ISTQB ISTQB-CTFL ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL v4.0) Exam Practice Test

Decision coverage, also known as branch coverage, is measured as the number of decision outcomes executed by the tests divided by the total number of decision outcomes in the test object. It ensures that every possible branch (true/false) decision in the code has been executed at least once.

Test-driven development is not an example of a typical generic skill required for testing, but rather an example of a specific technical skill or a development practice that may or may not be relevant for testing, depending on the context and the objectives of the testing activities. Test-driven development is an approach to software development and testing, in which the developers write automated unit tests before writing the source code, and then refactor the code until the tests pass. Test-driven development can help to improve the quality, the design, and the maintainability of the code, as well as to provide fast feedback and guidance for the developers. However, test-driven development is not a skill that is generally expected or needed for testers, especially for testers who are not involved in unit testing or who do not have access to the source code. The other options are examples of typical generic skills required for testing, which are skills that are applicable and beneficial for testing in any context or situation, regardless of the specific testing techniques, tools, or methods used. The typical generic skills required for testing include:

Be able to use test management tools and defect tracking tools: These are tools that help testers to plan, organize, monitor, and control the testing activities and resources, as well as to record, track, analyze, and resolve the defects detected during testing. These tools can improve the efficiency, the effectiveness, and the communication of the testing process, as well as to provide traceability, metrics, and reports for the testing outcomes.

Be able to communicate defects and failures to developers as objectively as possible: This is a skill that involves the ability to report and describe the defects and failures found during testing in a clear, concise, accurate, and unbiased manner, using relevant information, evidence, and terminology, without making assumptions, judgments, or accusations. This skill can facilitate the collaboration, the understanding, and the resolution of the defects and failures between the testers and the developers, as well as to prevent conflicts, misunderstandings, or blame games.

Possess the necessary social skills that support effective teamwork: These are skills that involve the ability to interact, cooperate, and coordinate with other people involved in or affected by the testing activities, such as the test manager, the test team, the project manager, the developers, the customers, the users, etc. These skills can include communication, negotiation, leadership, motivation, feedback, conflict resolution, etc. These skills can enhance the quality, the productivity, and the satisfaction of the testing process, as well as to foster a positive and constructive testing culture. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.1, Testing and the Software Development Lifecycle

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.2, Testing and Quality

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test-driven Development, Test Management Tool, Defect Tracking Tool, Defect Report, Failure, Social Skill2

 The following should be included in a test status report: total number of open and closed defects, actual effort spent, and number of executed, failed, and blocked tests. A test status report is a document that provides information on the results and status of testing activities for a given period or phase. A test status report should include information that is relevant, accurate, and timely for the intended audience and purpose. Some of the information that should be included in a test status report are: total number of open and closed defects, which can indicate the defect trend and defect density of the software product; actual effort spent, which can indicate the productivity and efficiency of the testing process; number of executed, failed, and blocked tests, which can indicate the test progress and test coverage of the software product. The following should not be included in a test status report: estimation details, defect reports, and impact analysis. Estimation details are not part of a test status report, but rather part of a test plan or a test estimation document. Estimation details provide information on the expected time, resources, and costs for testing activities, not on the actual results or status of testing activities. Defect reports are not part of a test status report, but rather separate documents that provide detailed information on individual defects found during testing. Defect reports include information such as defect description, defect severity, defect priority, defect status, defect resolution, etc. Defect reports can be referenced or summarized in a test status report, but not included in full. Impact analysis is not part of a test status report, but rather part of a risk assessment or prioritization process. Impact analysis provides information on the potential effects or consequences of a change or a defect on the software product or project. Impact analysis can be used to evaluate the amount or scope of testing to be performed, but not to report the results or status of testing activities. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 141.

Component integration tests are designed to verify the interactions and interfaces between integrated components. These tests should be carried out after component testing (where individual components are tested in isolation) but before system testing (where the entire system is tested as a whole). This ensures that any issues arising from the integration of components are identified and resolved early in the testing process, making option D the correct answer​​.

The most important task of a typical test leader is to coordinate the test strategy with project managers. The test strategy is a high-level document that defines the general approach and objectives of testing for a project or an organization. The test leader is responsible for defining, documenting, communicating, and implementing the test strategy in alignment with the project goals and constraints. The test leader also needs to coordinate with project managers and other stakeholders to ensure that the test strategy is feasible, effective, and efficient. The other options are not the most important tasks of a typical test leader. To automate tests is a task of a test automation engineer or a test automation specialist. To prepare and acquire test data is a task of a test analyst or a test engineer. To set up the test environment is a task of a test environment manager or a test environment specialist. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 13.

Testing is necessary for various reasons, such as:

To detect defects and failures that may affect the quality, performance, reliability or security of a software product or system

To verify that a software product or system meets its specified requirements, expectations and standards

To validate that a software product or system fulfills its intended purpose and satisfies its stakeholders’ needs

To provide information and feedback about the status and risks of a software product or system

To comply with regulations or contractual obligations that mandate testing for certain types of software products or systems The following statements describe some reasons why testing is necessary:

A) The customer decided that 100% branch coverage shall be achieved. This is a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a contractual obligation or a quality standard that requires testing to measure and achieve a certain level of code coverage.

C) For avionics and pharmaceutical systems software testing is mandated by standards. This is a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a regulation or a compliance requirement that mandates testing for certain types of software products or systems that have high safety or security risks.

D) The risks associated with delivering the system are far higher than the cost of testing. This is a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a risk-based approach that considers testing as an investment to reduce the probability and impact of potential failures or defects. The following statement does not describe a reason why testing is necessary:

B) The acquisition of test automation tools was based on the assumption that it will be used m all projects. This is not a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a business decision or a resource allocation that does not justify the need or purpose of testing. Test automation tools are not always suitable or beneficial for all projects, and testing can be performed with or without test automation tools. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 5-6.

During the review planning stage, key decisions are made, including the selection of standards and procedures to be followed during the review. This planning phase ensures that the review process is structured and adheres to agreed-upon standards, which can come from industry standards such as ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-3. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 emphasizes the importance of review planning in establishing the framework and guidelines for the review process​​.

Exercising at least one of the decision outcomes for all decisions within the code, ensures achieving full branch coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all branches in the control flow of the code are executed at least once by the test cases. A branch is a basic block of code that has a single entry point and a single exit point, and a decision is a point in the code where the control flow can take more than one direction, such as an if-then-else statement, a switch-case statement, a loop statement, etc. The decision outcomes are the possible paths that can be taken from a decision, such as the then branch or the else branch, the case branch or the default branch, the loop body or the loop exit, etc. The other statements are false, because:

The minimum number of test cases needed to achieve full branch coverage, is usually higher than that needed to achieve full statement coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all executable statements in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. This is because branch coverage is a stronger criterion than statement coverage, as it implies statement coverage, but not vice versa. For example, a single test case can achieve full statement coverage for an if-then-else statement, but two test cases are needed to achieve full branch coverage, as both the then branch and the else branch need to be exercised.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all unconditional branches within the code have not necessarily been exercised, as unconditional branches are branches that do not depend on any decision, and are always executed, such as a goto statement, a break statement, a return statement, etc. Unconditional branches are not part of the branch coverage criterion, as they do not represent different paths in the control flow of the code. However, they are part of the statement coverage criterion, as they are executable statements in the code.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all combinations of conditions in a decision table have not necessarily been exercised, as a decision table is a test design technique that represents the logical relationships between multiple conditions and their corresponding actions, in a tabular format. A decision table can have more combinations of conditions than the number of decision outcomes in the code, as each condition can have two or more possible values, such as true or false, yes or no, etc. For example, a decision table with four conditions can have 16 combinations of conditions, but the corresponding code may have only two decision outcomes, such as pass or fail. To exercise all combinations of conditions in a decision table, a stronger test coverage criterion is needed, such as condition combination coverage, which requires that all possible combinations of condition outcomes in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.3.1, Test Coverage Criteria Based on the Structure of the Software

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Branch Coverage, Statement Coverage, Branch, Decision, Decision Outcome, Unconditional Branch, Decision Table, Condition Combination Coverage

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The whole-team approach promotes collaboration among stakeholders (business representatives, developers, and testers) to ensure better quality and project success (A). This approach allows for early identification of issues, enhances shared responsibility, and improves software quality. Option C is a valid but indirect benefit, while options B and D do not directly describe the core advantage of the whole-team approach.

Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes. Regression testing can help prevent re-opening of defects fixed earlier by ensuring that they do not cause any new failures or side effects. The first recommendation to the company is to verify existing regression test suite are adequate, and augment it, if required, in order to ensure that defects fixed earlier get re-tested in each subsequent build. This can help improve the coverage and effectiveness of regression testing and detect any regression defects as soon as possible. Automating existing test suites may also help reduce the time and effort required for regression testing, but this is not the first recommendation, as automation may not be feasible or cost-effective for all test cases. Analyzing the product modules containing maximum defects and getting them thoroughly tested and defects fixed as a one-time activity may also help reduce the defect density and improve the quality of those modules, but this is not the first recommendation, as it does not address the root cause of re-opening defects fixed earlier. Training or replacing the teams responsible for development and testing of the modules containing maximum number of defects may also help improve their skills or performance, but this is not the first recommendation, as it may not be necessary or appropriate for all teams. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 19; Chapter 4, page 45.

The set of test inputs that achieve the relatively highest equivalence partition coverage for grading students is option D: 69, 79, 80, 89, 90. This set effectively tests the boundaries between each grade category, ensuring that the grading system accurately transitions from one grade to another at the correct thresholds​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

When writing a defect report, the tester can specify the expected result and the actual result based on the observation. The expected result is what the requirements specify, and the actual result is what was observed during testing. These elements are crucial for clearly communicating the nature of the defect to developers and other stakeholders. The other items such as test environment, test level, and root cause may not be clear or necessary at this stage of defect reporting.

Rule 5 in the decision table indicates that when the object is within 5 metres of the vehicle and the sensitivity mode is switched "on", no LED is lit. This matches the conditions and actions described in the decision table provided, ensuring that only the red LED is lit when the sensitivity mode is on and the object is within 1 metre, otherwise no LED is lit .

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Maintenance testing is carried out whenever changes are made to an existing system, including enhancements, defect fixes, and system migrations (C). It is not limited to adaptive maintenance (A) and is needed even when no defects are reported (B). Test cases are essential to validate fixes and prevent regressions (D).

Static testing, such as code reviews and static analysis, is particularly effective at identifying issues related to code structure and modularization. These techniques allow for the inspection of the code without executing it, making it easier to spot problems related to how the code is organized. Dynamic testing, on the other hand, focuses on the execution of code and is better suited for identifying runtime issues but does not easily reveal structural problems. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 highlights the strengths of static testing in uncovering such structural issue

The three-point test estimation technique is a method of estimating the test effort based on three initial estimates: the most optimistic, the most likely, and the most pessimistic. The technique uses a weighted average of these three estimates to calculate the final estimate, which is also known as the expected value. The formula for the expected value is:

Expected value = (most optimistic + 4 * most likely + most pessimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the expected value is:

Expected value = (6 + 4 * 30 + 54) / 6 Expected value = 30 person hours

However, the expected value is not the only factor to consider when estimating the test effort. The technique also calculates the standard deviation, which is a measure of the variability or uncertainty of the estimates. The formula for the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (most pessimistic - most optimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (54 - 6) / 6 Standard deviation = 8 person hours

The standard deviation can be used to determine a range of possible values for the test effort, based on a certain level of confidence. For example, using a 68% confidence level, the range is:

Expected value ± standard deviation

Using the calculated values, the range is:

30 ± 8 person hours

Therefore, the final estimate is between 22 person hours and 38 person hours, which is option A.

For boundary value analysis, the test cases should include the boundary values just inside and just outside the equivalence partition for the 13% interest rate range:

R100,000 (just inside the previous range)

R100,001 (start of the 13% range)

R500,000 (end of the 13% range)

R500,001 (just outside the range)

These values ensure that both the edges of the partition are tested​​.

The extent of testing required for a software product depends on various factors, such as the level of risk, the budget, and the time available. The level of risk reflects the potential impact of failures on the stakeholders and the environment. The budget determines how much resources can be allocated for testing. The time available defines the schedule and deadlines for testing activities. The particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor for the extent of testing required, as testing should be based on objective criteria and not on personal preferences or abilities. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 14-15.

Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD) tests focus on verifying whether the system meets the specified acceptance criteria. The most critical path to test first would be the scenario where everything is done correctly (happy path), ensuring the basic functionality works as expected.

The new user provides all valid data.

This ensures the registration form works and the user receives a confirmation email.

This test covers the basic functionality and will help verify that the primary use case is handled correctly before testing invalid or edge cases.

A correct list of boundary values for the P input should include the minimum and maximum values of the valid range (15 and 350), as well as the values just below and above the boundaries (14 and 351). Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an input domain or output range, as these values are more likely to cause errors than values in the middle. Option B satisfies this condition, as it has all four boundary values (14, 15, 350, 351). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 99999), option C has two values outside the range (999 and 100000), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

The absence-of-errors fallacy is the mistaken belief that just because a software system is free of defects, it will meet the user's needs and expectations. Involving users early through practices like prototyping helps ensure that the development team is building the right system that meets user expectations, not just a system that is defect-free. This approach aligns with the testing principle that emphasizes understanding the users' needs and ensuring the system fulfills them. This principle is explained in the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0​​.

Test exit criteria are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can be concluded. Test exit criteria are usually defined in the test plan and agreed by the stakeholders. Test exit criteria can be based on various factors, such as test coverage, defect status, quality level, risk level, etc. Test schedules would be the least likely to be used as the basis for test exit criteria, because test schedules are not directly related to the quality or performance of the software product, but rather to the time or resources allocated for testing. Test schedules can be used as the basis for test entry criteria, which are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can start. The other options are more likely to be used as the basis for test exit criteria. Cost of testing performed so far can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can indicate the return on investment or the cost-benefit ratio of testing. Confidence of testers in tested code can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can reflect the level of satisfaction or assurance of the testers about the quality or reliability of the software product. Number of unfixed defects can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can indicate the level of risk or impact of the remaining defects on the software product. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 13.

The IEEE 829 standard is a widely used specification for test documentation, but it is not mandatory or universal. Most test documentation regimes follow this spec to some degree, with changes done to fit a specific situation or organization. The standard does not require any approval from management, marketing or development for any deviation, nor does it depend on the type of project (military or consumer market). The standard also does not guarantee high quality test documentation regimes, as it only provides a general outline and format, not the actual content or quality criteria. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 16.

A correct reason to apply test automation is when there are a lot of repetitive testing tasks. Test automation is the use of software tools or scripts to perform or support testing activities, such as test case execution, test result comparison, test data generation, etc. Test automation can be beneficial when there are a lot of repetitive testing tasks that need to be performed frequently or consistently, such as regression testing, performance testing, load testing, etc. Test automation can help to save time and effort, increase reliability and accuracy, and improve coverage and efficiency of testing. The other options are not correct reasons to apply test automation. When a new test automation tool is launched is not a reason to apply test automation, but rather a factor for choosing a test automation tool. When it is easy to automate is not a reason to apply test automation, but rather a factor for evaluating the feasibility of test automation. When it is cheap to buy test automation tools is not a reason to apply test automation, but rather a factor for estimating the cost and benefit of test automation. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 10.

The Waterfall model exemplifies a software development model that does not support the principle of early testing. In the Waterfall model, each phase must be completed before the next begins, which delays testing until after the completion of the earlier phases like requirements gathering and design. This can often result in finding defects later in the development cycle, making them more expensive and time-consuming to fix​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

Selecting the right test technique is crucial because different techniques are suited to different types of testing and can significantly increase the effectiveness of the testing process by creating tests that are more likely to find defects. While reducing the number of tests (A) and defining the number of regression cycles (D) are considerations in the testing process, they are not the primary reasons for selecting a test technique. The assertion that the only way to test a software application is by using well-proven test techniques (B) is too restrictive and does not acknowledge the adaptability required in testing to suit different contexts and objectives. Therefore, option C is the most comprehensive reason, as it focuses on the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, leading to the creation of high-quality tests that have a higher chance of finding bugs.

All testing levels are applicable, independent of which software development life-cycle process (V-model, iterative, incremental) is used. Testing levels are defined based on the scope and objectives of testing, not on the software development model. Component testing, integration testing, system testing and acceptance testing are common testing levels that can be applied to any software development model, as long as they are planned and executed properly. The V-model is a software development model that emphasizes the relationship between each development phase and its corresponding testing phase. Iterative and incremental models are software development models that divide the development process into smaller cycles or iterations, where each iteration produces a working version of the software that can be tested and evaluated. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 18.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Exhaustive testing (testing all input combinations) is practically impossible except in trivial cases (C). Instead, testers focus on risk-based, prioritized, and efficient test techniques. The seven principles of testing in the ISTQB syllabus highlight that exhaustive testing is infeasible, and therefore, techniques such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, and risk-based testing are used to optimize test coverage.

The purpose of a review is to find defects and improve the quality of the work product, not to criticize or blame the author. Reporting defects objectively means describing them factually and constructively, without using negative or emotional language that could offend the author or damage their motivation. This way, the author can take the feedback positively as an effort at improving the product and not as a personal assault. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 138.

Risk level is determined by the combination of two factors: the likelihood of an event occurring and the impact or harm that could result from that event. This approach allows risks to be prioritized based on their potential effect on the project or system. The likelihood represents the probability of the risk event occurring, while the impact represents the severity of the consequences if the event does happen. This concept is fundamental in risk-based testing and helps guide decision-making during the testing process.

The requirement specifies that a bonus should be paid if the total amount of sales (TAS) made during the year is 300,000€ or more. The software incorrectly implements this requirement with "IF (TAS = 300,000)" instead of "IF (TAS >= 300,000)". Using boundary value analysis (BVA), which is a common technique in software testing, the three test cases provided (TC1 = 299,999, TC2 = 300,000, and TC3 = 300,001) cover the critical boundary values around the condition.

TC1 tests just below the boundary (299,999),

TC2 tests exactly at the boundary (300,000),

TC3 tests just above the boundary (300,001).

Since the software incorrectly checks for TAS equal to 300,000, only TC2 will fail because the condition is exactly met and highlights the incorrect implementation of the decision logic.

Equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis are test design techniques that are most appropriate for testing the login page of a web site. The page contains fields for user name and password, which are input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input data and output results of a software component into partitions of equivalent data. Each partition should contain data that is treated in the same way by the component. Equivalence partitioning can be used to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. Boundary value analysis is a technique that tests boundary values between partitions of equivalent data. Boundary values are values at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Boundary value analysis can be used to detect defects caused by incorrect handling of boundary conditions. For example, for testing the user name field, we can identify two equivalence partitions: valid user name (existing and correct) and invalid user name (non-existing or incorrect). The boundary values for these partitions are the minimum and maximum length of user name allowed by the system.

Decision table testing and state transition testing are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions or events. Decision table testing is a technique that shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). State transition testing is a technique that models how a system transitions from one state to another depending on events or conditions.

Exploratory testing and statement coverage are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that require learning, creativity and intuition or structural analysis. Exploratory testing is an approach to testing that emphasizes learning, test design and test execution at the same time. Exploratory testing relies on the tester’s skills, creativity and intuition to explore the software under test and discover defects. Statement coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many statements in a program have been executed by a test suite. Statement coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite.

Decision coverage and fault attack are not suitable for testing the login page of a web site, as they are more applicable for testing components that have complex logic or potential errors. Decision coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many decision outcomes in a program have been executed by a test suite. Decision coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite. Fault attack is a type of functional testing that deliberately introduces faults into a system in order to provoke failures or errors. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46; Chapter 5, page 47-48.

Traceability is the ability to trace the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Traceability can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test coverage, the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. However, not all the statements given are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products. The statement that is not true is option C, which says that test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly. This statement is false, because test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. Test objectives should not be the same for all test levels, as different test levels have different focuses, scopes, and perspectives of testing, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. The other statements are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products, such as:

Traceability can be useful for assessing the impact of a change to a test basis item on the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to identify which tests are affected by a change in the test basis, such as a new requirement, a modified design, a revised risk, etc., and to determine the necessary actions to update, re-execute, or re-evaluate the tests. Traceability can also help to estimate the effort, the cost, and the time needed to implement the change and to verify its impact on the software system.

Traceability can be useful for determining how many test basis items are covered by the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to measure the test coverage, which is the degree to which the test basis is exercised by the test cases. Traceability can help to identify which test basis items are covered, partially covered, or not covered by the tests, and to evaluate the adequacy, the completeness, and the effectiveness of the testing process. Traceability can also help to identify the gaps, the overlaps, or the redundancies in the test coverage, and to prioritize, optimize, or improve the test cases.

Traceability can be useful to support the needs required by the auditing of testing: This statement is true, because traceability can help to provide evidence, documentation, and justification for the testing activities, results, and outcomes. Traceability can help to demonstrate that the testing process follows the standards, the regulations, the policies, and the best practices that are applicable to the software system, the project, or the organization. Traceability can also help to verify that the testing process meets the expectations, the needs, and the satisfaction of the users and the stakeholders. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.1, Test Planning1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.2, Test Monitoring and Control1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, Test Analysis and Design1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Traceability, Test Basis, Test Artifact, Test Objective, Test Level, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2

In software testing, risks are categorized into product risks and project risks. Product risks are associated with the potential of a product to fail in meeting its quality criteria. Project risks are related to potential issues that could affect the project's ability to deliver a product.

[i] is a project risk because it concerns the availability and adequacy of hardware resources for performance testing.

[ii] is a product risk because it pertains to a security and functionality issue within the web application.

[iii] is a project risk because it involves the availability of necessary requirements documentation for the testing process.

[iv] is a product risk because it relates to the system's functionality and data integrity after a failure.

Thus, statement A correctly classifies [ii] and [iv] as product risks and [i] and [iii] as project risks​​.

The unscripted tests produced by the tester’s experience during the two-hour test session belong to the testing quadrant Q3. The testing quadrants are a classification of testing types based on two dimensions: the test objectives (whether the testing is focused on supporting the team or critiquing the product) and the test basis (whether the testing is based on the technology or the business). The testing quadrants are labeled as Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4, and each quadrant represents a different testing perspective, such as unit testing, acceptance testing, usability testing, or performance testing. The testing quadrant Q3 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of critiquing the product from the business perspective, such as exploratory testing, usability testing, user acceptance testing, alpha testing, beta testing, etc. The unscripted tests performed by the tester in the given scenario are examples of exploratory testing and usability testing, as they are based on the tester’s experience, intuition, and learning of the web application, and they focus on some specific usability issues, such as the user interface, the user satisfaction, the user feedback, etc. The other options are incorrect, because:

The testing quadrant Q1 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of supporting the team from the technology perspective, such as unit testing, component testing, integration testing, system testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by developers or testers who have access to the source code, the design, the architecture, or the configuration of the software system, and they aim to verify the functionality, the quality, and the reliability of the software system at different levels of integration.

The testing quadrant Q2 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of supporting the team from the business perspective, such as functional testing, acceptance testing, story testing, scenario testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by testers or customers who have access to the requirements, the specifications, the user stories, or the business processes of the software system, and they aim to validate that the software system meets the expectations and the needs of the users and the stakeholders.

The testing quadrant Q4 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of critiquing the product from the technology perspective, such as performance testing, security testing, reliability testing, compatibility testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by testers or specialists who have access to the tools, the metrics, the standards, or the benchmarks of the software system, and they aim to evaluate the non-functional aspects of the software system, such as the efficiency, the security, the reliability, or the compatibility of the software system under different conditions or environments. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Testing Quadrant, Exploratory Testing, Usability Testing, Unit Testing, Component Testing, Integration Testing, System Testing, Functional Testing, Acceptance Testing, Story Testing, Scenario Testing, Performance Testing, Security Testing, Reliability Testing, Compatibility Testing

The test pyramid concept suggests that there should be more low-level tests (unit tests) and fewer high-level tests (end-to-end tests).

As we move higher up the pyramid (e.g., from unit tests to integration tests to end-to-end tests), each test covers more production code.

Higher-level tests (like end-to-end) validate larger parts of the application, including multiple units and their interactions.

This aligns with the principle that higher-level tests provide broader coverage but are fewer in number and more expensive to run and maintain.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

A defect report should contain relevant details to help developers reproduce and fix the defect efficiently. The essential elements include:

Test object & environment (A) – To ensure reproducibility.

Title & summary (B) – For quick identification.

Expected vs. actual results (D) – To describe the discrepancy.

The structure of the test team (C) is irrelevant for defect tracking and resolution.

Debugging the software to find the reason for defects is not a common objective of testing, but rather a task of development or maintenance. Debugging is a process of locating and fixing errors in the software code, while testing is a process of finding and reporting defects in the software behavior or quality. Testing does not aim to fix defects, but rather to provide information on their existence and impact. The other options are common objectives of testing. Finding defects in the software is one of the main objectives of testing, as it helps to improve the quality and reliability of the software. Preventing defects is another objective of testing, as it helps to avoid rework and reduce costs and risks. Providing information on the status of the system is another objective of testing, as it helps to support decision making and risk management. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

Decision tables are used to model complex decision logic by considering different combinations of conditions and actions. Based on the given decision table for prescribing drug therapy:

Column 1 and Column 3 both result in the same actions (prescribing Amoxicillin).

These columns can be merged because the actions taken do not depend on whether the patient is taking anticoagulant therapy (both are 'T' for this condition).

Thus, combining these columns simplifies the decision table without losing any information.

You should choose a test technique because you need to match the way you test to the content of the product under test. A test technique is a method or process for deriving and selecting test cases based on some criteria or rules. Different test techniques are suitable for different types of software products, depending on their characteristics, functionalities, requirements, specifications, risks, etc. Choosing a test technique helps to ensure that the test cases are relevant, effective, and efficient for the product under test. The other options are not correct reasons to choose a test technique. Time constraints are not a factor for choosing a test technique, but rather for prioritizing or optimizing testing activities. Covering the full scope of the product’s functionality is not a guarantee of choosing a test technique, but rather a goal of testing. Choosing a test technique is not a common practice in software testing, but rather a professional skill and responsibility. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 31.

In Agile teams using the planning poker technique for estimating user stories, it is common practice to have further discussions and rounds of estimation if there is a significant discrepancy in the initial estimates. This helps in reaching a consensus and ensures that all team members understand the complexity and requirements of the user story. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, planning poker involves discussions to clarify differences in estimates, especially when there is a wide range of values selected. By having Memb6 and Memb4, who provided the most pessimistic and optimistic estimates, explain their reasoning, it fosters a deeper understanding and encourages the team to converge towards a more accurate and agreed-upon estimate.

A software bug can cause harm to a company by directly affecting its operations, reputation, user satisfaction, and financials. Option D, "When calculating the final price in a shopping list, the price of the last item is not added," describes a defect that directly impacts the core functionality of a financial transaction, potentially leading to financial loss and customer dissatisfaction. This can have severe implications for the company's credibility and revenue. Options A, B, and C describe bugs that, while potentially annoying, do not have the same direct impact on the company's core operations and financial integrity as option D.

Technical reviews are structured meetings that aim to examine various aspects of a product or project to identify any defects or improvements. Options A (Pre-meeting preparation by reviewers), B (Using checklists during the meeting), and D (Preparation of a review report) are typical activities in a technical review process. Inviting end-users to the meeting (C), however, is generally not part of a typical technical review, as these reviews are usually more focused on the technical aspects and are conducted by peers or experts within the development or testing teams rather than end-users​​.

The most important report improvement for the given incident report would be to add information about which web browser was used when the defect was detected. This information is relevant for reproducing and debugging the defect, as different web browsers may have different behaviors or compatibility issues with the web application. The other options are less important or irrelevant for the incident report. The developer who should fix the bug can be assigned by the project manager or the defect tracking system, not by the tester who reports the defect. The time stamp when the incident happened is not very useful, as it does not indicate the cause or the frequency of the defect. The impact analysis is not part of the incident report, but rather of the risk assessment or prioritization process. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 140.

 A test oracle is a mechanism or principle that can be used to determine whether the observed behavior or output of a system under test is correct or not1. A test oracle can be based on various sources of expected results, such as specifications, user expectations, previous versions, comparable systems, etc2. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 1.2.1, Page 91; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, Page 332.

In an Agile project, a tester's responsibilities include understanding, implementing, and updating the test strategy (i), actively collaborating with developers and business stakeholders to clarify requirements, especially in terms of testability, consistency, and completeness (iv), and participating proactively in team retrospective meetings, suggesting and implementing improvements (v). These activities ensure that testing is integrated into the development process, promoting continuous feedback and improvement. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus underlines the collaborative nature of Agile testing and the tester's role in contributing to the team's overall quality goals.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Test execution involves running test cases and documenting results. Test logs (A) provide evidence of executed tests, failures, and actual outcomes. Automated test scripts (B) are part of test implementation, test plans (C) belong to test planning, and test conditions (D) are identified during test analysis.

Product risk involves the potential issues that can affect the quality and functionality of the software product, such as defects, performance problems, and usability issues. Project risk, on the other hand, relates to the risks that can impact the project's schedule, budget, and resources, such as delays, cost overruns, and resource constraints. Understanding both types of risks is crucial for managing and mitigating potential problems in software projects.

Confirmation testing, also known as retesting, is conducted to verify that specific defects have been fixed. Regression testing, on the other hand, is performed to ensure that recent changes have not adversely affected existing features of the software. Both types of testing are crucial for maintaining the integrity and quality of the software after modifications​​.

The following statements about risk-based testing are correct:

II) Tests should be prioritized to find tie critical detects as early as possible. Risk-based testing involves prioritizing tests based on risk level, which reflects both the likelihood and impact of defects or failures. Tests with higher risk level should be executed earlier than tests with lower risk level, in order to find and fix critical defects as soon as possible.

III) Non-testing activities may also help to reduce risk. Risk-based testing does not only involve testing activities, but also other activities that can help mitigate risks, such as reviews, inspections, audits, simulations or prototyping.

Branch coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of branches or decision outcomes that are executed by the test cases. A branch is a point in the code where the control flow can take two or more alternative paths based on a condition. For example, an if-else statement is a branch that can execute either the if-block or the else-block depending on the evaluation of the condition. Branch coverage ensures that each branch is taken at least once by the test cases, and thus reveals the behavior of the software under different scenarios. Branch coverage is also known as decision coverage or all-edges coverage.

Branch coverage is suitable for testing the cases where a specific action is not allowed, because it can verify that the test cases cover all the possible outcomes of the conditions that determine the action. For example, if the program has a condition that checks if the manufacturing stage can be stopped, then branch coverage can ensure that the test cases cover both the cases where the stage can be stopped and where it cannot be stopped. This way, branch coverage can help identify any missing or incorrect branches that may lead to undesired or unsafe actions.

The other options are not correct because they are not suitable for testing the cases where a specific action is not allowed. Code coverage is a general term that encompasses various types of coverage metrics, such as statement coverage, branch coverage, data flow coverage, etc. Code coverage does not specify which type of coverage metric is used for the analysis. Data flow coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of data flow paths that are executed by the test cases. A data flow path is a sequence of statements that define, use, or kill a variable. Data flow coverage is useful for testing the correctness and completeness of the data manipulation in the software, but not for testing the conditions that determine the actions. Statement coverage is a type of structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of statements or lines of code that are executed by the test cases. Statement coverage ensures that each statement is executed at least once by the test cases, but it does not reveal the behavior of the software under different scenarios. Statement coverage is a weaker criterion than branch coverage, because it does not account for the branches or decision outcomes in the code. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages 51-54.

Statement coverage is a white-box test technique which focuses on executing all possible statements in the code at least once during testing. This helps in determining the percentage of executable statements that have been executed by the test suite, aiming to ensure that all parts of the program have been tested at least once​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

Static analysis is the process of examining the work products of a software development or testing activity without executing them. Static analysis can be applied to various types of work products, such as requirements, design, code, test cases, etc. However, test plans are not suitable for static analysis, because they are high-level documents that describe the test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, and risks of a testing project. Test plans are not executable or formalized in a way that static analysis tools can analyze them. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The ratio-based estimation method relies on historical relationships between development and testing effort.

Using the given 5:3 ratio:

Thus, the correct answer is 270 person-days (D).

(A) and (C) are incorrect as they overestimate the effort.

(B) underestimates the testing effort based on the ratio.

Ratio-based estimation helps allocate resources effectively based on past project data.

Statements II, III and V are true about test reports. Test reports are documents that provide information on the results and status of testing activities for a given period or phase. Test reports should give stakeholders information as basis for decisions, such as whether to release the software product, whether to continue testing, whether to change the scope or priorities of testing, etc. Test reports should summarize what happened through a period of testing, such as what test cases were executed, what defects were found, what risks were identified, what issues were encountered, what achievements were made, etc. Test reports should include information about remaining risks, such as what defects are still open, what test cases are still pending, what functionalities are still untested, what uncertainties are still unresolved, etc. Statements I and IV are not true about test reports. Test reports do not need to be approved by the test team, the development team, or the customer, unless it is specified by the test policy or the test plan. Test reports only need to be reviewed and verified by the test leader or the test manager before being distributed to the intended recipients. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 141.

Structural testing is a type of testing that measures its effectiveness by tracking which lines of code were executed by the tests. Structural testing, also known as white-box testing or glass-box testing, is based on the internal structure, design, or implementation of the software. Structural testing aims to verify that the software meets the specified quality attributes, such as performance, security, reliability, or maintainability, by exercising the code paths, branches, statements, conditions, or data flows. Structural testing uses various coverage metrics, such as function coverage, line coverage, branch coverage, or statement coverage, to determine how much of the code has been tested and to identify any untested or unreachable parts of the code. Structural testing can be applied at any level of testing, such as unit testing, integration testing, system testing, or acceptance testing, but it is more commonly used at lower levels, where the testers have access to the source code.

The other options are not correct because they are not types of testing that measure their effectiveness by tracking which lines of code were executed by the tests. Acceptance testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software meets the acceptance criteria and the user requirements. Acceptance testing is usually performed by the end-users or customers, who may not have access to the source code or the technical details of the software. Acceptance testing is more concerned with the functionality, usability, or suitability of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. Integration testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software components or subsystems work together as expected. Integration testing is usually performed by the developers or testers, who may use both structural and functional testing techniques to check the interfaces, interactions, or dependencies between the components or subsystems. Integration testing is more concerned with the integration logic, data flow, or communication of the software, rather than its individual lines of code. Exploratory testing is a type of testing that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution. Exploratory testing is usually performed by the testers, who use their creativity, intuition, or experience to explore the software and discover any defects, risks, or opportunities for improvement. Exploratory testing is more concerned with the behavior, quality, or value of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages 51-54; Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Testing, Section 1.4: Testing Throughout the Software Development Lifecycle, Pages 11-13; Chapter 3: Static Testing, Section 3.4: Exploratory Testing, Pages 40-41.

The minimum number of test cases needed to cover the full decision table associated with this scenario is 6. This is because the decision table has 4 conditions (type of customer and amount of sale) and 4 actions (bonus percentage). The conditions have 2 possible values each (Basic or Premium, and G1, G2 or G3), so the total number of combinations is 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 = 16. However, not all combinations are valid, as some of them are contradictory or impossible. For example, a sale cannot be both less than 300 euros and greater than 2000 euros at the same time. Therefore, we need to eliminate the invalid combinations and keep only the valid ones. The valid combinations are:

Type of customer

Amount of sale

Bonus percentage

Basic

G1

3%

Basic

G2

5%

Basic

G3

7%

Premium

G1

5%

Premium

G2

7%

Premium

G3

10%

These 6 combinations cover all the possible values of the conditions and actions, and they are the minimum number of test cases needed to cover the full decision table.

An oracle is a mechanism or source that can provide the expected result for a given test input or situation. Sometimes old version of a product can be used as an oracle, if it is assumed that the old version behaves correctly for the test cases that are executed on the new version. This is also known as back-to-back testing. Oracles do not help in reproducing the irreproducible bugs, as they only provide the expected results, not the actual results. Oracles are not derived from the design, but from the requirements or specifications. Oracles cannot be generated automatically using data generators, as data generators only provide test inputs, not test outputs. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 9.

The state transition diagram provided shows three distinct states:

Waiting for fingerprint

Waiting for PIN

Valid PIN/ask menu selection

Each state represents a different stage in the system's operation, with transitions based on user actions and system responses​​.

Checklist-based testing involves using checklists that contain items, such as potential test conditions, that should be tested. These checklists are often based on insights into what is important to the user, potential areas where software might fail, and specific aspects that need to be tested. It provides a structured yet flexible approach to testing, ensuring key areas are covered while allowing testers to use their experience and understanding of the system. Checklist-based testing is not limited to non-functional testing but can be applied to various types of testing, including functional testing.

A typical test plan includes various elements, such as resource requirements, test completion criteria, and suspension/resumption criteria. However, the list of product risks that have not been fully mitigated is generally not included in the test plan but rather in the risk management documentation.

The test plan focuses on planning and executing tests, including resource allocation and defining criteria for test suspension and resumption.

While risk management is crucial, unmitigated risks are typically documented in risk logs or separate risk management plans.

A dynamic analysis tool is a tool that performs analysis of a software product based on its behavior during execution. A dynamic analysis tool can monitor various aspects of a program’s run-time performance, such as memory usage, CPU load, response time, or resource leaks. A dynamic analysis tool can monitor the allocation, use and de-allocation of memory during run-time of a program, which can help detect defects such as memory leaks, buffer overflows, or memory corruption. A dynamic analysis tool cannot provide support for traceability of tests, test results and incidents to source documents, as this is a function of a test management tool. A dynamic analysis tool cannot execute programs step-by-step in order to reproduce failures and find corresponding defects, as this is a function of a debugging tool. A dynamic analysis tool cannot provide support for release of baselines consisting of configuration items, as this is a function of a configuration management tool. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 6, page 56-57.

This scenario is using a walkthrough review type and a perspective-based review technique. In a walkthrough, the author of the document leads the meeting and it typically includes a meeting leader and a scribe, as described. This type of review is informal, focuses on discussion, and often involves scenario-based reading of the document to understand different user perspectives​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

Configuration management of testware is a critical aspect of maintaining the integrity and traceability of test assets throughout the testing lifecycle. The main benefit of configuration management is to ensure that all testware items, such as test cases, test scripts, test data, and test results, are systematically identified, version controlled, and tracked for changes in relation to each other.

Option C accurately describes this benefit. By applying configuration management principles to testware, teams can manage changes to test assets efficiently, ensuring that the testware remains consistent, up-to-date, and aligned with the version of the software under test. This control mechanism facilitates the reproducibility of tests, enhances the reliability of testing activities, and supports traceability from requirements through to defects.

Options A, B, and D describe other aspects of test management and testing processes but do not capture the core benefit of configuration management of testware, which is centered on the systematic control and tracking of testware items.

This answer is correct because error guessing is a test design technique where the experience and intuition of the tester are used to anticipate where errors, defects and failures have occurred or are likely to occur, and to design test cases to expose them. Error guessing can be based on factors such as the complexity of the system or component, the known or suspected weaknesses of the system or component, the previous history of defects, or the common types of errors in the domain or technology. Error guessing can be used as a complementary technique to other more systematic or formal techniques, or when there is insufficient information or time to apply them. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.5

In the context of agile (iterative-incremental) development models, testing is integrated into the development process and occurs continuously throughout the lifecycle of the project. Agile testing emphasizes adaptability and the need for feedback at various stages of development.

Option C is correct because regression testing is indeed necessary whenever a new increment is added to the existing system. Agile development often involves frequent changes and additions to the codebase, which can potentially introduce new defects into previously tested code. Regression testing ensures that new changes have not adversely affected existing functionality.

Options A, B, and D present misconceptions about agile testing:

A is incorrect because, in agile, all types of testing (unit, integration, system, acceptance) are important and occur throughout the iteration, not just unit and acceptance tests.

B is incorrect because agile methodologies advocate for continuous integration and testing, where development and testing activities overlap and support each other throughout an iteration.

D is incorrect because agile methodologies encourage a wide range of testing types, including both functional and non-functional, as well as exploratory testing, to ensure a comprehensive quality assessment.

Acceptance criteria for user stories often include detailed specifications about data definitions, such as the format, allowed values, and default values for a data item. This helps ensure that the developed feature meets the expected requirements and provides a clear understanding for both developers and testers on what needs to be validated. Therefore, statement B is true as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

The benefits of continuous integration include: i. Allows earlier detection and easier root cause analysis of integration problems and conflicting changes. iv. Gives the development team regular feedback on whether the code is working. These benefits help in maintaining the stability and quality of the codebase by integrating and testing changes frequently and providing quick feedback to developers​​.

The question is about identifying an example of testing contributing to higher quality. Quality is the degree to which a component, system or process meets specified requirements and/or user/customer needs and expectations1. Testing is the process consisting of all lifecycle activities, both static and dynamic, concerned with planning, preparation and evaluation of software products and related work products to determine that they satisfy specified requirements, to demonstrate that they are fit for purpose and to detect defects2.

Therefore, testing contributes to higher quality by verifying and validating that the software products and related work products meet the specified requirements, are fit for purpose and have no defects, or at least have a reduced number of defects. Testing also provides information about the quality of the software products and related work products to the stakeholders, who can make informed decisions based on the test results3.

Out of the four given statements, only option D is an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it shows that testing has detected a defect (a flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function4) and that the defect has been resolved (fixed and confirmed) prior to release (delivery of the software product to the customer or end user). This means that testing has prevented a potential failure (an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits) from occurring in the operational environment, and thus has improved the quality of the software product.

Option A is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a reporting activity that summarizes the test results and evaluates the test objectives, but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test summary report is a document that records and communicates the outcomes of testing activities, including test completion criteria, test results, incident reports, test summary and evaluation, and lessons learned.

Option B is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a planning activity that estimates the resources and time needed for testing activities, but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test effort estimate is an approximation of the amount of work and/or the duration of time required to perform testing activities.

Option C is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a preparation activity that sets up the test environment (an environment containing hardware, instrumentation, simulators, software tools, and other support elements needed to conduct a test), but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test environment installation is a process of installing and configuring the test environment according to the test environment specification.

Boundary value analysis is a technique that tests boundary values between partitions of equivalent data. Boundary values are values at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Boundary value analysis can be applied to both input and output values. Based on the given requirement, we can identify two input values: age and weekend. Age should be an integer of 0 or above, and weekend means Friday to Sunday inclusive. The following statement is not correct:

A) Thursday is a valid input boundary value. This statement is not correct, as Thursday is not a boundary value for the input weekend. The boundary values for the input weekend are Friday and Sunday, as they are at the edge of the equivalence partition that represents weekend days. The following statements are correct:

B) A minimum of 6 valid test cases are derived from boundary value analysis based on input age. This statement is correct, as we can derive six valid test cases based on input age by using the minimum and maximum values for each equivalence partition defined by the requirement. The equivalence partitions for input age are: under 7 (0 to 6), 7 to 13 inclusive (7 to 13), and greater than 65 (66 and above). The minimum and maximum values for each partition are: 0 and 6, 7 and 13, and 66 and any value above it.

C) $3.01 is a valid output boundary value. This statement is correct, as $3.01 is a boundary value for the output additional fee. The additional fee can have four possible values depending on the input age: $0 (for visitors aged under 7), $2.40 (for visitors aged 7 to 13 inclusive with a 20% discount), $1.50 (for visitors aged greater than 65 with a 50% discount), and $3 (for visitors aged between 14 and 65). The boundary values for the output additional fee are $0 and $3, as they are at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Therefore, $3.01 is a valid output boundary value, as it is at the smallest incremental distance above $3.

D) 7 and 13 are boundary values for the equivalence partition including age 10. This statement is correct, as 7 and 13 are boundary values for the equivalence partition that represents visitors aged 7 to 13 inclusive. This partition includes age 10, which is an internal value within the partition. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 37-38.

Regression testing is the re-running of functional and non-functional tests to ensure that previously developed and tested software still performs as expected after a change1 It does not involve retesting of a fixed defect, testing of new functionality, or applying only to functional testing. Tests that are used for regression testing should be repeatable, because they are used to verify the stability of the software after each change2 References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.2, Page 291; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Page 292

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) focuses on test cases at the edges of partitions because defects often occur at boundaries. The temperature ranges are:

≤7 (Too cold → W)

[8-21] (Standstill → X)

[22-29] (Ideal → Y)

≥30 (Too hot → Z)

A two-point BVA means testing both the lower and upper boundary values of each partition.

The correct selection {7,8,21,22,29,30} includes:

7 → Boundary of Too Cold (W)

8 → Lower boundary of Standstill (X)

21 → Upper boundary of Standstill (X)

22 → Lower boundary of Ideal (Y)

29 → Upper boundary of Ideal (Y)

30 → Lower boundary of Too Hot (Z)

This ensures maximum boundary coverage.

The minimum number of test cases needed to cover every unique sequence of up to 3 states/2 transitions starting in the “Start” state and ending in the “End” state is 4. This is because there are 4 unique sequences of up to 3 states/2 transitions starting in the “Start” state and ending in the “End” state:

Start -> Bet -> End

Start -> Deal -> End

Start -> 1st Deal -> End

Start -> 2nd Deal -> End References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents.

Cost can be regarded as an exit criterion for testing, because it is a factor that affects the profitability and feasibility of the software product. Testing is an investment that aims to improve the quality and reliability of the software product, but it also consumes resources, such as time, money, and human effort. Therefore, testing should be planned and executed in a way that balances the cost and benefit of testing activities. Having cost as an exit criterion helps to avoid spending too much money on testing, which may result in an unprofitable product or a loss of competitive advantage. Cost can also help to prioritize and focus the testing efforts on the most critical and valuable features and functions of the software product. However, cost should not be the only exit criterion for testing, as it may not reflect the true quality and risk level of the software product. Other exit criteria, such as defect rate, test coverage, user satisfaction, etc., should also be considered and defined in the test plan.

The other options are incorrect, because they either deny the importance of cost as an exit criterion, or they make false or unrealistic assumptions about the cost of testing. Option B is incorrect, because the financial value of product quality can be estimated, for example, by using cost-benefit analysis, return on investment, or cost of quality models. Option C is incorrect, because going by cost as an exit criterion does not necessarily constrain the testing project or help achieve the desired quality level. Cost is a relative and variable factor that depends on the scope, complexity, and context of the software product and the testing project. Option D is incorrect, because the cost of testing can be measured effectively, for example, by using metrics, such as test effort, test resources, test tools, test environment, etc.

In Agile teams, close collaboration among testers and other team members can lead to organizational risks such as: ii. Close interaction with developers causes a loss of the appropriate tester mindset. iv. Testers, once they have acquired technical development or business skills, leave the testing team.

These risks highlight the potential issues of diminished testing perspective and team turnover when testers integrate closely with developers and other roles​​.

Test planning involves defining the overall approach to testing, including scheduling, resources, and milestones. It is during this phase that the detailed schedule for each testing activity is determined based on estimates, resource availability, and constraints. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 outlines that test planning encompasses the creation of test plans and schedules to ensure that testing activities are properly managed and controlled​​.

Finding all defects in a product and ensuring it is defect-free is not a valid objective of testing. Testing aims to find as many defects as possible, build confidence in the quality of the product, and evaluate work products. However, it is unrealistic to expect testing to find all defects, and declaring a product completely defect-free is impractical.

Test automation allows you to produce tests that are less subject to human errors, as they can execute predefined test scripts or test cases with consistent inputs, outputs, and expected results. Test automation can also reduce the manual effort and time required to execute repetitive or tedious tests, such as regression tests, performance tests, or data-driven tests. Test automation does not demonstrate the absence of defects, as it can only verify the expected behavior of the system under test, not the unexpected or unknown behavior. Test automation does not avoid performing exploratory testing, as exploratory testing is a valuable technique to discover new information, risks, or defects that are not covered by automated tests. Test automation does not increase test process efficiency by facilitating management of defects, as defect management is a separate activity that involves reporting, tracking, analyzing, and resolving defects, which may or may not be related to automated tests. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.3.1, Test Automation1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test Automation2

A successful review process involves all participants being trained in the review type and understanding its objectives. This ensures that everyone can contribute effectively and understand what is expected from the review. Proper training helps to identify defects accurately and facilitates constructive feedback, leading to a more efficient and effective review process. Hence, statement C is correct according to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

The principle of early testing is applicable to all recognized software development models, including sequential, iterative, and incremental models. Starting test activities early in the lifecycle helps in identifying and addressing defects as soon as possible, which can save time and costs by preventing defects from propagating to later stages of development. This proactive approach enhances the overall quality and efficiency of the software development process. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 1.3

Statement coverage is a metric used in white-box testing that measures the percentage of executable statements in the code that have been executed by the test cases. It is calculated as the number of statements executed by the tests divided by the total number of executable statements in the code, providing an indication of how much of the code has been tested​​.

Configuration management in the context of testing involves the systematic control of changes to the configuration items, including testware such as test scripts, test data, and test environments. It ensures that all changes are tracked and recorded, enabling the version control and management of testware​​ .

Option A is related to test execution rather than configuration management. Option C describes quality management in a broader sense, not specifically configuration management. Option D is specific to the configuration of tools, not the overall management of testware versions.

Looking for defects in a system does not require ignoring system details, but rather paying attention to them and understanding how they affect the system’s quality, functionality, and usability. Ignoring system details could lead to missing important defects or testing irrelevant aspects of the system.

Identifying defects may be perceived as criticism against product, especially by the developers or stakeholders who are invested in the product’s success. However, identifying defects is not meant to be a personal attack, but rather a constructive feedback that helps to improve the product and ensure its alignment with the requirements and expectations of the users and clients.

Looking for defects in system requires professional pessimism and curiosity, as testers need to anticipate and explore the possible ways that the system could fail, malfunction, or behave unexpectedly. Professional pessimism means being skeptical and critical of the system’s quality and reliability, while curiosity means being eager and interested in finding out the root causes and consequences of the defects.

Testing is often seen as a destructive activity instead of constructive activity, as it involves finding and reporting the flaws and weaknesses of the system, rather than creating or enhancing it. However, testing is actually a constructive activity, as it contributes to the system’s improvement, verification, validation, and optimization, and ultimately to the delivery of a high-quality product that meets the needs and expectations of the users and clients.

Use cases describe a system's behavior as it responds to a request from a user. They typically consist of various scenarios, such as basic flow, alternative flow, and exceptional flow, which represent possible behaviors when a user interacts with the system. When deriving test cases from use cases, it is important to cover these different types of user behaviors.

Test cases should be designed to verify how the system behaves during each of these scenarios. This ensures that the system operates correctly for normal and error conditions encountered by human users or systems interacting with the application. Thus, test cases derived from use cases aim to cover basic, exceptional, and alternative flows, ensuring comprehensive coverage.

In software testing terminology, a failure is an observable deviation of the software from its expected behavior. A defect (or bug) is the cause of the failure in the software's code. In this case, the observed slowdown is the failure, while the underlying memory leak in the application code is the defect causing this failure. This distinction is clearly outlined in the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, which differentiates between failures (observable issues) and defects (underlying issues in the code)​​.

A correct list of boundary values for the P input should include the minimum and maximum values of the valid range (15 and 350), as well as the values just below and above the boundaries (14 and 351). Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an input domain or output range, as these values are more likely to cause errors than values in the middle. Option B satisfies this condition, as it has all four boundary values (14, 15, 350, 351). Option A has only two boundary values (14 and 351), option C has only two boundary values (15 and 350), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is performed to verify that specific defects have been successfully fixed.

Option A: "Testing due to the application of a new version of the interface" would typically involve regression testing, not confirmation testing.

Option B: "Testing that fixes resolved the defects in the search function" fits the description of confirmation testing as it focuses on ensuring that specific issues have been addressed.

Option C: "Testing if a system still works after update of an operating system" is an example of regression testing, as it checks the overall system behavior after an update.

Option D: "Testing to ensure the adding of new functionalities haven't broken existing functions" is another example of re​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​ it checks for unintended consequences of new changes.

Therefore, the correct answer is B【6†source】【9†source】.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Product risks are risks that impact the quality or functionality of the software, whereas project risks affect the process, resources, or timeline.

(A) is correct because incorrect calculations impact software correctness.

(B), (C), and (D) are project risks as they relate to team coordination, staffing, and scheduling rather than software defects.

Identifying product risks early improves defect detection and ensures better coverage for high-risk areas.

In a formal review, the roles involved typically include the author, management, facilitator (also known as moderator), review leader, reviewers, and scribe. Each role has specific responsibilities to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the review process:

The author creates and refines the work product being reviewed.

Management allocates resources and supports the review process.

The facilitator manages the review meeting, ensuring it proceeds smoothly.

The review leader plans the review and ensures it meets its objectives.

Reviewers examine the work product to identify defects.

The scribe records issues raised during the review meeting​​.

This answer is correct because equivalence partitioning is a test design technique that divides the input domain of a system or component into partitions of equivalent data, such that each partition is expected to produce the same output or behavior. Equivalence partitioning aims to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. In this case, the input domain of the TAS can be divided into four partitions based on the bonus rules: less than 50k€, between 50k€ and 80k€, between 80k€ and 120k€, and more than 120k€. The test cases in the answer belong to the same partition, which is between 80k€ and 120k€, and they are expected to produce the same output, which is a bonus of 15%. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.1

When a manager asks when testing will be complete, the most appropriate and informative resource to provide an answer is test progress reports (Option A). Test progress reports contain detailed information on the status of testing activities, including what has been accomplished, what remains to be done, the results of the tests conducted, and any issues or risks that might impact the completion of testing. These reports allow for an informed assessment of the testing progress and estimation of when testing might be completed. Options B, C, and D do not provide the structured, detailed, and specific information required to accurately answer the manager's question about the completion of testing.

An incident is any event that occurs during testing that requires investigation. An incident management tool is a software tool that supports recording and tracking incidents throughout their life cycle. A QA manager of a start-up company needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. The best option for this case is to manage the incidents in a spreadsheet posted on the intranet. This option has several advantages over other options:

It is low cost, as it does not require purchasing any additional software or hardware.

It is easy to implement within a week, as it does not require installing or configuring any complex software or hardware.

It is accessible and transparent, as it can be viewed and updated by anyone who has access to the intranet.

It is structured and organized, as it can store and display various information about incidents, such as identifier, summary, description, severity, priority, status, resolution, etc. The other options are not suitable for this case, as they have several disadvantages over the chosen option:

Documenting incidents on a large board in the lab is not a good option, as it is not accessible or transparent to anyone who is not physically present in the lab. It is also not structured or organized, as it may not store or display all the necessary information about incidents.

Purchasing and deploying an incident management tool is not a good option, as it is not low cost or easy to implement within a week. It may require spending a significant amount of money and time on acquiring, installing and configuring the software or hardware.

Managing the incidents through emails and phone calls is not a good option, as it is not structured or organized. It may lead to confusion, inconsistency or loss of information about incidents. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33.

This answer is correct because in Agile software development, work product documentation, such as user stories, acceptance criteria, or test cases, tends to be lightweight and concise, as the focus is on working software and frequent communication rather than comprehensive documentation. Manual tests tend to be often unscripted, as they are often produced using experience-based test techniques, such as error guessing or exploratory testing, which rely on the tester’s skills, knowledge, and creativity to find defects and provide feedback. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.2, Section 3.2.1.2

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Equivalence partitioning (EP) divides input values into classes where test cases represent all possible values of each partition. The partitions in this scenario are:

≤7 (too cold → W)

8-21 (standstill → X)

22-29 (ideal → Y)

≥30 (too hot → Z)

Option C ({7,10,25,29}) covers all partitions by selecting representative values:

7 → Too cold (W)

10 → Standstill (X)

25 → Ideal (Y)

29 → Upper boundary of ideal (Y)

Other options do not cover all partitions adequately.

A new navigation system compared with a previous system is the most suitable application for testing by use cases, because it involves a high level of interaction between the user and the system, and the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are based on the user’s needs and goals. Use cases can help to specify the functional requirements of the new navigation system, such as the ability to enter a destination, select a route, follow the directions, receive alerts, etc. Use cases can also help to compare the accuracy and usability of the new system with the previous system, by defining the success and failure scenarios, the preconditions and postconditions, and the alternative flows of each use case. Use cases can also help to design and execute test cases that cover the main and exceptional paths of each use case, and to verify the satisfaction of the user’s expectations.

The other options are not the most suitable applications for testing by use cases, because they do not involve a high level of interaction between the user and the system, or the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are not based on the user’s needs and goals. A billing system used to calculate monthly charge based on a large number of subscriber parameters is more suitable for testing by data-driven testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using a large set of input and output data. The ability of an antivirus package to detect and quarantine a new threat is more suitable for testing by exploratory testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and security of a system or component by using an informal and flexible approach, based on the tester’s experience and intuition. The suitability and performance of a multimedia (audio video based) system to a new operating system is more suitable for testing by compatibility testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using different hardware, software, or network environments. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.1.1, page 28-29; Section 4.1.1, page 44-45; Section 4.2.1, page 47-48.

The test manager is most likely following the V-model for software development. The V-model is a software development model that defines four testing levels that correspond to four development phases: component testing corresponds to component design, integration testing corresponds to architectural design, system testing corresponds to system requirements specification, and acceptance testing corresponds to user requirements specification. The V-model also defines the test planning and test execution activities for each testing level. Agile is a software development model that follows an iterative and incremental approach, where testing is integrated into each iteration and adapts to changing requirements and feedback. Waterfall is a software development model that follows a sequential and linear approach, where testing is performed after the development phase is completed. Prototyping is a software development model that involves creating a simplified version of the software to elicit user feedback and validate requirements before developing the final product. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 18.

State transition testing is a black-box testing technique where test cases are designed to cover states and transitions of a state machine.

Given the state model with the following transitions:

PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION

IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED

IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED

SHIPPED -> INVOICED

INVOICED -> CANCELLED

CANCELLED -> PLACED

To cover all transitions at least once, we need to create a sequence that covers all six transitions.

Option A: IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED -> PLACED

- Misses SHIPPED -> INVOICED and INVOICED -> CANCELLED transitions.

Option B: IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> INVOICED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION

- Covers all transitions.

Option C: PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> CANCELLED ​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​sses INVOICED -> CANCELLED transition.

Option D: PLACED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED

- Misses SHIPPED -> INVOICED and INVOICED -> CANCELLED transitions.

Given these, Option B covers all the transitions【6†source】【9†source】.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Statement testing aims to execute every executable statement in the source code at least once.

(D) is correct as statement testing ensures maximum statement execution.

(A) describes branch testing, which focuses on flow transfers.

(B) and (C) incorrectly mix decision testing and branch testing concepts.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

During iteration planning, testers provide input on risk analysis, testability, and the feasibility of test automation. Participating in risk analysis (B) helps identify areas needing more extensive testing.

(A) is incorrect because the test strategy is usually set at a higher level (project or release level).

(C) is incorrect as release planning is broader than iteration planning.

(D) is incorrect since writing user stories is mainly the responsibility of the product owner, though testers contribute to defining acceptance criteria.

Risk-based test prioritization ensures testing efforts are aligned with business needs and software risks.

The following statements about reviews are true:

I) In walkthroughs the review meeting is typically led by the author. A walkthrough is a type of review that has a predefined objective and agenda but no formal process or roles. A walkthrough is typically led by the author of the work product under review, who guides the participants through a scenario and solicits feedback.

IV) Management rarely participates in technical review meetings. A technical review is a type of review that has a predefined objective and agenda but no formal process or roles. A technical review is typically performed by peers with technical expertise in order to evaluate technical aspects of a work product. Management rarely participates in technical review meetings, as they may not have sufficient technical knowledge or skills to contribute effectively. The following statements about reviews are false:

II) Inspection is characterized by an open-ended review meeting. An inspection is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. An inspection is characterized by a structured review meeting with a fixed duration and agenda.

III) Preparation before the review meeting is part of informal reviews. Preparation before the review meeting is part of formal reviews, such as inspections or technical reviews. Preparation involves checking