CTFL_Syll2018 Sample Questions Answers

The test execution schedule that meets the test plan requirements and logical dependencies is e, a, d, c, b. This schedule follows the order of re-tests first (e), followed by the highest priority tests (a and d), and then creates test data for subsequent tests (c and b). This schedule also respects the logical dependencies, as test case a creates an admin user, which is necessary for test case d to create a standard user, which is necessary for test cases c and b to perform other actions1 .

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is a project management technique that decomposes a project into smaller and manageable tasks. It is not a factor that is used as a basis for estimating testing effort, but rather an outcome of the estimation process. The other options are factors that can influence the testing effort, such as the quality of the test basis, the requirements for documentation, and the skills of the test team.

References: Section 2.3, Section 2.4

2-point boundary value analysis is a technique that tests the boundary values of valid and invalid partitions with two values each: one at the boundary and one just outside the boundary. For example, if the valid range is 1 to 10, the 2-point boundary values are 1, 2, 9, 10 for the valid partition, and 0, 11 for the invalid partitions. The advantage of this technique is that it reduces the number of test cases compared to 3-point boundary value analysis, which tests one value inside the boundary as well. However, it may miss some defects that occur only with the values inside the boundary.

In this question, the valid partitions are the ranges of spending that correspond to different discounts, and the invalid partitions are the ranges of spending that are below or above the valid partitions. The boundaries are the values of spending that trigger a change in the discount rate. The 2-point boundary values for each partition are:

• Invalid partition below £500: £0, £499
• Valid partition for 5% discount: £500, £501
• Valid partition for 10% discount: £1000, £1001
• Valid partition for 15% discount: £2000, £2001
• Valid partition for 20% discount: £4000, £4001
• Invalid partition above £4000: £4001, £4002

The test cases TC1 and TC2 already cover two of the boundary values: £500 and £2000. Therefore, to achieve 100% 2-point boundary value analysis, we need to write seven more test cases to cover the remaining boundary values: £0, £499, £501, £1000, £1001, £4000, and £4002. Note that £4001 is a boundary value for both the valid and invalid partitions, so we only need to test it once.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 4.2.2, p. 35-36 1; ISTQB Glossary v4.0, p. 16 2; Software Testing - Boundary Value Analysis 2

Testing and debugging are two different activities that are related to finding and removing defects and failures in software. Testing is the process of evaluating software by applying test cases to find failures and provide information on its quality. Debugging is the process of finding, analyzing, and removing the causes of failures in software. Testing reveals failures, which are deviations of the actual behavior of the software from its expected behavior. Debugging removes defects, which are flaws in the software that cause failures.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.2.1

According to the syllabus, non-functional testing is a type of software testing that verifies non-functional aspects or attributes of a software product or system, such as performance, usability, reliability, security, etc. Non-functional testing evaluates how well a system operates or behaves under certain conditions or scenarios, rather than what functions or features it provides. The answer D is correct because it best exemplifies non-functional testing. Tests which capture the time it takes to save a file are examples of performance testing, which is a type of non-functional testing that measures how fast or responsive a system is under various workloads or situations. The other answers are incorrect because they exemplify functional testing or structural testing, which are not types of non-functional testing. Tests based on the internal structure of a component or system (A) are examples of structural testing, which is a type of software testing that verifies the implementation or code of a software product or system. Tests related to ‘what’ the system should do (B) are examples of functional testing, which is a type of software testing that verifies the functionality or behavior of a software product or system. Tests which calculate overtime pay for those employees entitled to such © are also examples of functional testing, as they verify a specific function or feature of a software product or system.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.2.1, page 10-11.

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

The correct answer is A, as it states that the Wideband Delphi estimation technique is an example of the expert-based approach. The Wideband Delphi estimation technique is a method of estimating testing effort or duration by using a structured group process that involves multiple experts2. The experts provide their estimates independently and anonymously, then compare and discuss them until they reach a consensus2. This technique is an example of the expert-based approach, which is an approach that relies on the knowledge and experience of experts to estimate testing activities2. Option B is incorrect, as it states that the Wideband Delphi estimation technique is an example of the metrics-based approach. The metrics-based approach is an approach that uses historical data and mathematical formulas to estimate testing activities2. This approach does not involve experts or group processes. Option C is incorrect, as it states that burndown charts used in Agile development is an example of the expert-based approach. Burndown charts are graphical tools that show the amount of work remaining versus time in an Agile project2. They are used to monitor and control testing progress and quality. They are not examples of the expert-based approach, as they do not rely on experts’ opinions or estimates. Option D is incorrect, as it states that burndown charts used in Agile development is an example of the risk-based approach. The risk-based approach is an approach that uses risk analysis to prioritize and estimate testing activities2. This approach involves identifying and assessing risks based on their likelihood and impact. It does not involve burndown charts or Agile development. References: 2, Section 2.6

 Having the company’s independent test team design and execute the tests would achieve the highest level of testing independence for a project’s test level, because it would reduce the bias and influence of the developers or other stakeholders who are involved in the software development1 . An independent test team can provide a different perspective and focus on testing activities without being affected by development pressures or deadlines1 . The other options would not achieve the highest level of testing independence for a project’s test level. Option A is not a good option, because training developers to design good tests for the test team to execute would still introduce some bias and influence from the developers’ point of view1 . Option C is not a good option, because minimizing contact between testers and developers during test design to avoid bias would reduce the communication and collaboration that are essential for effective testing and defect resolution1 . Option D is not a good option, because outsourcing test design and execution to a different company would introduce some risks and challenges such as contractual issues, cultural differences, or loss of control over quality

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

Having an independent test function in an organisation can improve defect finding during reviews and testing, because independent testers can provide a different perspective and have less bias than developers or other stakeholders. Independent testers can also focus on testing activities without being influenced by development pressures or deadlines12. The other options are not valid reasons for having an independent test function. Option B is more related to code reviews, which can be done by developers themselves or by peers. Option C is not beneficial, because communication between developers and testers is essential for effective testing and defect resolution. Option D is not directly related to the test function, but to the test management and reporting processes12.

The statement that component testing tests interfaces between modules and interactions of different parts of a system does not describe component testing. Component testing is the process of testing individual software components that are separately testable, such as modules, programs, objects, classes, etc. Component testing verifies the functionality and quality of the components in isolation from other components. Component testing does not test the interfaces or interactions between components, as this is done in integration testing.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.1.2

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

The correct answer is D, as it describes tools that support reviews. Tools that support reviews are tools that assist with performing static testing activities such as checking documents for defects or compliance with standards3. Examples of tools that support reviews are:

• Tools for document review and annotation
• Tools for document comparison and version control
• Tools for checklist management and defect tracking

Option A is incorrect, as it describes tools that support usability testing. Tools that support usability testing are tools that assist with performing dynamic testing activities related to how easy and user-friendly the software product is3. Examples of tools that support usability testing are:

• Tools for recording user actions and feedback
• Tools for analyzing user behavior and satisfaction
• Tools for simulating different user interfaces and devices

Option B is incorrect, as it describes tools that assess data quality. Tools that assess data quality are tools that assist with evaluating and improving the accuracy and completeness of data used for testing3. Examples of tools that assess data quality are:

• Tools for data validation and verification
• Tools for data cleansing and transformation
• Tools for data profiling and analysis

Option C is incorrect, as it describes tools that support specialized testing needs. Tools that support specialized testing needs are tools that assist with performing dynamic testing activities related to specific domains or technologies3. Examples of tools that support specialized testing needs are:

• Tools for security testing
• Tools for performance testing
• Tools for accessibility testing

References: 3, Section 2.10

A key difference between black box and white box test design techniques is that white box techniques can measure the extent of code coverage, while black box techniques cannot. Code coverage is a measure of how much of the code of a system or component has been executed by a test or a set of tests. White box techniques use software code to derive test cases that cover specific aspects of the code, such as statements, branches, paths, or data flows. White box techniques can use tools or methods to measure the code coverage achieved by the test cases and identify any gaps or redundancies. Black box techniques use functional design specifications to derive test cases that cover specific aspects of the functionality, behavior, or quality of the system or component, such as inputs, outputs, equivalence classes, boundary values, states, transitions, etc. Black box techniques do not use or access the code of the system or component, and therefore cannot measure the code coverage.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.3 and 4.4

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

According to the syllabus, 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.

Exploratory testing can replace black box techniques when testing time is very limited, because it is a type of experience-based technique that allows testers to design and execute tests based on their intuition, knowledge, and skills, without following a predefined test plan or test cases13. The other options are false statements about testing techniques. Option B is false, because test execution scheduling should give priority to specification-based or structure-based techniques, which are more systematic and objective than experience-based techniques13. Option C is false, because specification-based techniques cannot be used as a substitute for a poorly defined test basis, but rather require a clear and complete test basis to design effective test cases13. Option D is false, because experience-based techniques are not systematic and do not produce detailed test documentation, but rather rely on the tester’s judgement and creativity

According to the syllabus, a test summary report is a document that summarizes the results and activities of a completed test level. It typically includes information such as test objectives, test items, test environment, test cases executed, defects found, incidents raised, and lessons learned. The answer C is incorrect because it would not typically be covered in a test summary report. The economic benefit of continuing testing beyond the planned date is not a relevant information for a completed test level, as it is more related to project management decisions. The other answers are correct because they are examples of information that would typically be covered in a test summary report.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.4.1, page 62-63.

Non-functional testing is a type of testing that focuses on the quality attributes of the system or its components, such as performance, reliability, usability, security, etc. Non-functional testing can be done at any test level, depending on the test objectives and scope. In this case, the test types that are non-functional tests are:

• Acceptance test: A test level that focuses on verifying whether the system meets the user’s needs and expectations, and whether it is acceptable for delivery or deployment.
• Stress test: A type of performance testing that evaluates the behavior of the system under extreme or abnormal conditions, such as high load, limited resources, or concurrent access.
• Reliability test: A type of testing that evaluates the ability of the system or its components to perform their required functions under stated conditions for a specified period of time.

Therefore, statements I, III, and V are correct.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.3 and 5.4

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

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

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

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.4.1

According to the syllabus, a mindset is a set of attitudes, beliefs, and assumptions that influence how a person thinks, feels, and behaves. A mindset for test activities and a mindset for development activities are different and complementary, as they reflect different goals and perspectives of testing and development. A tester is concerned with finding defects while a developer is interested in designing solutions. This statement best describes the key difference between a mindset for test activities and a mindset for development activities. A tester’s mindset is focused on identifying and reporting problems in the software product or system, such as errors, failures, or deviations from requirements or expectations. A tester’s mindset is also characterized by professional skepticism, curiosity, creativity, and critical thinking. A developer’s mindset is focused on creating and implementing solutions for the software product or system, such as features, functions, or enhancements. A developer’s mindset is also characterized by professional optimism, confidence, logic, and analytical thinking. The other answers are incorrect because they either confuse the roles of testers and developers or use incorrect terms.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 1.5.1, page 19-20.

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

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

Statement testing is a white box test technique2. A white box technique is a technique that uses the internal structure or logic of a system as a test basis to derive test cases and measure test coverage2. Statement testing is a technique that uses executable statements in the source code as a test basis to measure the coverage achieved by a test suite2. A statement is an instruction or command that performs an action or calculation in the source code2. Statement testing requires every statement in the source code to be executed at least once by a test suite2. Therefore, statement testing is a white box test technique.

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

2400, 1000, 2301 are test case inputs that each fall into a different equivalence partition1. Equivalence partitioning is a black box test design technique that divides the input domain of a system into partitions of equivalent data2. Each partition should contain data that is expected to be treated the same by the system2. Therefore, only one test case input from each partition is needed to test the system’s behaviour2. In this question, the input domain of the system is the time of travel, which can be divided into three partitions based on the fare rules:

• Peak-time tariff: This partition contains all the times between 0600 and 1000 (inclusive), which are subject to a higher fare.
• Off-peak tariff: This partition contains all the times between 1001 and 2259 (inclusive), which are subject to a lower fare.
• No service: This partition contains all the times between 2300 and 0559 (inclusive), which are not valid for travel.

Therefore, to test the system’s behaviour for each partition, we need to choose one test case input from each partition. Among the options given in this question, only D contains one test case input from each partition. 2400 belongs to the no service partition, 1000 belongs to the peak-time tariff partition, and 2301 belongs to the off-peak tariff partition. Therefore, D is the correct answer.

Incorrect interface specifications are most likely to be found by a review during static testing. A review is a type of static testing technique that involves a manual examination of a work product by one or more individuals who follow a defined process. A review can be applied to any work product, such as requirements specifications, design specifications, code, test cases, test plans, user manuals, etc. A review can help find defects and improve the quality of any work product at any stage of the software development lifecycle. Incorrect interface specifications are defects that affect the definition and communication of the interfaces between components or systems. These defects can be detected by reviewing the interface specifications document and comparing it with the requirements and design specifications.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 3.2.1

Regression testing can be applied to any test level where changes or fixes have been made to the software or its environment, and there is a risk that these changes may have introduced new defects or re-introduced previously fixed defects. Therefore, regression testing can be done at component, integration, system and acceptance test levels.

Traceability is the ability to identify related items in documentation and software, such as requirements, design specifications, code modules, test cases, test results, etc. Traceability helps to ensure that all requirements are covered by tests, that all tests are linked to requirements, and that any changes in requirements or software can be traced to their impact on other items.

Test Cases 1, 2 and 3 are all valid, because they cover all the possible combinations of conditions and actions in the decision table. Test Case 1 covers the case where the employee is not a car or motorcycle driver, which leads to the action of not allowing the expense claim. Test Case 2 covers the case where the employee drives a diesel car with an engine size greater than 1600cc, which leads to the action of accepting the expense claim at band C. Test Case 3 covers the case where the employee rides a motorcycle, which leads to the action of accepting the expense claim at band A12.

The correct answer is B, as it describes checklist-based testing. Checklist-based testing is an experience-based test technique that involves a list of tests based on what is important to the user as well as an understanding of why and how software fails1. Checklist-based testing can be used to ensure that important aspects of the software are tested and to guide the tester in creating additional tests1. Option A is incorrect, as checklist-based testing provides some consistency and guidelines concerning test case development by using predefined lists of items or criteria to check against1. Option C is incorrect, as checklist-based testing is not restricted to non-functional testing, but can be used for both functional and non-functional testing1. Option D is incorrect, as checklist-based testing does not include formal tests from detailed lists of test conditions, but informal tests from high-level lists of items or criteria1. References: 1, Section 4.2.6

A test completion report for a test level typically includes a summary of all the testing activities that have been performed. It should detail any deviations from the original test schedule, including any changes in the planned duration or effort that were required to complete the test activities. This report serves as a record of what was tested, how it was tested, and any issues that were encountered.

According to the syllabus, root cause analysis is a technique that aims to identify and address the underlying causes of defects or problems in a process or system. Root cause analysis involves finding the effect (the observable symptom or outcome of the problem), finding the cause (the factor or factors that directly influence the effect), and finding the root cause (the fundamental reason why the cause exists). The answer C is correct because it most accurately reflects this scenario. The incorrect customer discount is the effect and the reason for the requirement error is the root cause. The other answers are incorrect because they either confuse the effect, cause, and root cause or use incorrect terms.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 5.2.1, page 58.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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

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

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

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

The 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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

Equivalence partitioning is best defined as an analysis technique that divides inputs into groups that are expected to exhibit similar behaviors. The idea is to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each group or partition. Equivalence partitioning does not apply to time-related data classes only, but to any type of input data that can be divided into partitions. Equivalence partitioning is not a form of white-box testing, but a black-box testing technique. Equivalence partitioning is not a method to reduce test coverage, but a method to achieve test coverage more efficiently.

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

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

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

The choice of software development model depends on product and project characteristics1. A software development model is a framework that defines the activities, tasks, roles, and deliverables of a software project1. There are various software development models, such as waterfall, V-model, iterative, incremental, agile, etc1. The choice of software development model depends on product and project characteristics, such as size, complexity, scope, requirements, quality attributes, risks, resources, schedule, budget, etc1. Different software development models have different advantages and disadvantages for different types of products and projects1. Therefore, the choice of software development model depends on product and project characteristics.

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.

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.

• 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.

State transition testing is a technique that uses state transition diagrams as a test basis to derive test cases2. A state transition diagram shows the states of a system and the transitions between them triggered by events or conditions2. A test case can cover one or more state transitions, depending on the test objective and coverage criterion2. In this question, the test cases (i) and (ii) cover different sets of state transitions, as shown below:

Test Case

State Transitions

(i) X-Z-V-W

S1 – S2 – S3 – S4 – S2

(ii) W-Y-U-U

S4 – S2 – S4 – S4 – S4

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.

 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.

•  According to the IEEE 829 Standard for Software Test Documentation, an incident report should contain the following information:

Therefore, among the options given in this question, only (i), (iii), and (iv) are part of an incident report based on IEEE 829.

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

The minimum number of test cases required to guarantee both 100% statement coverage and 100% decision coverage is 2. Statement coverage means that every statement in the code is executed at least once by the test cases. Decision coverage means that every possible outcome of each decision (such as if-else statements) is executed at least once by the test cases. To achieve both statement and decision coverage, we need to test two scenarios: one where X > Y and one where X <= Y. This will ensure that all statements and decisions are covered by the test cases. A detailed explanation of statement and decision coverage can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 61-671.

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

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

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.

Finding defects, gaining confidence about the level of quality and providing information, and preventing defects are all valid test objectives according to the ISTQB Foundation Level syllabus. Debugging the code is not a test objective, because debugging is the process of finding and fixing defects, which is done by developers, not testers3

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

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

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.

The test execution schedule should take into account the prioritization and other constraints given in the question. The first activity is to run any re-tests, followed by the regression test script. Users have supplied their priority order to tests. Therefore, the test execution schedule should start with the re-test defect no 52, which is shown in the image as a table with 9 rows and 4 columns. The table is titled “Re-test defect no 52”. The columns are labeled: “#”, “Description”, “Priority”, “Note”, “Re-test”. The table is populated with data about different tasks and their priority and notes. The tasks are related to sales figures and account administration. The table is in black and white. The re-test defect no 52 has three tasks: c, a, and d, which have priority 1, 2, and 3 respectively. Therefore, the test execution schedule should start with c, followed by a, and then d. After that, the regression test script should be run, which is task e. Then, the remaining tasks should be run according to the user priority order: b, g, i, h, and f. Therefore, the test execution schedule is c, a, d, e, b, g, i, h, and f.

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

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

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

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

 Testers 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.

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.

•  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.

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.

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.

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

Testing is the process of evaluating a software product by learning about it through exploration and experimentation, which includes running tests, observing outcomes, making inferences, and creating and refining test ideas. Testing has many objectives, such as finding defects, providing information, improving quality, reducing risks, etc. One of the objectives of testing is preventing defects, which means avoiding or minimizing the occurrence of defects in the software product by applying good practices and techniques throughout the software development life cycle. Preventing defects can help to save time, cost, and effort in testing and development, and improve customer satisfaction and confidence. A detailed explanation of testing objectives can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 7-8.

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

A 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

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.

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