types of values involved in boolean expressions, such as strings or booleans. The other answers are correct because they are valid uses of decision coverage testing. Checking that all decisions have been exercised in a single program or a business process can help to identify defects or missing functionality in the code or process logic. Checking that at least 100% decision coverage has been achieved can help to ensure that all reachable code has been executed and that 100% statement coverage has been achieved as well.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.2.3, page 42-43.

 Using a keyword-driven testing approach to separate the actions and data from the tool’s script is the best approach to improve the way test automation tools are being used in your company, because it allows for more flexibility, maintainability, and reusability of automated test scripts1 . A keyword-driven testing approach uses keywords or commands to represent actions or data in the test scripts, which can be stored in external files or tables and accessed by the tool1 . The other options are not good approaches to improve the way test automation tools are being used in your company. Option A is not a good approach, because selecting and automating scripts that test new functionality to find the most defects does not consider the suitability, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of automation1 . Option C is not a good approach, because ensuring that all data, inputs and actions are stored in the tool’s script for ease of maintenance makes the test scripts more rigid, complex, and difficult to modify1 . Option D is not a good approach, because keeping expected results separate from the automation tool to allow the testers to check the results reduces the efficiency and reliability of automation and increases the manual effort

The predicted number of defects and the amount of rework required is the most likely factor to impact the amount of testing effort required, because it affects the quality and stability of the software under test1 . Testing effort can increase if there are many defects in the software that need to be detected, reported, fixed, and re-tested1 . The other options are not likely to impact the amount of testing effort required directly. Option B is related to the size and composition of the project team, but it does not determine how much testing effort is needed for the software itself1 . Option C is related to the use of a project management tool to schedule tasks, but it does not affect how much testing effort is needed for each task1 . Option D is related to the responsibilities for testers and developers being clearly defined, but it does not influence how much testing effort is needed for their respective tasks1 .

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.

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.

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.

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.

Static analysis tools are tools that examine the code or design of a software system without executing it. Static analysis tools can be used to find defects, measure complexity, check compliance, or improve quality. Some examples of defect types that can be found by static analysis tools are:

• Variables that are never used: This defect type occurs when a variable is declared but not referenced or assigned in the code, which indicates a waste of memory or a logic error.
• Coding standard violations: This defect type occurs when the code does not follow the predefined rules or conventions for formatting, naming, commenting, etc., which affects the readability and maintainability of the code.
• Uncalled functions and procedures: This defect type occurs when a function or procedure is defined but not called or invoked in the code, which indicates a waste of resources or a missing functionality.

Memory leaks are defect types that are least likely to be found by static analysis tools because they are related to the dynamic behavior and performance of the software system. Memory leaks 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 can only be detected by dynamic analysis tools that monitor the memory usage of the program during execution. You can find more information about static analysis tools in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 6, Section 6.3.

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.

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 most important report improvement is A. Add an impact analysis. An impact analysis is an assessment of how the defect affects the functionality, usability, performance, reliability, security, or other aspects of the system under test. An impact analysis can help prioritize and classify the defect based on its severity and urgency. An impact analysis can also help determine the root cause and possible solutions for the defect. An impact analysis is an essential part of a defect report because it provides useful information for decision-making and improvement processes.

The other report improvements are not as important as adding an impact analysis because they do not provide as much information or value for decision-making and improvement processes. For example:

• B. Add information about which developer should fix the bug: This report improvement is not necessary because it is not part of the information that is required to describe, reproduce, and prioritize the defect. The assignment of developers to fix bugs is part of the defect management process, which involves assigning, tracking, resolving, and verifying defects.
• C. Add the time stamp when the incident happened: This report improvement is not very useful because it does not provide much information about the cause or effect of the defect. The time stamp when the incident happened is only relevant if it is related to some external factors or events that could influence the behavior or performance of the system under test.
• D. Add information about which web browser was used: This report improvement is not very relevant because it does not affect the functionality or usability of the system under test. The web browser used is only relevant if it is related to some compatibility or interoperability issues that could cause defects or failures in the system under test.

You can find more information about defect reports and impact analysis in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 5.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

 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 question asks which of the test cases will exercise both outcomes from decision 2. Decision 2 is represented by node B in the flow graph. Node B has two outcomes: edge 2 (P > Q) and edge 3 (P <= Q). Therefore, to exercise both outcomes from decision 2, we need to choose a test case that covers both edge 2 and edge

• Among the options given in this question, only B covers both edge 2 and edge
• In B, P =36 > Q =36 for edge 2 and P =37 <= Q =35 for edge
• Therefore, B is the correct answer.

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.

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.

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.

•  The test objectives for user acceptance testing of the first release of a new software product aimed at a general market and built using Agile methods are D. c and d. User acceptance testing is a level of testing that involves users or customers validating that the software product meets their needs and expectations before accepting it for use or deployment. User acceptance testing can have different objectives depending on the context and purpose of the software product. For a new software product aimed at a general market and built using Agile methods, some possible objectives are:

A detailed explanation of user acceptance testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 79-80.

Experience-based test design techniques are techniques that use the skill, intuition, and experience of testers 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 test design techniques are typically used when there is insufficient information or time to apply other more formal techniques1. They do not use decision tables, identify the structure of the system or software, or establish traceability from test conditions back to the specifications and requirements.

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.

Statement coverage is not a black box technique, because it requires knowledge of the internal structure of the code. Black box techniques are based on the external behavior and specification of the software, without looking at the code. Equivalence partitioning, state transition testing, and boundary value analysis are all examples of black box techniques12

Dynamic analysis tools are used to find defects, such as memory leaks, while software is executing. Dynamic analysis tools monitor the behavior and performance of the software under various conditions and report on any anomalies or errors. Dynamic analysis tools are not used to determine differences between files or databases, which is a function of comparison tools. Dynamic analysis tools are not used to measure the percentage of specific types of code structure that have been exercised, which is a function of code coverage tools.

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.

The statement that best defines static techniques is D. Manual examination and automated analysis of code or project documentation. Static techniques are techniques that analyze the code or other software artifacts (such as requirements, specifications, designs, models, test cases, etc.) without executing them, and provide information about their quality, defects, complexity, maintainability, etc. Static techniques can be performed manually or automatically by using tools or methods such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, standards, guidelines, static analysis tools, code metrics tools, etc. Static techniques can help to improve the quality and consistency of code or other software artifacts throughout the software development life cycle and reduce the cost and effort of testing and debugging. A detailed explanation of static techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 27-34.

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.

Black-box testing is a test technique that investigates the input vs. output behavior of a software system, without considering its internal structure or implementation. Therefore, option B is correct. Option A is incorrect, as it describes white-box testing, which focuses on the internal structure or implementation of a software system. Option C is incorrect, as it describes exploratory testing, which relies on the testers’ intuition and experience. Option D is incorrect, as it describes integration testing, which tests the interfaces and interactions between components or systems.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 4.1

Load testing tool checks for time response and resource utilization of a system under a specific load condition or scenario. Load testing tool can simulate multiple users accessing or performing operations on a system concurrently and measure how long it takes for the system to respond and how much CPU, memory, disk or network resources are consumed by the system.

• Defect 1: Missing test case for validation failure of ‘Password’ field being blank. According to checklist item C2, there must be one test case for each error path. The test basis document specifies that the ‘Password’ field must be mandatory, and that if it is blank, Error Number 13 should be displayed. However, none of the test cases cover this scenario. Therefore, a test case for this validation failure is missing and should be added.
• Defect 2: Incorrect field name in TC3. According to checklist item C3, each test case must use terminology consistent with the test basis document. The test basis document uses the term ‘User Name’ to refer to the field that identifies the user. However, TC3 uses the term ‘User Id’, which is inconsistent and confusing. Therefore, TC3 should be corrected to use the term ‘User Name’ instead of ‘User Id’.
• Defect 3: Incorrect error number in TC3. According to checklist item C3, each test case must use terminology consistent with the test basis document. The test basis document specifies that if the ‘User Name’ entered does not exist on the database, Error Number 12 should be displayed. However, TC3 states that Error Number 23 should be displayed, which is incorrect and does not match the test basis document. Therefore, TC3 should be corrected to use Error Number 12 instead of Error Number 23.

 A variable has the wrong numeric value passed into it is the type of defect that would not be typically found by using a static analysis tool, because it is a logical or functional error that depends on the context and requirements of the software13. A static analysis tool can detect syntactic or structural errors in the code, such as missing declarations, undefined variables, unused variables, or unreachable code13. The other options represent such errors that can be typically found by using a static analysis tool. Option A is an error where a variable is defined but is then not used, which indicates a waste of memory or a possible logic flaw13. Option B is an error where a variable is used in a calculation before it is defined, which can cause unpredictable results or exceptions13. Option D is an error where a variable is used but not declared, which can cause compilation or runtime errors

Equivalence partitioning is a technique to divide a set of possible inputs or outputs into classes that are expected to behave similarly or produce similar results. For each equivalence class, only one test case is required to represent the whole class. In this case, we can identify the following equivalence classes for the input field ‘ZIP code’:

• Valid ZIP code format and valid ZIP code value (e.g., 12345)
• Valid ZIP code format and invalid ZIP code value (e.g., 99999)
• Invalid ZIP code format and valid ZIP code value (e.g., 1234)
• Invalid ZIP code format and invalid ZIP code value (e.g., ABCDE)

Therefore, four test cases are required to test this field using equivalence partitioning.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.4.1

To apply to the RAD development model. Metrics are quantitative measures that can be used to monitor, control, and improve the test process and the quality of the system. Metrics can be used for various purposes, such as to identify the percentage of work done in test environment preparation or test case preparation, to measure whether dates of test milestones were met, to compare actual results with expected results, to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, etc. However, metrics are not specific to any development model, such as RAD (Rapid Application Development), and can be applied to any type of software development project. A detailed explanation of metrics can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 103-105.

It can be done without reference to the internal structure of the component or system. Black-box testing techniques are based on the external behavior and functionality of the system, not on its internal structure or code. Black-box testing techniques include equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, decision table testing, state transition testing, use case testing, etc. A detailed explanation of black-box testing techniques can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 25-601.

Planning and control, analysis, design, implementation, execution, evaluation of exit criteria and reporting, test closure. The fundamental test process is a generic model that describes the main activities and tasks involved in testing. The fundamental test process consists of five phases: planning and control, analysis and design, implementation and execution, evaluation of exit criteria and reporting, and test closure activities. Each phase has specific objectives, inputs, outputs, and deliverables. A detailed explanation of the fundamental test process can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 13-241.

Decision coverage is a structure-based test technique that involves testing every decision point in the code by testing all possible outcomes or branches of each decision point. Decision coverage 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 pseudo code given in the question has one decision point at line 4, where the value of Gender is compared to ‘female’. This decision point has two possible outcomes or branches:

• True branch: If Gender = ‘female’, then print “Ms” at line 5.
• False branch: If Gender != ‘female’, then print “Mr” at line 7.

To achieve 100 per cent decision coverage, we need to test both outcomes or branches of the decision point at least once. Therefore, we need two test cases that cover both scenarios:

• TC1: Gender = ‘female’ -> Print “Dear Ms”
• TC2: Gender = ‘male’ -> Print “Dear Mr”

The other options are not correct because they do not provide enough or too many test cases to achieve 100 per cent decision coverage. For example:

• A. 1: This option is not enough because it only provides one test case that covers one outcome or branch of the decision point, but not the other.
• C. 3: This option is too many because it provides three test cases that cover both outcomes or branches of the decision point, but one of them is redundant or unnecessary.
• D. 4: This option is too many because it provides four test cases that cover both outcomes or branches of the decision point, but two of them are redundant or unnecessary.

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

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.

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.

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.

Assigning resources for the planned activities is an activity that is appropriate to the test planning stage, because it involves estimating and allocating the necessary human and physical resources for testing . Test planning is the process of defining the objectives, scope, approach, and resources for testing . The other options are not activities that are appropriate to the test planning stage, but rather to other stages of testing. Option A is an activity that is appropriate to the test analysis stage, because it involves analysing the test basis (such as requirements, design, or code) to identify test conditions . Option C is an activity that is appropriate to the test implementation stage, because it involves designing and preparing the test environments (such as hardware, software, network, or data) for test execution . Option D is an activity that is appropriate to the test execution stage, because it involves writing a test execution schedule that defines the order and dependencies of test cases or procedures .

After completing the tool selection and a successful proof-of-concept, introducing the selected tool into an organization generally starts with a pilot project, which has the following objectives12:

• Gaining in-depth knowledge about the tool, understanding both its strengths and weaknesses
• Evaluating how the tool fits with existing processes and practices, and determining what would need to change
• Assessing whether the benefits will be achieved at reasonable cost
• Identifying and resolving any technical and organizational issues before deploying the tool on a larger scale
• Providing training, coaching, and mentoring for users of the tool
• Defining metrics to measure the success of the tool deployment

Therefore, the option D is the most typical objective of running a pilot project, as it is essential to ensure the compatibility and suitability of the tool with the current way of working, and to identify any potential risks or challenges that may arise from the tool introduction12.

The other options are not typical objectives of running a pilot project, because they are either part of the tool selection process, or the outcomes of the pilot project. They are:

• To establish whether the tool is available for a free trial period (and for how long) (A). This is part of the tool selection process, which involves gathering information about the tool features, costs, support, and availability12. This should be done before running a pilot project, as it helps to narrow down the list of potential tools and to conduct a proof-of-concept12.
• To provide training, coaching, and mentoring for users of the tool (B). This is an outcome of the pilot project, which aims to increase the competence and confidence of the tool users and to facilitate the tool adoption12. This should be done during and after the pilot project, as it helps to ensure the effective and efficient use of the tool and to address any issues or feedback from the users12.
• To develop a clear set of requirements and objective criteria against which the tool can be evaluated ©. This is also part of the tool selection process, which involves defining the tool requirements based on the needs and expectations of the stakeholders, and establishing the evaluation criteria based on the benefits and risks of the tool12. This should also be done before running a pilot project, as it helps to compare and rank the potential tools and to select the most suitable one12.

References:

• ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 syllabus
• Chapter 6 - Tool Support for Testing | PPT

A key difference between a peer review of code and static analysis of code using a tool is that static analysis targets the code technically whereas peer review is applicable to further aspects. Static analysis focuses on the technical aspects of the code, such as syntax, logic, complexity, quality, security, etc. Peer review can also address these aspects, but it can also consider other aspects, such as readability, maintainability, usability, functionality, etc. Peer review can also provide feedback, suggestions, or opinions from different perspectives or expertise levels. compares these two techniques as follows:

Static analysis tools are software tools that examine (analyse) source code without executing it. They are used by developers as part of their development environment for checking their code against coding standards (rules), finding syntax errors etc.

Peer reviews are manual checking activities where work products such as requirements specifications or code are examined by colleagues (peers) for defects.

A, B, and C are incorrect answers. A peer review does not find defects while static analysis finds failures (A), as both techniques can find defects but not failures. Failures are observed at runtime when executing the code. Peer reviews cannot find missing requirements whereas static analysis can (B), as both techniques cannot find missing requirements but only check conformance to existing requirements. Missing requirements can be found by other techniques such as elicitation or validation. A peer review finds failures while static analysis finds defects ©, as both techniques find defects but not failures. Failures are observed at runtime when executing the code.

 Exploratory testing would be a good test technique to use when under severe time pressure, because it is a type of experience-based technique that allows testers to design and execute tests based on their intuition, knowledge, and skills, without following a predefined test plan or test cases . Exploratory testing can be useful when testing time is very limited, as it can help to find important defects quickly and adapt to changing requirements or situations . The other options are not good test techniques to use when under severe time pressure. Option B is not a good option, because structure-based testing is a type of technique that requires analysing the code or design of the software under test to measure aspects such as code coverage, complexity, or coupling . Structure-based testing can be time-consuming and may not be feasible or effective when testing time is very limited . Option C is not a good option, because specification-based testing is a type of technique that requires analysing the requirements or specifications of the software under test to design test cases that verify the expected functionality or behaviour . Specification-based testing can also be time-consuming and may not be suitable or efficient when testing time is very limited . Option D is not a good option, because use case testing is a type of technique that requires analysing the use cases or scenarios of the software under test to design test cases that verify the end-to-end user interactions and outcomes . Use case testing can also be time-consuming and may not be relevant or effective when testing time is very limited .

According to the syllabus, equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input data into partitions that are expected to be processed in the same way by the system under test. The partitions should be disjoint, meaning that they do not overlap. The answer C is correct because 50 and 60 are in the same partition of valid inputs that will pass the test. The other answers are incorrect because they contain values from different partitions.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.2.1, page 40.

A peer review is a review done by colleagues at the same organizational level, such as developers, testers, or managers. An informal review without moderator is called a walkthrough. A review done by developers and testers together is called an inspection. A review done by developers only is not a specific type of review.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) Syllabus - ASTQB, Section 3.1.1, Page 18

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.

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 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.

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.

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

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 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 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.

How to fix the defect is not needed to specify in a defect report because it is not part of the information that is required to describe, reproduce, and prioritize the defect. How to fix the defect is part of the solution or resolution that is provided by the developers or maintainers who are responsible for correcting the defect. A defect report is a document that records and communicates the details of a defect found during testing. A defect report typically includes the following information:

• Defect ID: A unique identifier for the defect
• Summary: A brief description of the defect
• Severity and priority: An indication of how serious and urgent the defect is
• Test environment details: A description of the hardware, software, network, data, tools, etc., that were used when the defect was found
• How to reproduce the defect: A step-by-step procedure to recreate the defect
• Expected and actual results: A comparison of what should have happened and what actually happened when the defect occurred
• Attachments: Any additional information or evidence that can help understand or resolve the defect, such as screenshots, logs, files, etc.

You can find more information about defect reports in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 5.