ISTQB-CTFL ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL v4.0) Questions and Answers

Option D correctly explains what is represented by the lines A, B and the axes X, Y in a testing metrics chart. According to option D:

X-axis represents Time

Y-axis represents Count

Line A represents Number of open bugs

Line B represents Total number of executed tests

This information is essential in understanding and analyzing the testing metrics of a completed project.

The key difference between a peer review of code and static analysis of code using a tool lies in their approaches and scope. A peer review is a manual inspection of the code by peers or colleagues, focusing not only on the technical aspects of the code but also on other elements such as design, compliance with standards, and maintainability. Peer reviews can identify defects, suggest improvements, and ensure that the code adheres to best practices and team standards.

On the other hand, static analysis is an automated process performed by tools designed to analyze the code without executing it. These tools can detect potential issues such as syntax errors, vulnerabilities, and code smells based on predefined rules and patterns. While static analysis is technically focused, it lacks the broader perspective that human reviewers can provide, such as evaluating the code's maintainability or adherence to project-specific standards. Therefore, static analysis targets the code technically, whereas peer review encompasses a wider range of aspects, making option B the correct answer.

The following statements about reviews are true:

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

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

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

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

In Agile development, an informal review, often referred to as a "buddy check," is a common review type. Informal reviews are unstructured and involve a pair of colleagues reviewing each other’s work to identify defects early and provide immediate feedback. This type of review is less formal than inspections or walkthroughs and is particularly suitable for Agile environments where rapid feedback and flexibility are essential.

The figure depicts the life-cycle of a defect using state transition testing. State transition testing is a technique that models how a system transitions from one state to another depending on events or conditions. The figure shows six states (S0 to S5) and seven transitions (T0 to T6). The correct sequence of state transitions that follows the figure is S0->S1->S2->S3->S5->S1->S2->S3. This sequence represents the following scenario:

S0: The defect is not yet detected (initial state).

T0: The defect is detected by testing (event).

S1: The defect is reported and registered (state).

T1: The defect is assigned to a developer for fixing (event).

S2: The defect is being fixed by the developer (state).

T2: The developer fixes the defect and delivers a new version (event).

S3: The defect is verified by testing (state).

T5: The testing fails to confirm that the defect is fixed (event).

S5: The defect is rejected by testing (state).

T6: The defect is reassigned to a developer for fixing (event).

S1: The defect is reported and registered (state).

T1: The defect is assigned to a developer for fixing (event).

S2: The defect is being fixed by the developer (state).

T2: The developer fixes the defect and delivers a new version (event).

S3: The defect is verified by testing (state). The other sequences are incorrect, as they do not follow the transitions shown in the figure. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 40-41.

The ISTQB fundamental test process consists of five main phases, as described in the ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.2, page 15:

Test planning and control: This phase involves defining the test objectives, scope, strategy, resources, schedule, risks, and metrics, as well as monitoring and controlling the test activities and results throughout the test process.

Test analysis and design: This phase involves analyzing the test basis (such as requirements, specifications, or user stories) to identify test conditions (such as features, functions, or scenarios) that need to be tested, and designing test cases and test procedures (such as inputs, expected outcomes, and execution steps) to cover the test conditions. This phase also involves evaluating the testability of the test basis and the test items (such as software or system components), and selecting and implementing test techniques (such as equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, or state transition testing) to achieve the test objectives and optimize the test coverage and efficiency.

Test implementation and execution: This phase involves preparing the test environment (such as hardware, software, data, or tools) and testware (such as test cases, test procedures, test data, or test scripts) for test execution, and executing the test procedures or scripts according to the test plan and schedule. This phase also involves logging the outcome of test execution, comparing the actual results with the expected results, and reporting any discrepancies as incidents (such as defects, errors, or failures).

Evaluating exit criteria and reporting: This phase involves checking if the planned test activities have been completed and the exit criteria (such as quality, coverage, or risk levels) have been met, and reporting the test results and outcomes to the stakeholders. This phase also involves making recommendations for the release or acceptance decision based on the test results and outcomes, and identifying any residual risks (such as known defects or untested areas) that need to be addressed or mitigated.

Test closure activities: This phase involves finalizing and archiving the testware and test environment for future reuse, and evaluating the test process and the test project against the test objectives and the test plan. This phase also involves identifying any lessons learned and best practices, and communicating the findings and suggestions for improvement to the relevant parties.

References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.2, page 15; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 37-38; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 - Sample Exam - Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 88, page 32.

Static testing is a form of testing that does not involve executing the software, but rather analyzing it for defects, errors, or violations of standards. Static testing can be applied to any software development product, including requirements specifications, design specifications, code, test cases, test plans, user manuals, etc. Static testing can be done by using various techniques such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, static analysis tools, etc. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 7.

An incident report is a document that records the details of an incident. An incident report typically contains the following items:

Identifier: A unique identifier for the incident report

Summary: A concise summary of the incident

Description: A detailed description of the incident, including the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, and any relevant screenshots or logs

Severity: The degree of impact that the incident has on the system

Priority: The level of urgency for resolving the incident

Status: The current state of the incident, such as new, open, resolved, closed, etc.

Resolution: The action taken to resolve the incident, such as fix, workaround, reject, etc. Based on the information given in the question, the tester would be able to write down all of these items except for the test case identifier. A test case identifier is a unique identifier for a test case that is used to link it to other test artifacts, such as test plans, test scripts, test results or incident reports. However, since the tester is performing exploratory testing, there is no predefined test case that can be associated with the incident. Exploratory testing is an approach to testing that emphasizes learning, test design and test execution at the same time. Exploratory testing relies on the tester’s skills, creativity and intuition to explore the software under test and discover defects. Exploratory testing does not use formal test cases or scripts, but rather uses test charters or missions that guide the tester’s actions and objectives. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33; Chapter 5, page 47-48.

According to the decision table in the image, a Preferred Guest Card holder with a Silver room is eligible for an upgrade to Gold Luxury (YES), while a non-Preferred Guest Card holder, regardless of room type, is not eligible for any upgrade (NO). Therefore, Customer A (a Preferred Guest Card holder with a Silver room) would be offered an upgrade to Gold Luxury, and Customer B (a non-Preferred Guest Card holder with a Platinum room) would not be offered any upgrade. References = The answer is derived directly from the decision table provided in the image; specific ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents are not referenced.

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

Behavior-Driven Development (BDD) is a collaborative approach that enhances communication among project stakeholders, including developers, testers, and business analysts. It involves defining how software should behave through examples written in a common language understandable by all stakeholders, often using the Given-When-Then format​​.

Experience-based testing techniques leverage the tester's intuition and prior experience to identify defects that systematic techniques might miss. These techniques are valuable because they can uncover issues based on real-world usage and scenarios that aren't always covered by more formalized black-box and white-box methods. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 highlights the complementary nature of experience-based techniques in providing a broader defect detection strategy​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

State transition testing validates valid and invalid state transitions based on defined rules.

D is invalid because it transitions from DIAGNOSTIC MODE directly to EMERGENCY MODE, which is not a valid state change in most systems.

Other options follow valid sequences according to state transition rules.

Exploratory testing is an approach to testing that emphasizes learning, test design and test execution at the same time. Exploratory testing relies on the tester’s skills, creativity and intuition to explore the software under test and discover defects. Exploratory testing is suitable for a new project with little documentation and high probability for bugs, as it can help uncover unknown requirements, assumptions and risks. Exploratory testing is not requirements based testing, which is an approach to testing that derives test cases from documented requirements or specifications. Requirements based testing is not feasible for a new project with little documentation, as it requires clear and complete requirements to be available. Exploratory testing is not metric based approach, which is an approach to testing that uses quantitative measures to monitor and control the testing process and evaluate the quality of the software product. Metric based approach is not effective for a new project with high probability for bugs, as it may not capture all aspects of quality and may lead to false confidence or unrealistic expectations. Exploratory testing is not regression testing, which is an approach to testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes. Regression testing is not relevant for a new project with no previous versions or baselines. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 5, page 47-48.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Independent testers provide a fresh perspective and are more likely to identify failures that developers might overlook due to their familiarity with the software (C). Independent testing helps avoid cognitive biases, improves defect detection, and enhances the overall quality assurance process. While A and D touch on related concepts, they do not directly define the benefit as well as C does. Option B highlights a potential challenge rather than a benefit.

The critical information missing from the defect report is a detailed description of the defect to enable reproduction. A clear and concise description of the steps taken to reproduce the defect is essential for developers to understand the context and to be able to replicate the issue in their environment. Without this information, it can be challenging to diagnose and fix the defect. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus emphasizes the importance of providing all necessary details in a defect report to facilitate effective communication and resolution.

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

The author creates and refines the work product being reviewed.

Management allocates resources and supports the review process.

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

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

Reviewers examine the work product to identify defects.

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

The correct answer can be derived by applying the given rules to each case:

A is ST certified and has 12 years of testing experience, which is more than 10 years. Therefore, A does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown.

B is not ST certified and has 7 years of testing experience, which is between 5 and 10 years. Therefore, B matches rule 3 and the result is limited access.

C is not ST certified and has 3 years of testing experience, which is less than 5 years. Therefore, C does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown. Verified References: This question does not require any external references, as it is based on logical reasoning.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Checklist-based testing uses specific test conditions (B) that help testers ensure key aspects are validated. The checklist items can be derived from past defects, requirements, or regulatory standards.

(A) is incorrect because general guidelines lack specificity.

(C) is incorrect because checklists can be used for both manual and automated testing.

(D) is incorrect because checklists are useful for both functional and non-functional testing (e.g., security, performance).

Checklists help ensure completeness without enforcing strictly scripted execution.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The planning phase of the review process (C) includes defining the review’s purpose, scope, and exit criteria to ensure alignment. Option A is part of the defect management phase, B happens during individual preparation, and D takes place in the review meeting.

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

Problems in defining the right requirements is not a product risk, but rather a project risk. A product risk is a risk that affects the quality or performance of the software product itself, such as poor usability, failure-prone functionality, security vulnerabilities, compatibility issues, etc. A project risk is a risk that affects the management or delivery of the software project itself, such as unrealistic schedule, insufficient resources, unclear scope, changing requirements, etc. The other options are examples of product risks, as they relate to the software product’s characteristics or features. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 12.

In a formal review process, the recorder's role is typically responsible for documenting the findings of the review team, including action items, decisions, and recommendations. This ensures that there is an accurate record of what was discussed and agreed upon, facilitating follow-up and continuous improvement. Therefore, statement C is correct as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

The correct statement is B. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, the testing quadrants help to categorize tests based on their purpose and whether they are technology-facing or business-facing, and whether they support the team or critique the product. Quadrant Q2 includes tests that are business-facing and support the team, such as automated acceptance tests produced during Behavior-Driven Development (BDD) and Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD)​​ .

Quadrant Q3 includes business-facing tests that critique the product, such as exploratory testing, usability testing, and user acceptance testing. These tests are typically manual and focus on evaluating the product from a user perspective, rather than being part of a continuous integration process​​.

Quadrant Q4 includes technology-facing tests that critique the product, such as performance tests, security tests, and other non-functional tests, which can be automated but are not related to unit tests produced during TDD .

Matching the descriptions with the test techniques:

Black-box test techniques use the external description of the software, including requirements, use cases, and user stories.

White-box test techniques use the internal structure of the software system, including software architecture and code.

Black-box test techniques can reveal deviations from the requirements as they validate the external behavior of the software.

Both black-box and white-box test techniques are applicable to functional and non-functional testing.

A typical product risk involves issues directly related to the software product's functionality, performance, usability, reliability, etc. Option A, "Poor usability of the software," directly impacts the end-user's interaction with the software and is a quality attribute of the product itself, making it a product risk. Options B, "A problem in the code developed by a 3rd party," C, "Low quality of the configuration data, test data and tests," and D, "Problem in defining the right requirements," can be considered either product or project risks depending on the context, but option A is the most directly associated with a typical product risk concerning the quality and usability of the software.

This answer is correct because configuration management is a process of establishing and maintaining consistency of a product’s performance, functional, and physical attributes with its requirements, design, and operational information throughout its life. Configuration management helps ensure that all relevant project documentation and software items are uniquely identified in all their versions and therefore can be unambiguously referenced in test documentation. This supports testing by providing traceability, consistency, and control over the test artifacts and the software under test. References: : ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, : ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.2.2.2

Statement B contradicts the general principles of testing, because running the same test set more often will not increase the chances of finding new defects, unless there are some changes in the system or environment that affect the test results. Running different test sets with different inputs, outputs or conditions would be more effective in finding new defects. Statements A, C and D are consistent with the general principles of testing. Statement A states that most defects are found in a small subset of a system’s modules, which is true according to the defect clustering principle. Statement C states that testing is better if it starts at the beginning of a project, which is true according to the early testing principle. Statement D states that how testing is done, is based on the situation in a particular project, which is true according to the context-dependent testing principle. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, pages 4-6.

This question asks for a non-functional aspect of testing the download process of a mobile application. Option A, "It was easy to locate, download and install the application," refers to usability, which is a non-functional quality attribute. Non-functional testing involves testing the system's attributes, such as usability, performance, reliability, etc., rather than specific behaviors or functions. Options B, "The application was correctly downloaded," C, "The application created an installation log file in a given folder," and D, "The application installed only after the user's approval," describe functional aspects, focusing on what the software does rather than how it performs or is experienced by the user.

In a planning poker session, if there is a significant difference in the estimations, it indicates that there may be misunderstandings or different perspectives on the complexity of the user story. According to the agile principles, the team should discuss these differences to reach a common understanding. The goal is to ensure that all team members have a shared understanding of the user story's scope and complexity before finalizing the estimate​​.

To achieve 100% branch coverage of the process flow, we need to test both the true and false outcomes of the condition (User presses Cancel). Branch coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many decision outcomes in a program have been executed by a test suite. Branch coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite.

To test the true outcome of the condition, we need a test case that simulates the user pressing Cancel after booking a bill. This test case will exit the loop and end the process flow.

To test the false outcome of the condition, we need a test case that simulates the user not pressing Cancel after booking a bill. This test case will repeat the loop and book another bill.

Therefore, we need at least two test cases to achieve 100% branch coverage of the process flow. One test case for each possible outcome of the condition.

Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 40-41.

 Static testing is a form of testing that does not involve executing the software or system under test. It includes activities such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, and analysis of documents, code, and models. Static testing can find defects early in the development process, before they become more expensive and difficult to fix in later stages. Static testing can also improve the quality of the software or system by preventing defects from being introduced in the first place. Static testing can complement dynamic testing, which involves executing the software or system under test and checking the results against expected outcomes. Dynamic testing can find defects that static testing may miss, such as performance, usability, or integration issues. However, dynamic testing alone is not sufficient to ensure quality, as it may not cover all possible scenarios, inputs, or paths. Therefore, a test manager who decides to skip static testing is making a wrong decision, as he or she is ignoring the benefits of static testing and relying solely on dynamic testing, which may not be effective or efficient enough to find and prevent defects. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Version 4.0, 2018, Section 2.1.1, page 14; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, page 36; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 - Sample Exam - Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 3, page 9.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

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

Title & summary (B) – For quick identification.

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

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

A technical review is a type of formal review that involves a team of technical experts who evaluate a software product against a set of predefined quality criteria. A technical review is suitable for ensuring high quality and technical correctness of complex or critical software components, such as algorithms, architectures or designs. A technical review is not a walkthrough, which is an informal review led by the author of the work product. A technical review is not an informal review, which is a review that does not follow a defined process and has no formal entry or exit criteria. A technical review is not a management review, which is a type of formal review that focuses on business aspects and project progress. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 29-30.

Maintenance testing is testing performed on a software product after delivery to correct defects or improve performance or other attributes. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various situations, such as modifications to a released software or system, migration of the system data to a replacement system, or retirement of the software or system. Maintenance testing is not executed when there is an update to the maintainability requirements during the development phase, as this is not a maintenance situation but rather a change request that should be handled by the development process. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 18-19.

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

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

Exploratory testing involves simultaneous test design and execution and is guided by a test charter, which outlines what needs to be tested, how it should be tested, and what to look for. This technique is typically conducted within predefined time periods, known as time-boxing, which allows testers to explore a system, understand its functionalities, and identify potential issues without detailed documentation or prior test case planning. The key aspects of exploratory testing include flexibility, adaptability, and the ability to respond to system behavior during testing.

Retrospectives are a crucial part of Agile practices, aiming to identify process improvements and determine how to implement them effectively. They should involve participants discussing not only what improvements could be made but also how to integrate and sustain those improvements within the project context, including the software development lifecycle. This makes statement D accurate according to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

 The thought process of the software company is incorrect, because it assumes that each artifact can be reviewed using only one review method, and that the review method depends solely on the criticality of the artifact. This is a simplistic and rigid approach that does not consider the benefits and limitations of different review methods, the context and purpose of the review, and the feedback and improvement opportunities that can be gained from multiple reviews. According to the CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, the selection of review methods should be based on several factors, such as the type and level of detail of the artifact, the availability and competence of the reviewers, the time and budget constraints, the expected defects and risks, and the desired outcomes and quality criteria. Moreover, the same artifact can be reviewed using different review methods at different stages of the development lifecycle, to ensure that the artifact meets the changing requirements, standards, and expectations of the stakeholders. For example, a requirement specification can be reviewed using an informal review method, such as a walkthrough, to get an initial feedback from the users and developers, and then using a formal review method, such as an inspection, to verify the completeness, correctness, and consistency of the specification. Therefore, the software company should adopt a more flexible and context-sensitive approach to selecting and applying review methods for different artifacts, rather than following a fixed and arbitrary rule. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.2.1, page 31-32; Section 3.2.2, page 33-34; Section 3.2.3, page 35-36.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Acceptance criteria 8 states that the system should charge the user on the first business day of the following month. However, the test cycle only verified monthly payments for over a year, without confirming whether payments were processed specifically on the first business day.

(B) is incorrect because the test validated monthly and annual payment options.

(C) is incorrect because not all criteria were fully validated.

(D) is incorrect because OTP verification (6) was tested as part of registration.

Ensuring timely execution of payments (Criteria 8) requires additional validation.

When developers are trying to identify and remove a defect, they need clear information on what went wrong and what was expected. The items that will be most useful to developers in this context are the expected results (item 1), the actual results (item 2), and a description of the defect including steps to reproduce, screenshots, and database dumps (item 5). This information helps developers understand the nature of the defect and provides the necessary details to reproduce and diagnose the issue effectively.

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

This answer is correct because the test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are not a typical content of a test completion report for a test project. A test completion report is a document that summarizes the test activities and results at the end of a test project. It usually includes information such as the test objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, results, deviations, issues, risks, lessons learned, and recommendations for improvement. The test procedures of all test cases that have been executed are part of the test documentation, but they are not relevant for the test completion report, as they do not provide a high-level overview of the test project outcomes and performance. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.5.3.2

The relationship between impact analysis and regression testing in maintenance testing is that impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on an existing software product after it has been delivered or deployed, in order to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after a change or a modification. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various reasons, such as corrective maintenance (fixing defects), adaptive maintenance (adapting to new environments), perfective maintenance (improving performance), preventive maintenance (avoiding future problems), etc. Impact analysis is a technique that is used to assess the extent and nature of changes introduced by maintenance activities on the software product or project. Impact analysis helps to identify which parts of the software product are affected by the changes, which parts need to be modified or updated accordingly, which parts need to be retested or verified for correctness or compatibility, etc. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change or a modification. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of maintenance activities on the software product’s functionality or quality. Regression testing can be performed at various levels and scopes depending on the impact analysis results. Therefore, in maintenance testing, impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 20.

Equivalence partitioning is a technique that divides the input data and output results of a software component into partitions of equivalent data. Each partition should contain data that is treated in the same way by the component. Equivalence partitioning can be used to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. Equivalence partitioning is suitable for testing the price computation, as it can identify different partitions based on the passenger type, the travelling type, the distance and the kind of transport. Equivalence partitioning is not statement coverage, which is a technique that measures how many executable statements in a source code are executed by a test suite. Statement coverage is not appropriate for testing the price computation, as it does not consider the input data or output results. Equivalence partitioning is not state transition testing, which is a technique that models how a system transitions from one state to another depending on events or conditions. State transition testing is not relevant for testing the price computation, as it does not involve any states or transitions. Equivalence partitioning is not use case testing, which is a technique that tests how users interact with a system to achieve a specific goal. Use case testing is not applicable for testing the price computation, as it does not focus on a single function or component. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 37-38.

The question is about selecting the correct test values for x based on equivalence partitioning. Equivalence partitioning is a software test design technique that divides the input data of a software unit into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived. In this case, the given equivalence classes are:

(x \leq -100)

(-100 < x < 100)

(100 \leq x < 1000)

(x \geq 1000)

Option D provides a value from each of these partitions:

For (x \leq -100), it gives -1000.

For (-100 < x < 100), it gives -100 and 100.

For (100 \leq x < 1000), it gives 500.

For (x \geq 1000), it gives 1500.

So, option D covers all four given equivalence classes with appropriate values.

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

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

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

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

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

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

In a formal review process, the recorder's role is typically responsible for documenting the findings of the review team, including action items, decisions, and recommendations. This ensures that there is an accurate record of what was discussed and agreed upon, facilitating follow-up and continuous improvement. Therefore, statement C is correct as per the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A test case is a set of input values, execution preconditions, expected results and execution postconditions, developed for a particular objective or test condition. A test case is a sequence of actions for test execution that can be followed by a tester or a test automation tool. A test case is specified during the test implementation activity, which is the activity that prepares the testware needed for test execution. A test case does not include actual results, as these are obtained during test execution and compared with the expected results. A test case does not describe items or events to test, as these are derived from the test basis during the test analysis activity. A test case is not derived during the test design activity, as this is the activity that specifies the test conditions or objectives that need to be tested. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 23-24; Chapter 4, page 34.

The key difference between the mindsets for test activities and development activities lies in the objectives: a tester is primarily concerned with finding defects to ensure product quality, while a developer focuses on designing and building solutions. This distinct focus helps ensure thorough quality checks and balances within the software development life cycle​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, a defect is a deviation from the expected result which in this scenario is the incorrect discount applied to the customers. The root cause, as per the ISTQB definition, is the originating cause of a defect, which in this case is the incorrect requirement stating 50% instead of 5%. Therefore, the incorrect requirement is the root cause and the customer receiving the wrong discount is the effect of this root cause.

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

The new user provides all valid data.

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

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

Traceability primarily refers to the ability to link test cases back to their sources in the test basis, such as requirements or design documents. This linkage allows for the determination of coverage, impact analysis, and maintaining consistency across test documentation. However, traceability does not directly enable the application of experience-based test techniques, which are more about using the tester's intuition and experience. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 does not state that traceability enables experience-based techniques, making option B the false statement​​.

Statement D is correct. According to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, both black-box test techniques (which focus on testing without internal knowledge of the application) and experience-based test techniques (which rely on testers' experience and intuition) can be applied to both functional and non-functional testing. Functional testing is concerned with what the system does, whereas non-functional testing looks at how the system performs under certain conditions. These techniques are versatile and can be employed to address both these aspects​​.

The test levels and their objectives can be matched as follows:

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the system are as designed and specified (A3: System testing).

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the interfaces are as designed (B2: Integration testing).

Verifying whether the functional and non-functional behaviors of the components are as designed and specified (C1: Component testing).

Establishing confidence in the quality of the system as a whole (D4: Acceptance testing)​​.

Effort estimate does not depend on the budget of the project, but rather on the scope, complexity, and quality of the software product and the testing activities1. Budget is a constraint that may affect the feasibility and accuracy of the effort estimate, but it is not a factor that determines the effort estimate. Effort estimate is the amount of work required to complete the testing activities, measured in terms of person-hours, person-days, or person-months2.

The other options are correct because:

A. Once the test effort is estimated, resources can be identified and a schedule can be drawn up, as they are interrelated aspects of the test planning process3. Resources are the people, tools, equipment, and facilities needed to perform the testing activities4. Schedule is the time frame and sequence of the testing activities, aligned with the project milestones and deadlines5.

B. Effort estimate can be inaccurate because the quality of the product under tests is not known, as it affects the number and severity of the defects that may be found and the rework that may be needed to fix them6. Quality is the degree to which the software product satisfies the specified requirements and meets the needs and expectations of the users and clients7.

D. Experience based estimation is one of the estimation techniques, which relies on the judgment and expertise of the testers and other project stakeholders to estimate the test effort based on similar projects or tasks done in the past. Experience based estimation can be useful when there is a lack of historical data, formal methods, or detailed information about the software product and the testing activities.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 154

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 155

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 156

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 157

5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 158

6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 159

7 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 16

[8] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 160

[9] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 161

Metrics can be collected during and at the end of testing activities to assess various aspects including progress against the planned schedule and budget, the current quality of the test object, the adequacy of the test approach, and the effectiveness of the test activities with respect to the objectives. Collecting these metrics helps in understanding the overall performance and quality of the testing process​​.

Test implementation involves finalizing the test procedures, including the order of execution of test cases based on their dependencies, preconditions, and postconditions. This phase ensures that all necessary test scripts, test data, and test environments are ready for execution. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, test implementation is the phase where detailed test procedures are derived and documented, making it a critical step before actual test execution​​.

Defect clustering is a testing principle that states that a small number of modules contain most of the defects detected during pre-release testing, or are responsible for most of the operational failures. Defect clustering can be explained by Pareto’s principle (also known as the 80-20 rule), which states that approximately 80% of the problems are found in 20% of the modules. Defect clustering suggests a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, as it implies that more effort should be allocated to test the modules that have shown high defect density or criticality. Pesticide paradox is another testing principle that states that if the same tests are repeated over and over again, eventually they will no longer find any new defects. Pesticide paradox suggests a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but not based on defect clustering, but rather on test diversity and coverage. Early testing is a testing principle that states that testing activities should start as early as possible in the software development life cycle and should be focused on defined objectives. Early testing does not suggest a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but rather a proactive approach to prevent defects from occurring or propagating. Absence-of-errors fallacy is a testing principle that states that finding and fixing defects does not help if the system built is unusable and does not fulfill the users’ needs and expectations. Absence-of-errors fallacy does not suggest a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but rather a focus on quality attributes and user requirements. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 1, page 9-10.

A decision table is a technique that should be used to cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an Automated Teller Machine (ATM). A decision table shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). A decision table consists of four quadrants: conditions (inputs), actions (outputs), condition entries (values) and action entries (results). A decision table can be used to test components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify three input conditions: the bank card is valid, the PIN code is correct, and money is available in the user’s account. We can also identify four output actions: the card is rejected, the ATM asks for another PIN code, the ATM asks for another amount, and the ATM dispenses the money. A decision table can show all possible combinations of these conditions and actions in a systematic way.

Use case based testing is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Use case based testing is a technique that verifies that a software product or system meets its specified requirements or user stories by executing realistic scenarios or workflows. Use case based testing can be used to test components that have complex or dynamic interactions with users or other systems. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify several use cases, such as withdraw money, check balance, transfer money, etc. Each use case can have one or more scenarios that describe the steps and outcomes of the interaction. However, use case based testing may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some scenarios may be omitted or overlooked.

Boundary value analysis is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Boundary value analysis is a technique that tests boundary values between partitions of equivalent data. Boundary values are values at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Boundary value analysis can be used to test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify boundary values for the input amount, such as the minimum and maximum amount allowed by the system or the user’s account. However, boundary value analysis may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not have boundary values or may not be related to input values.

Equivalence class partitioning is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Equivalence class partitioning is a technique that divides the input data and output results of a software component into partitions of equivalent data. Each partition should contain data that is treated in the same way by the component. Equivalence class partitioning can be used to test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify equivalence partitions for the input amount, such as valid amount (within the range allowed by the system and the user’s account) and invalid amount (outside the range allowed by the system or the user’s account). However, equivalence class partitioning may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not be related to input values or may have more than two partitions. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46.

A product risk is a risk that affects the quality or timeliness of the software product being developed or tested1. Product risks are related to the requirements, design, implementation, verification, and maintenance of the software product2.

The risk of the sub-contractor failing to meet his commitment is a product risk, as it could cause a delay in the completion of the testing required for the current cycle, which in turn could affect the release date of the product. The release date is an important aspect of the product quality, as it reflects the customer satisfaction and the market competitiveness of the product3.

The other options are not correct because:

A. It is not true that any risk associated with development timeline is a product risk. Some risks could be project risks, which are risks that affect the management or control of the software project, such as budget, resources, schedule, or communication1. For example, a risk of losing a key project stakeholder is a project risk, not a product risk.

B. It is not true that the risk is no longer a risk for the Test Manager since an independent party is managing it. The Test Manager is still responsible for ensuring that the testing activities are completed according to the test plan and the quality objectives4. The Test Manager should monitor and control the sub-contractor’s performance and communicate with him regularly to identify and mitigate any potential issues or deviations5.

C. It is not clear what is meant by “object” in this option, but it could be interpreted as the software system under test or the test object6. In any case, the risk is not an object risk, as it does not affect the successful completion of the object, but rather the successful completion of the testing of the object. An object risk could be a risk that affects the functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, or portability of the software system under test2. For example, a risk of the software system having a high complexity or a low testability is an object risk, not a product risk.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 97

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 98

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 99

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 100

5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 101

6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 102

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

A key characteristic of informal reviews is low cost. Informal reviews are a type of review that does not follow a formal process or have any formal documentation. Informal reviews are usually performed by individuals or small groups of peers or colleagues who have some knowledge or interest in the product under review. Informal reviews can be done at any time and for any purpose, such as checking for errors, clarifying doubts, sharing ideas, etc. Informal reviews have low cost, as they do not require much time, effort, or resources to conduct. The other options are not key characteristics of informal reviews. Kick-off meeting is a characteristic of formal reviews, such as inspections or walkthroughs. Kick-off meeting is a meeting that is held before the review process starts, where the roles and responsibilities of the participants are defined, the objectives and scope of the review are agreed, and the logistics and schedule of the review are planned. Individual preparation is a characteristic of formal reviews, such as inspections or walkthroughs. Individual preparation is an activity that is performed by the reviewers before the review meeting, where they examine the product under review and identify any issues or questions that need to be discussed or resolved during the review meeting. Metrics analysis is a characteristic of formal reviews, such as inspections or walkthroughs. Metrics analysis is an activity that is performed after the review process is completed, where the data and results of the review are collected and analyzed to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the review, as well as to identify any improvement actions or lessons learned for future reviews. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 9.

Test design is one of the fundamental activities in software testing, focusing on how tests will be structured and what strategies will be employed. As per the ISTQB syllabus, identifying appropriate test execution and automation tools is a task closely associated with test design activities because it directly influences how tests will be conducted, managed, and executed efficiently. This activity involves deciding on the tools that will best support the testing goals and requirements.

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

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

Using the given values, the expected value is:

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

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

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

Using the given values, the standard deviation is:

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

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

Expected value ± standard deviation

Using the calculated values, the range is:

30 ± 8 person hours

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

Test-Driven Development (TDD) emphasizes writing tests before code and includes refactoring as a key practice to improve both the tests and the code. This ensures that the codebase remains clean and maintainable. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 discusses TDD as a practice that includes writing tests first, coding to satisfy those tests, and then refactoring the code to improve its structure and readability while keeping the tests intact​​.

The correct matching of the topics with their descriptions is as follows:

Functional behaviour: The externally observable behaviour with user actions as input operating under certain configurations (A to C).

Quality characteristics: How the system performs the specific behaviour (B to A).

Scenarios: A sequence of actions between an external actor and the system, to accomplish a specific goal or business task (C to B).

Business rules: Activities that can only be performed in the system under certain conditions defined by outside procedures and constraints (D to E).

External interfaces: Description of the connections between the system to be developed and the outside world (E to D)​​.

A defect is a flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function. A defect can cause harm to the end customer, the company, or both, depending on the impact and severity of the failure. In this case, the defect in the code causes the system to lock down accounts that have an overdraft higher than $1000, instead of $10,000. This can cause harm to the end customer, as they may lose access to their funds and face inconvenience or financial difficulties. This can also cause harm to the company, as they may lose customer trust and satisfaction, face legal issues or complaints, or incur additional costs for fixing the defect and restoring the accounts. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 3-4.

Static analysis tools are software tools that examine the source code of a program without executing it. They can detect various types of issues, such as syntax errors, coding standards violations, security vulnerabilities, and potential bugs12. However, static analysis tools cannot identify issues that depend on the runtime behavior or performance of the program, such as very low MTBF (Mean Time Between failure)3. MTBF is a measure of the reliability of a system or component. It is calculated by dividing the total operating time by the number of failures. MTBF reflects how often a system or component fails during its expected lifetime. Static analysis tools cannot measure MTBF because they do not run the program or observe its failures. MTBF can only be estimated by dynamic testing, which involves executing the program under various conditions and collecting data on its failures4. Therefore, very low MTBF is an issue that cannot be identified by static analysis tools. The other options, such as potentially endless loops, referencing a variable with an undefined value, and security vulnerabilities, are issues that can be identified by static analysis tools. Static analysis tools can detect potentially endless loops by analyzing the control flow and data flow of the program and checking for conditions that may never become false5. Static analysis tools can detect referencing a variable with an undefined value by checking the scope and initialization of variables and reporting any use of uninitialized variables6. Static analysis tools can detect security vulnerabilities by checking for common patterns of insecure code, such as buffer overflows, SQL injections, cross-site scripting, and weak encryption. References = What Is Static Analysis? Static Code Analysis Tools - Perforce Software, How Static Code Analysis Works | Perforce, Static Code Analysis: Techniques, Top 5 Benefits & 3 Challenges, What is MTBF? Mean Time Between Failures Explained | Perforce, Static analysis tools - Software Testing MCQs - CareerRide, ISTQB_Chapter3 | Quizizz, [Static Code Analysis for Security Vulnerabilities | Perforce].

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

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

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

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

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

Component testing is a test level. A test level is a group of test activities that are organized and managed together based on some common characteristics or objectives. A test level can be defined based on various factors, such as the scope and target of testing, the phase and model of development, the stakeholders and roles involved in testing, etc. Component testing (also known as unit testing or module testing) is a test level that focuses on verifying the functionality and quality of individual software components (such as modules, classes, functions, methods, etc.). Component testing can be performed by developers or testers using various techniques and tools depending on the type and complexity of the components. The other options are not test levels. Integration testing is another test level that focuses on verifying the functionality and quality of groups of software components that interact with each other or with external systems. Functional testing is a type of black-box dynamic testing that verifies that the system under test performs its intended functions according to its requirements or specifications. Experience-based testing is a category of test design techniques that rely on the tester’s knowledge and intuition to derive and select test cases based on their experience with similar systems, technologies, domains, risks, etc. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 19.

A test tool used for the analysis of a developer's code prior to its execution falls under the category of static testing tools. Static testing involves examining the code and documentation without executing the code. These tools are used to perform static analysis, which helps in identifying potential defects and code quality issues early in the development process. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus specifies that static analysis tools are essential for finding defects that do not manifest themselves during the execution of the program.

The test engineer should re-run the tests, in order to ensure that new defects have not been introduced by the fix. This is also known as regression testing, which is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of a fix or a modification. The other options are incorrect reasons for re-running the tests. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, as they have already been run, and results recorded, because this ignores the possibility of new defects caused by the fix. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, they should be part of the developer tests, because this assumes that developer tests are sufficient and reliable, which may not be true. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, because the defect shows that the test cases need to be updated, because this does not address the impact of the fix on other test cases or functionalities. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 41.

Testing can contribute to higher quality by helping to measure the quality of software. Quality is defined as the degree to which a component or system satisfies specified requirements and customer or user needs and expectations. Testing is a process of evaluating a component or system by applying inputs and observing outputs, and comparing them with expected results. Testing can help to measure the quality of software by providing information on its functionality, performance, usability, security, reliability, etc. Testing can also help to identify and report defects in software, which can lead to improvement actions and quality assurance activities. The other options are not accurate descriptions of how testing can contribute to higher quality. Testing does not ensure that remaining defects are documented, but rather that detected defects are reported. Testing does not remove errors in software, but rather finds defects in software behavior or quality. Testing does not eliminate the risk with software, but rather assesses and manages the risk with software. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

One possible risk of introducing test automation is that the selected tool may not be fit-for-purpose. This means that the tool might not meet the specific needs and requirements of the project, leading to inefficiencies and possibly failing to provide the expected benefits. It is crucial to evaluate and select the appropriate tool based on the project's context and objectives. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus highlights the importance of careful tool evaluation and selection to ensure it aligns with the testing goals and the development environment.

Decision table testing is used to analyze combinations of inputs to determine the appropriate outputs, often based on specific rules or conditions.

For the problem statement:

Rule 1: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = True)

Outcome: Transaction = Approved

Rule 4: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = False)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

The additional test cases are:

DT1: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Insufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = True)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

DT2: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = False, Correct PIN = True)

Outcome: Transaction = Approved

DT3: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Insufficient, Fast Cash = True, Correct PIN = False)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

DT4: (Withdrawal = Allowed, Balance = Sufficient, Fast Cash = False, Correct PIN = False)

Outcome: Transaction = Declined

From the given test cases, DT2 covers the scenario where Fast Cash is False, which is not covered in the initial cases. DT3 covers the case where Balance is Insufficient and PIN is incorrect.

Combining Rules 1 and 4 with DT2 and DT3 covers all the scenarios.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

BDD emphasizes collaboration between developers, testers, and business stakeholders to define system behavior in a readable format (A). It typically uses the Given-When-Then syntax. Unlike unit testing (B), BDD is at a higher level of abstraction. It does not focus solely on non-functional testing (C) and encourages early testing rather than post-development validation (D).

Debugging is the development activity that finds, analyses and fixes defects. Unlike testing, which aims to identify defects in the software, debugging is the process that developers use to locate and correct the errors found during testing. This involves diagnosing the root causes of these defects and making necessary code changes to resolve them. Debugging is a critical part of the development cycle and ensures that the software functions correctly after defects are fixed.

A test status report is a document that provides a snapshot of the testing activities and their progress during a particular period. It should include information about any impediments encountered during the test execution and the actions taken to resolve them, which helps stakeholders understand the challenges and how they were addressed​​ .

Option B describes an activity related to test completion rather than ongoing status reporting. Option C is incorrect because the structure and contents of the report may vary based on the audience's needs. Option D, while important, is not the primary purpose of a test status report, which focuses more on the current status and impediments.

System testing is a level of testing performed to evaluate the behavior and quality of a whole software product or system. System testing can include various types of testing, such as:

I) Usability testing: A type of testing that evaluates how easy, efficient and satisfying it is to use the software product or system from the user’s perspective.

II) Requirements based scenarios testing: A type of testing that verifies that the software product or system meets its specified requirements or user stories by executing realistic scenarios or workflows. System testing does not include the following types of testing, as they are more suitable for lower levels of testing, such as unit testing or integration testing:

III) Testing parts of the code in isolation: A type of testing that verifies the functionality and quality of individual software components or units by isolating them from other components or units.

IV) Correct order of parameters in API calls: A type of testing that verifies the functionality and quality of software components or units that communicate with each other through application programming interfaces (APIs) by checking the correct order and format of parameters in API calls. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 20-21; Chapter 4, page 34-35.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

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

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

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

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

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

R100,000 (just inside the previous range)

R100,001 (start of the 13% range)

R500,000 (end of the 13% range)

R500,001 (just outside the range)

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

Test Management tools are designed to support the planning, execution, and monitoring of the testing process. They provide features for managing test cases, test runs, tracking defects, and reporting on testing activities. However, the statement in option C describes Test Management tools as monitoring and reporting on the system's behavior during testing activities, which is not accurate. Test Management tools focus on the testing process itself rather than on the behavior of the system under test.

Test data preparation tools (A) indeed create and manage test data for use during test execution.

Test execution tools (B) automate the execution of test cases and the comparison of actual outcomes against expected results.

Test comparators (D) are tools that compare actual outcomes with expected outcomes, highlighting discrepancies.

Therefore, option C is the correct answer as it inaccurately describes the function of Test Management tools.

Communication from testers about defects, test results, and other test information should emphasize the benefits of testing such as increased quality and reduced risk. This positive framing helps in reinforcing the value of testing and ensuring stakeholders understand the contribution of testing to the overall project success​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

Testware is a term that refers to all artifacts produced during the testing process, such as test plans, test cases, test scripts, test data, test results, defect reports, etc. The following statements about testware are correct:

II) All the testware should be subject to Configuration Management. Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains consistency among work products throughout their life cycle. Configuration management applies to all testware, as it helps ensure their quality and consistency, track their changes and defects, control their versions and access rights, and link them to other artifacts.

III) The testware at the end of the project should be transferred to the organization responsible for maintenance. Maintenance testing is testing performed on a software product after delivery to correct defects or improve performance or other attributes. Maintenance testing requires testware from previous testing activities or phases, such as test cases, test data, test results, etc. Therefore, the testware at the end of the project should be transferred to the organization responsible for maintenance testing, such as support team or maintenance team. The following statements about testware are incorrect:

I) When closing the test activities, all the testware resources can be uninstalled and released. This statement is incorrect, as some testware resources may still be needed for future testing activities or phases, such as maintenance testing or regression testing. Therefore, when closing the test activities, some testware resources should be archived and stored for future use, while others can be uninstalled and released.

IV) The developers are responsible for the correct installation of the testware. This statement is incorrect, as the testers are responsible for the correct installation of the testware. The testers should ensure that they have access to all necessary testware resources and that they are installed and configured properly before starting the test execution. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 6, page 58-61.

In the context of software testing, the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 differentiates between "validation" and "verification" based on their respective focuses in the software development lifecycle. Verification is the process of evaluating a system or component to determine whether the products of a given development phase satisfy the conditions imposed at the start of that phase. In simpler terms, verification is about checking the product against the specified requirements to ensure it was built correctly. Validation, on the other hand, involves evaluating a system or component during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it meets specified requirements for its intended use. This means validation is about ensuring the product fulfills its intended use and meets the needs of the user.

The following statements about re-testing and regression testing are true:

I) Re-testing should be performed after a defect is fixed. Re-testing is a type of testing that verifies that a defect has been successfully resolved by executing a test case that previously failed due to that defect. Re-testing should be performed after a defect is fixed and delivered to ensure that it does not cause any new failures or side effects.

III) Re-testing and regression testing may be performed at any test level. Re-testing and regression testing are not limited to a specific test level, but can be applied at any level depending on the context and objectives. For example, re-testing and regression testing can be performed at unit level, integration level, system level or acceptance level.

IV) Regression testing may include functional, non-functional and structural testing. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes. Regression testing may include various types of testing depending on the scope and purpose of the changes. For example, regression testing may include functional testing to check if the software meets its requirements, non-functional testing to check if the software meets its quality attributes, or structural testing to check if the software meets its design or code standards. The following statement about re-testing and regression testing is false:

II) Regression testing should always be performed after a defect is fixed. Regression testing is not always necessary after a defect is fixed, as some defects may have a low impact or low likelihood of affecting other parts of the software. Regression testing should be performed after a defect is fixed only if there is a risk of introducing new defects or causing existing defects due to the changes made to fix the defect. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 2, page 19; Chapter 4, page 45.

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