CTFL_Syll2018 Practice Exam Questions with Answers ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (Syllabus 2018) Certification

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

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

References: Section 1.4.3.2, Section 5.3.2

Test plan is the test document where you would expect to find test exit criteria described. Test exit criteria are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can be completed or stopped. Test exit criteria are usually defined during test planning and control phase and evaluated during evaluating exit criteria and reporting phase. Test plan is a document that describes the scope, approach, resources, schedule, risks, metrics etc., for testing activities. Test plan also includes test exit criteria as part of its contents3 defines test exit criteria and test plan as follows:

Test exit criteria: The set of generic or specific conditions for permitting process exit criteria that are defined for each Test Level.

Test plan: A document describing the scope, approach, resources and schedule of intended test activities.

Gaining confidence about the level of the system’s quality can be a common objective of testing, because testing can provide information about how well the system meets its specified requirements and user expectations, and how many defects have been found and fixed in the system.

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

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

A unit test framework tool is a tool that supports the creation, execution and reporting of unit tests, which are tests that verify the functionality and quality of individual functions or methods in source code. A unit test framework tool can detect defects such as syntax errors, logic errors, boundary violations, etc.

Both functional and structural approaches are used in integration tests. Functional testing verifies that the integrated components work together as expected, while structural testing checks the internal structure and logic of the integrated components1 explains this in more detail:

Integration testing is a level of software testing where individual units are combined and tested as a group. The purpose of this level of testing is to expose faults in the interaction between integrated units. Test drivers and test stubs are used to assist in Integration Testing.

Integration testing can be done in two ways:

• Bottom-up Integration Testing: Bottom up integration testing begins with unit testing, followed by tests of progressively higher-level combinations of units called modules or builds.
• Top-down Integration Testing: In top down integration testing, the highest-level modules are tested first and progressively lower-level modules are tested after that.

The correct answer is D, as DT1 and DT4 would achieve full coverage of the full decision table when combined with the test cases that have already been generated for rules 1 and 4. Decision table testing is a black-box test technique that uses a table to show combinations of inputs and their associated outputs1. In this case, the inputs are the account type, the amount entered, and the expected result. The outputs are the actions taken by the ATM system. The decision table has eight rules, each corresponding to a possible combination of inputs and outputs. The test cases that have already been generated for rules 1 and 4 are:

• TC1: Account = Checking, Amount = $600, Expected Result = Process the transaction
• TC4: Account = Savings, Amount = Not entered, Expected Result = Generate an error message

The additional test cases are:

• DT1: Account = Checking, Amount = Not entered, Expected Result = Generate an error message
• DT2: Account = Savings, Amount = $100, Expected Result = Process the transaction
• DT3: Account = Checking, Amount = $100, Expected Result = Process the transaction
• DT4: Account = Savings, Amount = $600, Expected Result = Generate an error message

To achieve full coverage of the full decision table, two more test cases are needed that cover the remaining six rules. DT1 and DT4 cover these rules, as shown in the table below:

Therefore, option D is the correct answer. Options A, B, and C are incorrect, as they do not cover all the rules in the decision table. References: 1, Section 4.2.5

Checklist-based testing is an experience-based test technique whereby the experienced tester uses a high-level list of items to be noted, checked or remembered, or a set of rules or criteria against which a product has to be verified. Checklist-based testing can help the tester to focus on important aspects of the test object and to ensure that nothing is overlooked or forgotten. Checklist-based testing can also help the tester to communicate and report the test results and coverage more effectively.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.6.1

If the fault in the code is contained in a small area, then it may cause the system to fail under certain circumstances, resulting in a defect1 . However, this is not a definite consequence, as it depends on whether the fault is executed or not. The other options are not definite consequences of this mistake either. Option A assumes that the system will always fail because of the fault, which may not be true if the fault is never executed or does not affect critical functionality1 . Option C assumes that there will be negative impacts on money, time, or business reputation because of the fault, which may not be true if the defect is minor or does not affect important stakeholders1 . Option D assumes that contractual requirements have not been met by testing because of the fault, which may not be true if testing has fulfilled its objectives and scope according to the contract1 .

The correct answer is A, as it explains a drawback of independent testing. Independent testing is a type of testing that is performed by a person or team that is not involved in the development of the software1. Independent testing can have many benefits, such as providing an objective view of the software quality, reducing conflicts of interest, and increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of testing1. However, independent testing can also have some drawbacks, such as being isolated from the rest of the development and project team1. This can lead to communication problems, lack of collaboration, and misunderstanding of requirements and expectations1. Option B is incorrect, as it does not explain a drawback of independent testing, but a benefit. Due to their differing backgrounds and perspectives, an independent test team may discover defects that the developers did not uncover1. This can improve the quality of the software and reduce the risk of failures in operation1. Option C is incorrect, as it does not explain a drawback of independent testing, but a strength. An independent test team may possess specializations in specific test types such as usability or security that enhance the overall effectiveness of the test team1. These test types may require specialized skills, tools, or environments that are not available to the developers or other testers1. Option D is incorrect, as it does not explain a drawback of independent testing, but a misconception. Having the business organization participate as an independent test team can benefit the overall testing effort since business participants can provide valuable feedback on the user requirements, expectations, and satisfaction1. However, business participants are often not trained nor experienced in testing, so they should not be the only source of independent testing1. They should be supported by professional testers who can apply appropriate test techniques and methods1. References: 1, Section 2.2

According to the syllabus, test execution scheduling is the process of assigning and ordering test cases or test procedures to be executed in a test cycle. Test execution scheduling should take into account the prioritisation and dependency of the test cases or test procedures, as well as the availability of test resources and environments. The answer B is correct because it best meets the prioritisation and dependency conditions given in the table. The answer B follows this logic:

• Start with the highest priority tests that have no dependencies, which are 5 and 7.
• Then, execute the tests that depend on 5 and 7, which are 4 and 3 respectively.
• Next, execute the remaining high priority tests that have no dependencies, which are 9 and 10.
• After that, execute the tests that depend on 9 and 10, which are 1 and 6 respectively.
• Finally, execute the low priority tests that have no dependencies, which are 8 and 2.

The other answers are incorrect because they either violate the dependency conditions or do not follow the prioritisation order. For example, answer A executes test 2 before test 10, which is not allowed because test 2 depends on test 10. Answer C executes test 6 before test 9, which is not allowed because test 6 depends on test 9. Answer D executes test 1 before test 9, which is not allowed because test 1 depends on test 9.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 5.3.1, page 60-61.

Test design is the process of transforming general testing objectives into tangible test conditions and test cases that can be executed and verified against expected results. Test design involves identifying test techniques, coverage criteria, input data, expected outcomes and other test parameters.

Functional and Structural tests are two different test design techniques, not test levels or test types. They can be applied at any test level (Unit, Integration, System, Acceptance) and for any test type (Functional, Non-functional, Regression, Maintenance). Therefore, option A is the correct answer. Option B is incorrect because Functional tests can be performed at any test level, not just Unit and Integration. Option C is incorrect because Functional and Structural are not test levels, but test design techniques. Option D is incorrect because Structural tests can be performed at any test level, not just Unit.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018 v3.1.1, Chapter 4.1.2 Test Design Techniques1

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

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

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

The best way to take advantage of the different mindsets of testers and developers is to bring the two mindsets together. Testers and developers have different perspectives and skills that can complement each other and improve the quality of the software. Testers tend to focus on finding defects and verifying the software against the requirements and specifications, while developers tend to focus on creating and implementing the software according to the design and architecture. By collaborating and communicating with each other, testers and developers can share their knowledge, feedback, and ideas, and resolve issues more efficiently and effectively.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.2

The correct logical order for the test cases is 3, 1, 4, 2, 6, 5. This order follows the logical sequence of actions that a user would perform to book a flight using a web-based airline booking system. The order also respects the dependencies between test cases, such as logging in before searching for flights or booking a flight before printing a confirmation receipt . The other options are incorrect logical orders for the test cases. Option A does not follow the logical sequence of actions and does not respect the dependencies between test cases. For example, it starts with confirming details and booking a flight before logging in or selecting a flight. Option B does not follow the logical sequence of actions and does not respect the dependencies between test cases. For example, it starts with selecting a flight before logging in or searching for flights. Option C does not follow the logical sequence of actions and does not respect the dependencies between test cases. For example, it starts with viewing selected items in My Flights before selecting any flights.

System testing is a test level that focuses on testing the system as a whole against its requirements and specifications. System testing applies to both functional and non-functional aspects of the system, such as functionality, performance, reliability, usability, security, etc. System testing has several objectives, such as:

• Satisfying legal requirements, such as compliance with standards or regulations.
• Using system specifications as a test basis, such as system requirements, system design, user stories, or use cases.
• Establishing confidence in the system, such as its readiness for release or deployment, its suitability for use, its quality and reliability, etc.

Therefore, statements a and b apply to system testing.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.2.2

Traceability between the test basis and test work products means that there is a clear and documented relationship between the requirements, design, and other sources of test conditions, and the test cases, test procedures, and test results that are derived from them. This helps to ensure that the test work products are consistent, complete, and relevant to the test basis. One of the direct benefits of maintaining traceability is the ability to analyse the impact of changes in the test basis on the test work products, and vice versa. For example, if a requirement is changed, added, or deleted, traceability can help to identify which test cases, test procedures, and test results need to be updated, executed, or removed accordingly. Similarly, if a test result reveals a defect in the test basis, traceability can help to locate the source of the defect and determine the scope of the correction. Traceability also supports other benefits, such as measuring test coverage, reporting test progress, and evaluating test quality, but these are not direct benefits of maintaining traceability, rather they are outcomes of using traceability information for various purposes. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.1.2, p. 23-24 1; ISTQB Glossary v4.0, p. 67 2

 According to the syllabus, error guessing is a technique that uses testers’ experience and intuition to identify potential errors or defects in a software system. An experienced tester makes a list of potential defects and failures, and designs and runs tests to generate these failures should the defects be present in the code. The answer B is correct because it best describes a methodical approach to the error guessing technique. The other answers are incorrect because they describe other techniques, such as exploratory testing (A), checklist-based testing © and negative testing (D).

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.2.4, page 43.

According to the syllabus, use case testing is a technique that tests the functionality of a system using scenarios based on use cases. A use case is a description of how an actor interacts with a system to achieve a goal. A use case defines the expected behaviour and possible variations of the system under test. The answer A is correct because test cases are designed to exercise the defined behaviours of the use case and its variations. The other answers are incorrect because they are not true statements about use case testing. There can be multiple test cases for each use case, depending on the complexity and variations of the use case. Test cases can be derived from other sources besides activity diagrams, such as textual descriptions or flow charts. It is possible to measure use case test coverage by comparing the number of executed test cases with the number of defined test cases for each use case.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.5.1, page 49-50.

Mr; Mrs.; Ms; any other input is the correct list of the equivalence classes of the input values for this field. Equivalence partitioning is a technique to divide the input domain into partitions that are expected to behave similarly or produce the same output. Each partition should have at least one representative value as a test case3 explains this as follows:

Equivalence Partitioning (or Equivalence Class Partitioning) is an software testing technique that divides the input data of a software unit into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived. In principle, test cases are designed to cover each partition at least once.

The fundamental concept of Equivalence Partitioning is that you can find more errors in a test case by using a representative value from an equivalence class than by using any other value from the class.

The input domain for this field can be divided into four partitions: Mr, Mrs., Ms, and any other input. The first three partitions are valid, as they are the only acceptable values for this field. The last partition is invalid, as it includes any value that is not Mr, Mrs., or Ms, such as Dr, Prof, Miss, etc.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Functional and structural tests are alternative test types that may be used separately or together at B. All test levels. Functional testing is a type of testing that verifies the functionality of the system or component under test against its requirements or specifications. Functional testing focuses on what the system or component does, not how it does it. Structural testing is a type of testing that verifies the structure or code of the system or component under test. Structural testing focuses on how the system or component does it, not what it does. Functional and structural testing can be used separately or together at any test level, such as unit testing, integration testing, system testing, acceptance testing, etc. Functional and structural testing can complement each other by providing different perspectives and coverage of the system or component under test. A detailed explanation of functional and structural testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 25-26.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Boundary Value Analysis is a black-box testing technique that is used to test the boundaries or limits of input or output values for a given system or component. Boundary Value Analysis helps to identify errors at the edges of an input or output domain. For example, in a system designed to work out the employee tax to be paid, there are four boundaries for the salary input: $4,000 (lower boundary for tax free), $5,500 (upper boundary for tax free and lower boundary for 10% tax), $34,000 (upper boundary for 10% tax and lower boundary for 22% tax), and any value above $34,000 (upper boundary for 22% tax and lower boundary for 40% tax). A valid Boundary Value Analysis test case would test one value below, on, and above each boundary. For example, $33,501 is a valid test case because it is one value above the boundary of $34,000. A detailed explanation of Boundary Value Analysis can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 38-41.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Static code analysis is a technique that examines the source code or other software artifacts without executing them, and can detect defects, vulnerabilities, code smells, and deviations from standards early in the development process1. According to the ISTQB syllabus, one of the benefits of static testing is early defect detection2, which can reduce the cost and effort of fixing them later.

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

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

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

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

Independence from the production process is a characteristic that is most likely to promote effective software testing1. Independence from the production process means that the testers are not involved in the development or maintenance of the software product under test, and thus can provide an unbiased and objective view of its quality1. Independence from the production process can also help to avoid conflicts of interest, reduce confirmation bias, increase defect detection, and improve test coverage1. Therefore, independence from the production process is a characteristic that is most likely to promote effective software testing.

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

!decision table

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

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

Group

Equivalence Classes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A white box testing design technique is D. Statement testing. Statement testing is a white box testing technique that is based on an analysis of the structure of the component or system. Statement testing aims to cover every executable statement in the code at least once by the test cases. Statement testing can help to detect syntax errors, logic errors, or unreachable code in the system or component under test. Statement testing is usually performed at lower levels of testing, such as unit testing or component testing. A detailed explanation of statement testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 68-69.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The requirement given in

the image specifies

the charge for

a money transfer based on

the amount

of money transferred.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

66, Weekend = No -> No charge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Memory leaks are defect types that are least likely to be found by static analysis tools because they are related to the dynamic behavior and performance of the software system. Memory leaks occur when a program does not release memory that it has allocated, causing the system to run out of memory and slow down or crash. Memory leaks can only be detected by dynamic analysis tools that monitor the memory usage of the program during execution. You can find more information about static analysis tools in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], Chapter 6, Section 6.3.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

!state diagram

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

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

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

Each review has clear defined objectives, the right people for the review objective are involved, and there is an emphasis on learning and process improvement are typically found to enable the review process to be successful1. A review is a type of static testing that involves the examination of software artifacts by humans to find defects, improve quality, or achieve other objectives1. A review process should have clear defined objectives that specify the purpose, scope, and expected outcomes of the review1. The right people for the review objective should be involved, such as reviewers, moderators, authors, managers, etc., who have the appropriate skills, knowledge, experience, and roles to perform the review effectively1. There should also be an emphasis on learning and process improvement, as reviews can provide feedback and suggestions to improve the software artifacts, processes, and skills of the participants1. Therefore, these characteristics are typically found to enable the review process to be successful.

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

 Frequency 0, 1, 5, 6; Duration 0, 1, 30, 60, 61 is the correct test set of valid and invalid boundary values applying 2-value boundary value analysis1 . Boundary value analysis is a technique that tests the values at and near the boundaries of an input domain or output range1 . A 2-value boundary value analysis tests two values for each boundary: one valid value and one invalid value1 . For Frequency, the valid boundaries are 1 and 5, so the test set should include one valid value (1 or 5) and one invalid value (0 or 6) for each boundary. For Duration, the valid boundaries are 1 and 60, so the test set should include one valid value (1 or 60) and one invalid value (0 or 61) for each boundary. The other options are incorrect test sets of valid and invalid boundary values applying 2-value boundary value analysis. Option A only includes valid values for each boundary, but not invalid values. Option B includes invalid values that are not adjacent to the boundaries (59 seconds and 60 minutes 1 second). Option D includes more than two values for each boundary (0, 1, 2 for Frequency; 0, 1, 30 for Duration).

Every executable statement is covered is the statement that is guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test. Decision coverage is a structure-based testing technique that measures how many decision outcomes have been exercised by a set of test cases. A decision is a control structure that has two or more possible outcomes (e.g., if-then-else, switch-case, etc.). Decision coverage requires that each decision outcome is executed at least once by a test case. If a program got 100% decision coverage in a test, it means that every possible outcome of every decision in the code has been covered by at least one test case. This also implies that every executable statement in the code has been covered by at least one test case, since every statement belongs to some decision outcome2 explains decision coverage as follows:

Decision Coverage (also known as Branch Coverage) is a white box testing technique which measures how many decision outcomes have been tested by a set of test cases.

A decision is any control structure where there are two or more possible paths through it (e.g., if-then-else statements, switch-case statements, etc.). Each path through such control structures represents an outcome.

Decision Coverage requires that each outcome from each decision point be executed at least once by one or more test cases.

Decision Coverage can be calculated as follows:

Decision Coverage = (Number of Decision Outcomes Executed / Total Number of Decision Outcomes) * 100%

If Decision Coverage is 100%, it means that every possible outcome from every decision point has been tested by at least one test case. This also means that every executable statement has been tested by at least one test case.

A, B, and C are incorrect answers. Every output equivalence class has been tested (A), every input equivalence class has been tested (B), and the “dead” code has not been covered © are statements that are not guaranteed to be true if a program got 100% decision coverage in a test. Equivalence classes are groups of inputs or outputs that are expected to produce similar results or behavior from the system under test. Equivalence partitioning is a specification-based testing technique that uses equivalence classes to design test cases. Decision coverage is a structure-based testing technique that does not consider equivalence classes, but only the outcomes of the decisions in the code. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not ensure that every output or input equivalence class has been tested. Dead code is code that can never be executed, regardless of the input values or conditions. Dead code can be caused by logic errors, redundant statements, unreachable branches, etc. Decision coverage does not detect or cover dead code, since it only considers the outcomes of the decisions that can be executed. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply that the dead code has not been covered.

The correct answer is A, as it describes error guessing. Error guessing is an experience-based test technique that involves designing tests based on experience, defect data, or common knowledge about why software fails1. Error guessing can be used to complement other more formal test techniques by focusing on areas that are more likely to contain defects1. Option B is incorrect, as error guessing does not involve building test cases based on the various experiences of developers, architects, users, and other stakeholders on project teams, but based on the tester’s own experience and knowledge1. Option C is incorrect, as error guessing is not a suitable test technique that can be used effectively in place of more formal techniques, but a supplementary technique that can be used in addition to more formal techniques1. Option D is incorrect, as error guessing is not a valid and useful white-box test technique due to its high degree of statement coverage, but an experience-based test technique that does not rely on the structure of the software1. References: 1, Section 4.2.6

100% branch coverage means 100% statement coverage, but not vice-versa. Branch coverage is a stronger criterion than statement coverage, as it requires that every possible outcome of each decision point is executed at least once. Statement coverage only requires that every executable statement is executed at least once1 explains this as follows:

Branch Coverage (also known as Decision Coverage) measures which possible branches in flow control structures are followed. Branch Coverage is a testing method, which aims to ensure that each one of the possible branch from each decision point is executed at least once and thereby ensuring that all reachable code is executed.

Statement Coverage measures the number of statements in the source code that are executed during the test. Statement Coverage is a metric, which is used to calculate and measure the number of statements in the source code which have been executed during testing.

B, C, and D are false statements. 100% statement coverage does not mean 100% branch coverage (B), as there may be some branches that are not covered by the test cases. 100% branch coverage does not mean 100% statement coverage and vice-versa ©, as branch coverage implies statement coverage but not the other way around. It is possible to achieve 100% statement coverage (D), but it may not be feasible or cost-effective for some systems.

Test implementation and execution is the phase of the test process where test cases are executed and test results are logged. It includes activities such as checking if the preconditions of test execution have been met, executing test cases according to a test procedure, comparing actual results with expected results, logging test results and reporting defects, and repeating test activities as needed. Prioritizing test conditions is not an activity that belongs to test implementation and execution, but rather to test analysis and design, which is the phase where test conditions are identified and test cases are designed. References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.2.3 and 4.2.4

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

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

Some examples of experience-based testing techniques are:

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

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

Test implementation and execution is the stage of the Fundamental Test Process where testers write detailed steps for executing each test case (test procedures), prepare and prioritize test cases for execution, execute test cases and record results, compare actual results with expected results and report discrepancies as incidents.

Statement coverage is a white-box test technique which focuses on the percentage of executable statements that has been executed by a test suite. This is the best description of statement coverage, as it measures how many statements in the source code have been covered by one or more test cases. Option A is incorrect, as it describes state transition testing, which is a black-box test technique that uses a state table to derive test cases. Option B is incorrect, as it describes error guessing, which is an experience-based test technique in which test cases are based on the tester’s knowledge of past failures. Option D is incorrect, as it describes decision coverage, which is a white-box test technique that covers the decision results which determine the next statement to be executed.

References: , Section 4.2.2