The test pyramid is a concept that illustrates the different levels of testing and their relative quantities. The pyramid suggests that there should be more low-level unit tests than high-level end-to-end tests. As you move up the pyramid, the scope of each test increases, meaning each higher level test typically covers more of the production code.

Unit Tests:Form the base of the pyramid and cover individual units of code. They are numerous because they are quick to write and execute.

Service/Integration Tests:Sit in the middle of the pyramid and cover interactions between integrated units or services.

UI/End-to-End Tests:At the top of the pyramid, these tests cover entire workflows and user interactions, making them fewer in number due to their complexity and execution time.

Option B accurately describes that the higher the layer of the test pyramid, the more production code a single automated test tends to cover because these higher-level tests involve broader functionalities and interactions compared to unit tests.

Both black-box test techniques and experience-based test techniques can be applied to functional and non-functional testing. Functional testing focuses on what the system does, while non-functional testing examines how the system performs. These techniques provide flexible and effective methods for assessing various aspects of the system.

References:

ISTQB® CTFL Syllabus 4.0, Chapter 4.4, page 42: Experience-Based Testing Techniques​

Test management focuses on planning and control activities. Test planning (II) involves defining test strategies, schedules, and resources, while test monitoring and control (V) ensures that testing activitiesare aligned with objectives and tracked effectively. Other activities, such as test design (I) and peer review facilitation (IV), are typically handled by testers or test leads.

DevOps practices emphasize the importance of testing non-functional characteristics such as performance, security, and reliability. This focus ensures that the system not only meets functional requirements but also performs well under various conditions and is secure. DevOps promotes a continuous testing approach, which includes both functional and non-functional testing integrated into the development and deployment pipelines.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 2.1.4 on DevOps and testing, which highlights the role of DevOps in emphasizing non-functional characteristics​​.

Confirmation testingis performed after a defect is fixed to confirm it no longer exists (A).Regression testingensures new defects have not been introduced in unchanged parts of the system. Regression testing is broader than confirmation testing and covers unmodified areas affected by the changes. Options B, C, and D misrepresent the relationship and scope of these tests.

In the context of software testing roles, tasks typically performed by someone in a testing role include evaluating the test basis and test object, creating test completion reports, and assessing the testability of the test object. These tasks are directly related to ensuring the quality and effectiveness of the software testing process.

Evaluate test basis and test object: This involves reviewing and analyzing the documents and artifacts that are used as the basis for testing. This is a fundamental task for testers tounderstand what needs to be tested and to ensure that the test objects are adequately covered by the test cases​​.

Create test completion report: This is part of the test closure activities. Testers are responsible for summarizing the testing activities, outcomes, and lessons learned, which are compiled into a test completion report. This report is crucial for stakeholders to understand the test results and make informed decisions​​.

Assess testability of test object: This task involves evaluating how easily a test object (such as a piece of software) can be tested. This includes considering aspects such as the availability of test data, the ability to isolate the object for testing, and the clarity of the requirements. Testers often perform this assessment to identify potential challenges and mitigate them before testing begins​​.

On the other hand:

Define test environment requirements: While testers may provide input on the test environment, the primary responsibility for defining and setting up the test environment usually falls to roles such as system administrators or infrastructure specialists. They ensure that the necessary hardware, software, and network configurations are in place for testing to proceed. This task is less likely to be the sole responsibility of a tester​​.

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

Checklist-based testingusesspecific 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 incorrectbecause general guidelines lack specificity.

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

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

Checklistshelp ensure completenesswithout enforcingstrictly scriptedexecution.

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

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

A failure is an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits1. A requirement is a condition or capability needed by a user to solve a problem or achieve an objective2. In this case, the requirement is that the diagnostics tests should execute in less than 2 seconds. Therefore, any event that violates this requirement is a failure. The only option that clearly violates this requirement is B. The diagnostic tests take too much time to execute. If the diagnostic tests take more than 2 seconds to complete, then they do not meet the specified limit and thus fail. The other options are not necessarily failures related to the specified requirement. Option A. The diagnostic tests fail to start after a system reset is a failure, but not related to the time limit. It is related to the functionality of the self-diagnostics module. Option C. The diagnostic tests that measure the speed of the memory, fail is also a failure, but not related to the time limit. It is related to the accuracy of the memory tests. Option D. The diagnostic tests fail due to incorrect implementation of the test code is also a failure, but not related to the time limit. It is related to the quality of the test code. References = ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Requirements Engineering Fundamentals.

Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers dynamically design and execute tests based on their knowledge, intuition, and learning of the software system, without following predefined test scripts or test cases. Exploratory testing can be conducted following a session-based approach, which is a structured way of managing and measuring exploratory testing. In a session-based approach, the testers perform uninterrupted test sessions, usually lasting between 60 and 120 minutes, with a specific charter or goal, and document the issues detected, the test coverage achieved, and the time spent in session sheets. Session sheets are records of the test activities, results, and observations during a test session, which can be used for reporting, debriefing, and learning purposes. The other statements are false, because:

Exploratory testing is not a test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements, but rather a test technique in which testers explore the software system to detect functional and non-functional defects, as well as to learn new information, risks, or opportunities. Non testable requirements are requirements that are ambiguous, incomplete, inconsistent, or not verifiable, which can affect the quality and effectiveness of the testing process. Non testable requirements can be detected by applying static testing techniques, such as reviews or inspections, to the requirements specification, before the software system is developed or tested.

Exploratory testing is not a test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code, but rather a test technique used by testers during dynamic testing to find defects by exploring the behavior and performance of the software system, without examining the source code. Informal code reviews are static testing techniques, in which the source code isanalyzed by one or more reviewers, without following a formal process or using a checklist, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Informal code reviews are usually performed by developers or peers, not by testers.

In exploratory testing, testers usually do not produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis, but rather produce unscripted tests and adapt them based on the feedback and the findings of the testing process. Scripted tests are tests that are designed and documented in advance, with predefined inputs, outputs, and expected results, and are executed according to a test plan or a test procedure. Bidirectional traceability is the ability to trace both forward and backward the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Scripted tests and bidirectional traceability are usually associated with more formal and structured testing approaches, such as specification-based or structure-based test techniques, not with exploratory testing. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Exploratory Testing, Session-based Testing, Session Sheet, Non Testable Requirement, Static Testing, Informal Review, Dynamic Testing, Scripted Testing, Bidirectional Traceability2

The testing of software does not demonstrate the absence of defects, but rather the presence of defects or the conformance of the software to the specified requirements1. Testing can never prove that the software is defect-free, as it is impossible to test all possible scenarios, inputs, outputs, and behaviors of the software2. Testing can only provide a level of confidence in the quality of the software, based on the coverage, effectiveness, and efficiency of the testing activities3.

The other options are correct because:

A. Properly designed tests that pass reduce the level of risk in a system, as they verify that the system meets the expected quality attributes and satisfies the needs and expectations of the users and clients4. Risk is the potential for loss or harm due to the occurrence of an undesirable event5. Testing can help to identify, analyze, prioritize, and mitigate the risks associated with the software product and project6.

C. Software testing identifies defects, which can be used to improve development activities, as they provide feedback on the quality of the software and the effectiveness of the development processes7. Defects are flaws or errors in the software that cause it to deviate from the expected or required results or behavior. Testing can help to detect, report, track, and resolve the defects, and prevent them from recurring in the future.

D. Performing a review of the requirement specifications before implementing the system can enhance quality, as it can ensure that the requirements are clear, complete, consistent, testable, and aligned with the needs and expectations of the users and clients. Requirements are the specifications of what the software should do and how it should do it. Testing can help to validate that the requirements are met by the software, and verify that the software is implemented according to the requirements.

References =

1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 10

2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 11

3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 12

4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 13

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

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

7 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 14

[8] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 15

[9] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 16

[10] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 17

[11] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 18

[12] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 19

To determine the correct execution order that minimizes the number of configuration switches and respects the dependencies, we need to consider the following:

Initial Configuration:CONF1.

Dependencies:

TC1 depends on nothing.

TC2 depends on TC4.

TC3 depends on TC4.

TC4 depends on nothing.

TC5 depends on TC1.

Configuration Requirements:

TC1 requires CONF2.

TC2 requires CONF2.

TC3 requires CONF1.

TC4 requires CONF1.

TC5 requires CONF2.

Given the initial configuration is CONF1, start with test cases that can run on CONF1 and respect the dependencies. Then switch to CONF2 only when necessary. The optimal order to minimize configuration switches is:

Start withTC4(no dependencies, CONF1).

Continue withTC3(depends on TC4, CONF1).

Switch to CONF2.

ExecuteTC2(depends on TC4, CONF2).

Continue withTC1(no dependencies, CONF2).

Finally, executeTC5(depends on TC1, CONF2).

Therefore, the correct order is:

TC4(CONF1)

TC3(CONF1)

TC2(CONF2)

TC1(CONF2)

TC5(CONF2)

Thus, the answer isA. TC4, TC3, TC2, TC1, TC5.

Test automationimproves efficiency and accuracy, butit does NOT eliminate manual testing (D).

(A) is correctbecause automationspeeds up execution.

(B) is correctas automated tests produceconsistent and unbiased results.

(C) is correctbecause automationreduces human errors in repetitive tests.

However,manual testing remains essential for exploratory testing, usability testing, and complex test scenarios.

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.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 2.5.1, Page 35.

Covering all transitions at least once is the highest coverage criterion for state transition based test cases, because it ensures that every possible change of state is tested at least once. This means that all the events that trigger the transitions, as well as the actions and outputs that result from the transitions, are verified. Covering all transitions at least once also implies covering all states at least once, but not vice versa. Therefore, option D is not the highest coverage criterion. Option C is the lowest coverage criterion, because it only tests the initial and final states of the system or component, without checking the intermediate states or transitions. Option A is incorrect, because the coverage criteria for state transition based test cases can be determined and compared based on the number of transitions and states covered. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 4.2.3, page 49-50.

The support offered by a performance testing tool is often leveraged by testers to run load tests, which are tests that simulate a large number of concurrent users or transactions on the system under test, in order to measure its performance, reliability, and scalability. Performance testing tools can help testers to generate realistic workloads, monitor system behavior, collect and analyze performance metrics, and identify performance bottlenecks. The other statements are false, because:

A test data preparation tool is a tool that helps testers to create, manage, and manipulate test data, which are the inputs and outputs of test cases. Test data preparation tools are not directly related to running automated regression test suites, which are test suites that verify that the system still works as expected after changes or modifications. Regression test suites are usually executed by test execution tools, which are tools that can automatically run test cases and compare actual results with expected results.

A bug prediction tool is a tool that uses machine learning or statistical techniques to predict the likelihood of defects in a software system, based on various factors such as code complexity, code churn, code coverage, code smells, etc. Bug prediction tools are not used by testers to track the bugs they found, which are the actual defects that have been detected and reported duringtesting. Bugs are usually tracked by defect management tools, which are tools that help testers to record, monitor, analyze, and resolve defects.

A continuous integration tool is a tool that enables the integration of code changes from multiple developers into a shared repository, and the execution of automated builds and tests, in order to ensure the quality and consistency of the software system. Continuous integration tools are not used by testers to automatically generate test cases from a model, which are test cases that are derived from a representation of the system under test, such as a state diagram, a decision table, a use case, etc. Test cases can be automatically generated by test design tools, which are tools that support the implementation and maintenance of test cases, based on test design specifications or test models. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.4.1, Types of Test Tools

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Performance Testing Tool, Test Data Preparation Tool, Bug Prediction Tool, Continuous Integration Tool, Test Execution Tool, Defect Management Tool, Test Design Tool

BDD emphasizes collaboration between developers, testers, and business stakeholders to define system behavior in a readable format (A). It typically uses theGiven-When-Thensyntax. 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).

The business-facing quadrant that supports the team is focused on tests that validate the system against user stories. These tests ensure that the system delivers the value and functionality described by the user stories, which are central to agile methodologies.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.1.7 on the testing quadrants, particularly the business-facing tests that support the team and are based on user stories​​.

During release planning, a tester adds value by assessing the testability of user stories. This involves evaluating whether the user stories are clear, concise, and testable. The tester ensures that the acceptance criteria are well-defined and that the stories can be effectively tested within the given timeframe.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.1.2 on the tester's contribution to iteration and release planning, which includes assessing the testability of user stories​​.

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

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

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

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

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

Checklist-based testing, as defined in the ISTQB CTFL syllabus, is indeed a review technique used within formal review processes. During these reviews, reviewers individually inspect work products to identify defects based on predefined checklists. These checklists serve as guidelines to ensure thorough examination and to cover important aspects consistently.

The other options do not accurately describe the checklist-based testing technique. Option A describes a technique for managing review meetings rather than the checklist-based testing itself. Option C incorrectly emphasizes the level of detail in checklists as a factor in reproducibility of test cases, which is not the primary focus of checklist-based testing. Option D, while true about the necessity of periodic review, is not the core aspect of the checklist-based testing technique itself.

White-box testing, also known as structural testing, involves testing the internal structures or workings of an application, as opposed to its functionality (which is tested by black-box testing). The correct statement about white-box testing is that it helps find defects by measuring aspects such as statement coverage.

Statement Coverage: White-box testing techniques like statement coverage measure whether each statement in the code has been executed at least once. This helps ensure that all parts of the code are tested and can reveal defects in areas that might not be reached by black-box testing alone​​.

Other statements are less accurate in the context of white-box testing:

Specifications being vague: White-box testing is code-focused, not requirement-focused. If specifications are vague, it affects both white-box and black-box testing. The main advantage of white-box testing is that it allows testers to create tests based on the code's structure and logic​​.

Requirements-based coverage: This is typically associated with black-box testing, which derives tests from specifications and requirements. White-box testing, on the other hand, derives tests from the code itself​​.

Focus on defects rather than failures: Both white-box and black-box testing aim to identify defects, but white-box testing does this through code coverage and examining the code paths directly. It does not focus exclusively on defects rather than failures; it is just another method to identify potential issues​​.

This answer is correct because Behavior-Driven Development (BDD) is a test-first approach, where tests that express a shared understanding from stakeholders of how the application is expected to work, are first written in business-readable language (following the Given/When/Then format), and then made executable to drive development. BDD is a collaborative approach that involves testers, developers, business analysts, product owners, and other stakeholders in defining the expected behavior of the application using scenarios that describe the preconditions, actions, and outcomes of the application. BDD scenarios are written using a domain-specific language (DSL) that can be translated into executable test cases using tools such as Cucumber or SpecFlow. BDD aims to improve communication, collaboration, and feedback among the team members, and to deliver software that meets the customer’s needs and expectations. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.4

Retrospectives are critical for continuous improvement in Agile projects. They involve not only identifying process improvements but also planning their implementation and ensuring they areretained, considering the specific context of the project, such as the software development lifecycle. This holistic approach ensures that improvements are practical and sustainable.

References:

ISTQB® CTFL Syllabus 4.0, Chapter 2.1.6, page 26: Retrospectives and Process Improvement​

One of the typical potential risks associated with using test automation tools is the underestimation of the effort required to maintain test scripts. While test automation can reduce test execution times and provide more consistent and repeatable tests compared to manual testing, maintaining test scripts can be labor-intensive and often requires significant effort. Changes in the application under test can lead to frequent updates in the test scripts to keep them functional and relevant.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 6.2 on the benefits and risks of test automation tools

The syllabus outlines that while automation can improve efficiency, it also introduces maintenance challenges​​.

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0, the life cycle of a defect typically follows a sequence from its discovery to its closure. In the provided figure, it starts with S0 (New), moves to S1 (Assigned), then to S2 (Resolved), followed by S3 (Verified). If the defect is not fixed, it can be Re-opened (S5) and goes back for verification (S3). Once verified, it is Closed (S4). References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 1.4.3, Page 17.

In Agile estimation sessions, particularly during Planning Poker, the goal is to reach a consensus on the effort required for a user story. The process encourages discussion and collaboration among team members to understand the story's requirements and complexities fully. Here’s a breakdown of the options and why D is the correct choice:

Option A:Calculating the arithmetic mean of all estimates.

This method is straightforward but does not facilitate team discussion or consensus-building. It merely averages out the estimates without addressing the reasons behind the varying estimates. Thus, important insights and understanding of the task complexity might be missed.

Option B:Selecting the most frequent estimate value.

While this approach acknowledges the majority’s opinion, it ignores the minority views, which might highlight significant aspects of the story that need consideration. It doesn't ensure that all perspectives are considered and discussed.

Option C:Calculating the mean of the most optimistic and pessimistic estimates.

This approach considers the extremes but again lacks the team discussion and consensus aspect. It also assumes that the extreme values alone can balance out the estimate, which might not always capture the true complexity or simplicity of the task.

Option D:Discussing the most pessimistic and optimistic estimates.

This approach fosters team collaboration and understanding. Memb4 and Memb6 explain their reasoning for the highest and lowest estimates, respectively, which can reveal different perspectives on the task's complexity. This discussion helps the team align their understanding and often leads to a more accurate and agreed-upon estimate in subsequent rounds.

In conclusion, the main goal of Agile estimation techniques like Planning Poker is to encourage team communication and collaboration to ensure that all aspects of the user story are considered. Option D best aligns with this goal by promoting discussion and consensus.

The tool described in the question supports the automated creation and installation of builds and the execution of various types of automated tests. This aligns with the practices and tools typically found in DevOps environments, which aim to integrate and automate the processes between software development and IT teams. DevOps tools facilitate continuous integration (CI) and continuous delivery (CD), enabling automated building, testing, and deployment of applications. Therefore, the correct answer is that this is an example of DevOps related tools​​.

As a functional tester, you should open a defect report providing detailed information on which devices and by running which tests you observed the issue. A defect report is a document that records the occurrence, nature, and status of a defect detected during testing, and provides information for further investigation and resolution. A defectreport should include relevant information such as the defect summary, the defect description, the defect severity, the defect priority, the defect status, the defect origin, the defect category, the defect reproduction steps, the defect screenshots, the defect attachments, etc. Opening a defect report is a good practice for any tester who finds a defect in the software system, regardless of the type or level of testing performed. The other options are not recommended, because:

The issue is related to performance efficiency, not functionality, but that does not mean that as a functional tester, you should not open any defect report as all the functional tests passed. Performance efficiency is a quality characteristic that measures how well the software system performs its functions under stated conditions, such as the response time, the resource utilization, the throughput, etc. Performance efficiency is an important aspect of the user experience, especially for web applications that run on different devices and networks. Even if the functional tests passed, meaning that the software system met the functional requirements, the performance issue observed on some devices could still affect the user satisfaction, the usability, the reliability, and the security of the software system. Therefore, as a functional tester, you have the responsibility to report the performance issue as a defect, and provide as much information as possible to help the developers or the performance testers to investigate and resolve it.

A test status report communicates the current status, progress, and issues encountered during testing to stakeholders. It is crucial for effective test management and decision-making.

Option A:Correct as it involves reporting impediments and solutions, which are essential for ongoing test activities.

Option B:Incorrect because test status reports are not limited to test completion activities and focus more on ongoing test status rather than final unmitigated risks.

Option C:Incorrect as the structure and contents of reports should be tailored to the audience's needs to ensure effective communication.

Option D:Incorrect because specifying communication lines is typically done in the test plan, not the status report.

Thus, option A best describes a key aspect of a test status report.

Performing static testing on a commercially available executable library can raise legal issues, primarily related to the ownership and licensing of the software. These libraries are often proprietary, and analyzing them without permission may violate software licenses or intellectual property laws. Static testing typically involves analyzing source code, which may not be accessible for such libraries without appropriate permissions.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 3.2.2 on legal and ethical considerations in static testing​​.

A test plan serves multiple purposes, such as defining the scope, approach, resources, and schedule of the testing activities. It also helps in communicating important information and managing stakeholder expectations. In agile projects, test plans might be concise to align with agile principles of simplicity and flexibility. A one-page test plan can effectively communicate broad activities and strategic decisions, such as not writing detailed test cases due to the project's agile nature. This approach ensures that essential information is conveyed without unnecessarydocumentation overhead, adhering to the agile manifesto's value of "working software over comprehensive documentation"​​.

When a document management system is decommissioned, maintenance testing must include data migration testing to ensure that all documents are correctly transferred to a state archive, meeting legal requirements for long-term storage. This process verifies that data integrity is maintained during migration.

References:

ISTQB® CTFL Syllabus 4.0, Chapter 2.3, page 29: Maintenance Testing and Data Migration​

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

(C) is incorrectas release planning is broader than iteration planning.

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

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

A test plan is a document detailing the objectives, resources, schedule, and scope of testing activities. It also outlines the test strategy, environment, tools, and criteria for test completion and suspension.

Option A:Correct as it indicates resource planning which is a crucial part of a test plan.

Option B:Correct as it describes exit criteria which are essential for test completion.

Option C:Incorrect because a test plan typically addresses known risks and mitigation strategies but does not list unmitigated risks post-test execution.

Option D:Correct as it mentions suspension criteria which are also a part of a test plan.

Therefore, option C is false as it does not reflect the typical information found within a test plan.

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

The other options are not correct because they are not types of testing that measure their effectiveness by tracking which lines of code were executed by the tests. Acceptance testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software meets the acceptance criteria and the user requirements. Acceptance testing is usually performed by the end-users or customers, who may not have access to the source code or the technical details of the software. Acceptance testing is more concerned with the functionality, usability, or suitability of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. Integration testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software components or subsystems work together as expected. Integration testing is usually performed by the developers or testers, who may use both structural and functional testing techniques to check the interfaces, interactions, or dependencies between the components or subsystems. Integration testing is more concerned with the integration logic, data flow, or communication of the software, rather than its individual lines of code. Exploratory testing is a type of testing that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution. Exploratory testing is usually performed by the testers, who use their creativity, intuition, or experience to explore the software and discover any defects, risks, or opportunities for improvement. Exploratory testing is more concerned with the behavior, quality, or value of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages51-54; Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Testing, Section 1.4: Testing Throughout the Software Development Lifecycle, Pages 11-13; Chapter 3: Static Testing, Section 3.4: Exploratory Testing, Pages 40-41.

One of the primary benefits of using test automation tools is the reduction in time spent on repetitive tasks. Automation allows tests to be run quickly and consistently, freeing up testers to focus on morecomplex and exploratory testing tasks. While automation can help increase test coverage and improve efficiency, it does not necessarily reduce the number of found bugs or always decrease the total cost of the test project.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 6.2 on the benefits of test automation​​.

Boundary value analysis involves testing at the boundaries between partitions. The most efficient boundary values to test are those at the edge of the input ranges:

Just below the minimum value (9)

At the minimum value (10)

Just above the minimum value (11)

Just below the maximum value (4999)

At the maximum value (5000)

Just above the maximum value (5001)

Testing these values ensures that the program handles the boundaries correctly, covering both valid and invalid input scenarios​​.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The testing quadrants, as defined in the context of agile testing, help categorize different types of tests based on their goals and who they serve.

Q1:Technology-facing tests that support the team (e.g., unit tests).

Q2:Business-facing tests that support the team (e.g., automated acceptance tests, BDD, ATDD).

Q3:Business-facing tests that critique the product (e.g., exploratory testing).

Q4:Technology-facing tests that critique the product (e.g., performance and load tests).

Option B correctly places automated acceptance tests from BDD and ATDD in quadrant Q2.

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

Type of customer

Amount of sale

Bonus percentage

Basic

G1

3%

Basic

G2

5%

Basic

G3

7%

Premium

G1

5%

Premium

G2

7%

Premium

G3

10%

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

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents,

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.

References: ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.01, Section 2.3.2, page 24-25; ISTQB® Glossary v4.02, page 33.

In a structured review process, it is essential to plan reviews carefully and manage them effectively. Reviewing large work products in one go is not recommended because it can lead to oversight of issues due to fatigue or information overload. It is more efficient to break down large work products into smaller, manageable parts and review them incrementally. This ensures a thorough and effective review process. Additionally, other practices such as planning for the review, starting discussions during review initiation, and creating defect reports for found issues are standard recommendations for an effective review process​​.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

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

In a typical formal review process, the role usually responsible for documenting the findings, such as action items, decisions, and recommendations, made by the review team is the recorder. The recorder ensures that all discussions and conclusions are accurately captured and documented for future reference and follow-up.

A configuration management tool helps in maintaining and managing changes to software, including test cases. It ensures that changes are tracked and can be retrieved if needed. In this scenario, using a configuration management tool would have allowed Sam's updates to be stored in a central repository, preventing the loss of his work even if his PC's hard disk crashed.

References:

ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 5.4 on configuration management, which describes the role of configuration management tools in maintaining control over changes​​.

The best example of a test case for this user story should cover the acceptance criteria comprehensively. Option A addresses the critical aspects of the acceptance criteria:

Verifying the discount for the first timeslot (8 AM GMT) - ensuring it provides a 10% discount.

Verifying that changing the time slot removes the discount - ensuring the discount logic is correctly applied.

This test case effectively validates the functionality related to both the discount and the ability to change time slots, which are key parts of the user story's requirements​​.

In branch testing, a conditional branch represents a decision point in the software program where the flow of execution can take different paths based on specific conditions. For example, this could be an "if-else" statement, a "switch-case" statement, or loops where different execution paths are taken depending on the evaluated condition. This type of testing ensures that all possible paths and conditions are executed at least once, which helps in identifying any potential defects in different branches of the code​​.

Test exit criteria are the conditions that must be fulfilled before concluding a particular testing phase. These criteria act as a checkpoint to assess whether we have achieved the testing objectives and are done with testing1. Test exit criteria are typically defined in the test plan document, which is one of the outputs of the test planning phase. The test plan document describes the scope, approach, resources, and schedule of the testing activities. It also identifies the test items, the features to be tested, the testing tasks, the risks, and the test deliverables2. According to the ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, the test plan document should include the following information related to the test exit criteria3:

The criteria for evaluating test completion, such as the percentage of test cases executed, the percentage of test coverage achieved, the number and severity of defects found and fixed, the quality and reliability of the software product, and the stakeholder satisfaction.

The criteria for evaluating test process improvement, such as the adherence to the test strategy, the efficiency and effectiveness of the testing activities, the lessons learned and best practices identified, and the recommendations for future improvements.

Therefore, the test plan document is the most appropriate test document to find the test exit criteria described. The other options, such as test design specification, project plan, and requirements specification, are not directly related to the test exit criteria. The test design specification describes the test cases and test procedures for a specific test level or test type3. The project plan describes the overall objectives, scope, assumptions, risks, and deliverables of the software project4. The requirementsspecification describes the functional and non-functional requirements of the software product5. None of these documents specify the conditions for ending the testing process or evaluating the testing outcomes. References = ISTQB® Certified TesterFoundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing | Baeldung onComputer Science, Entry And Exit Criteria In Software Testing - Rishabh Software, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing Life Cycle - STLC [2022 Updated] - Testsigma Blog, ISTQB® releases Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0 (CTFL).

The question is about marking the correct sentences among the given statements related to defects, failures, and mistakes. According to the ISTQB glossary, the definitions of these terms are1:

Defect: A flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function, e.g. an incorrect statement or data definition. A defect, if encountered during execution, may cause a failure of the component or system.

Failure: An event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits.

Mistake: A human action that produces an incorrect result.

Therefore, out of the five given statements, only two are correct, namely:

A human mistake may produce a defect: This is true, as a mistake is a source or cause of a defect, e.g. a programmer may make a mistake in writing a code statement, which results in a defect in the software component.

When a defect exists in a system it may result in a failure: This is true, as a defect is a potential or actual cause of a failure, e.g. a defect in the software component may cause the system to fail to perform a required function when the defect is encountered during execution.

The other three statements are incorrect, namely:

Defects are a result of environmental conditions and are also referred to as “Failures”: This is false, as defects are not a result of environmental conditions, but of mistakes or other factors, and defects are not the same as failures, but rather the causes of failures.

A system will totally fail to operate correctly when a failure exists in it: This is false, as a system may not necessarily fail completely or stop operating when a failure occurs, but may continue to operate with reduced functionality or performance, or with incorrect results.

Defects occur only as a result of technology changes: This is false, as defects can occur due to various reasons, not only technology changes, such as human mistakes, design flaws, requirement changes, hardware failures, etc.

References:

1: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms 4.0, 2023, available at ISTQB) and ASTQB).

Statement coverage is a structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of executable statements in the source code that are executed by a test suite1. Decision coverage is another structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of decision outcomes (such as branches or conditions) in the source code that are executed by a test suite1. Decision coverage is a stronger metric than statement coverage, because it requires that every possible outcome of each decision is tested, while statement coverage only requires that every statement is executed at least once2. Therefore, if a test suite achieves 100% decision coverage, it also implies that it achieves 100% statement coverage, because every statement in every branch or condition must have been executed. However, the converse is not true: 100% statement coverage does not guarantee 100% decision coverage, because some branches or conditions may have multiple outcomes that are not tested by the test suite2. For example, consider the following pseudocode:

if (x > 0) then print(“Positive”) else print(“Non-positive”) end if

A test suite that executes this code with x = 1 and x = -1 will achieve 100% statement coverage, because both print statements are executed. However, it will not achieve 100% decision coverage, because the condition x > 0 has only been tested with two outcomes: true and false. The third possible outcome, x = 0, has not been tested by the test suite. Therefore, the test suite may miss a potential bug or error in the condition or the branch.

The other options, such as stale transition coverage, equivalence class coverage, and boundary value coverage, are not guaranteed to be 100% by achieving 100% decision coverage. Stale transition coverage is a structural coverage metric that measures the percentage of transitions between states in a state machine that are executed by a test suite3. Equivalence class coverage is a functional coverage metric that measures the percentage of equivalence classes (or partitions) of input or output values that are tested by a test suite4. Boundary value coverage is another functional coverage metric that measures the percentage of boundary values (or extreme values) of input or output ranges that are tested by a test suite4. These metrics are independent of decision coverage, because they are based on different aspects of the system under test, such as its behavior, functionality, or specification. Therefore, achieving 100% decision coverage does not imply achieving 100% of any of these metrics, and vice versa. References = ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Test Coverage in Software Testing - Guru99, Structural Coverage Metrics - MATLAB & Simulink - MathWorks India, Test Design Coverage in Software Testing - GeeksforGeeks.

Configuration management (CM) in the context of testing involves the process of managing changes to the software and its associated artifacts, such as test plans, test cases, test scripts, and test results. It ensures that all changes are systematically tracked and controlled throughout the software development lifecycle.

Option A:Incorrect. While CM supports consistency in test environments, it is not specifically about comparing expected and actual results.

Option B:Correct. CM allows tracking all changes to versions of testware, ensuring that the correct versions are used and any changes are documented and managed.

Option C:Incorrect. This describes quality management, not configuration management.

Option D:Incorrect. Configuration management does not focus on configuring static analysis tools.