iSQI CTFL_Syll2018 ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (Syllabus 2018) Exam Practice Test

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

After completing the tool selection and a successful proof-of-concept, introducing the selected tool into an organization generally starts with a pilot project, which has the following objectives12:

• Gaining in-depth knowledge about the tool, understanding both its strengths and weaknesses
• Evaluating how the tool fits with existing processes and practices, and determining what would need to change
• Assessing whether the benefits will be achieved at reasonable cost
• Identifying and resolving any technical and organizational issues before deploying the tool on a larger scale
• Providing training, coaching, and mentoring for users of the tool
• Defining metrics to measure the success of the tool deployment

Therefore, the option D is the most typical objective of running a pilot project, as it is essential to ensure the compatibility and suitability of the tool with the current way of working, and to identify any potential risks or challenges that may arise from the tool introduction12.

The other options are not typical objectives of running a pilot project, because they are either part of the tool selection process, or the outcomes of the pilot project. They are:

• To establish whether the tool is available for a free trial period (and for how long) (A). This is part of the tool selection process, which involves gathering information about the tool features, costs, support, and availability12. This should be done before running a pilot project, as it helps to narrow down the list of potential tools and to conduct a proof-of-concept12.
• To provide training, coaching, and mentoring for users of the tool (B). This is an outcome of the pilot project, which aims to increase the competence and confidence of the tool users and to facilitate the tool adoption12. This should be done during and after the pilot project, as it helps to ensure the effective and efficient use of the tool and to address any issues or feedback from the users12.
• To develop a clear set of requirements and objective criteria against which the tool can be evaluated ©. This is also part of the tool selection process, which involves defining the tool requirements based on the needs and expectations of the stakeholders, and establishing the evaluation criteria based on the benefits and risks of the tool12. This should also be done before running a pilot project, as it helps to compare and rank the potential tools and to select the most suitable one12.

References:

• ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 syllabus
• Chapter 6 - Tool Support for Testing | PPT

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

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

Integration testing can be done in two ways:

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

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

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

Therefore, statements a and b apply to system testing.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.2.2

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

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

Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to the software or its environment, or by retirement of the software or its environment1. Therefore, the events that would represent triggers for maintenance testing are:

• Upgrading the production system’s database for the latest Oracle release (a change to the environment)
• Retirement of a live application that no longer has business benefit (a retirement of the software)

The other events are not triggers for maintenance testing, because they are either related to the development or testing process, or do not involve any change or retirement of the software or its environment. They are:

• Migrating tests from a spreadsheet to the new test management tool (a change to the testing process)
• An urgent fix to a new application before its initial release to production (a change to the software in development)
• Simplifying the requirements to make them easier to analyse and review (a change to the requirements in development)

References: ISTQB Foundation Level 2018 syllabus Exams Set 10 - CherCherTech

To achieve 100% statement coverage, we need to execute every statement in the code at least once. To achieve 100% decision coverage, we need to execute every possible outcome of every decision in the code at least once. In this case, we can use the following test cases to cover both statement and decision coverage:

• A = 5, B = 4, C = 3, D = 2, E = 1
• A = 1, B = 2, C = 3, D = 4, E = 5
• A = 3, B = 4, C = 5, D = 2, E = 1
• A = 3, B = 2, C = 1, D = 4, E = 5

These four test cases will cover all the statements and all the possible outcomes of the decisions in the code. Therefore, the minimum number of test cases required to achieve both statement and decision coverage is four.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.3.1

The percentage of test conditions covered by test cases is a metric from the test design phase, as it measures how well the test cases cover the test basis13. The other metrics are from the test execution phase or the test closure phase.

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

Error, fault, failure is the option that describes the causal chain in the correct sequence1 . The causal chain is a model that explains how defects are introduced and manifested in software1 . An error is a human action or decision that produces an incorrect result1 . A fault is a defect in the software caused by an error1 . A failure is an incorrect behaviour of the software caused by a fault1 . The other options do not describe the causal chain in the correct sequence. Option B uses synonyms for error (mistake), fault (bug), and failure (defect), but does not follow the correct order. Option C uses synonyms for error (mistake) and fault (failure), but does not follow the correct order and confuses fault with failure. Option D uses synonyms for fault (bug) and error (error), but does not follow the correct order and confuses failure with error.

According to the syllabus, decision coverage is a technique that measures the percentage of decision outcomes that have been exercised by a test suite. A decision outcome is the result of evaluating a boolean expression in a control structure, such as an if statement or a switch statement. The goal of decision coverage testing is to cover and validate all the accessible source code by checking and ensuring that each branch of every possible decision point is executed at least once. The answer C is incorrect because it is not a valid use of decision coverage testing. Decision coverage testing does not check that all decisions are based on a numeric value, as there can be other types of values involved in boolean expressions, such as strings or booleans. The other answers are correct because they are valid uses of decision coverage testing. Checking that all decisions have been exercised in a single program or a business process can help to identify defects or missing functionality in the code or process logic. Checking that at least 100% decision coverage has been achieved can help to ensure that all reachable code has been executed and that 100% statement coverage has been achieved as well.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.2.3, page 42-43.

 The level of risk is determined by multiplying the impact of an adverse event by the likelihood of that event occurring1 . The impact of an adverse event is the degree of harm or loss that would result from the event, such as financial loss, reputation damage, legal consequences, or safety hazards1 . The likelihood of an adverse event is the probability or frequency of the event happening, based on historical data, expert judgement, or statistical analysis1 . The other options are not correct formulas for calculating risk. Option A confuses the cost of preventing an adverse event with its impact. Option B confuses the cost of possible legal action with its likelihood. Option D uses two synonyms for likelihood (probability and frequency) instead of combining it with impact.

The statement that environmental conditions only affect the hardware - not the software is not a good explanation why software failures can be caused by environmental conditions. Environmental conditions can affect both the hardware and the software, as they can influence the performance, reliability, and functionality of the system. For example, factors like magnetism, radiation, pollution, heat, humidity, vibration, etc. can affect electronic devices and the embedded software that runs on them. Software failures caused by environmental conditions can have serious consequences, especially for safety-critical systems. References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.2.2

In the context of software testing, the correct sequence of events typically starts with a mistake, which is a human error made during the software development process. This mistake can lead to a fault in the code, which is a defect or bug that exists in the software. If this fault is executed, it may cause a failure, which is an instance where the software does not perform its intended function.

References: The ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents provide detailed explanations of these terms and their sequence. Specifically, the syllabus outlines the fundamental concepts of software testing, including the definitions and differences between errors, faults, and failures.

It is a project risk since successful completion of the project depends on successful and timely completion of the tests. defines project risks as follows:

Project risks are risks that affect the project schedule, resources, or budget. They can be related to the project management process, such as planning, estimation, communication, or monitoring. Project risks can also be related to external factors, such as dependencies, stakeholders, vendors, or regulations.

It is not a product risk (B and C), as product risks are risks that affect the quality or performance of the software product. defines product risks as follows:

Product risks are risks that affect the functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, or portability of the software product. They can be related to the software requirements, design, implementation, or testing. Product risks can also be related to user expectations, needs, or satisfaction.

It is not no longer a risk for the Test Manager (D), as the sub-contractor’s failure may still impact the Test Manager’s responsibilities and deliverables. The Test Manager should monitor and mitigate this risk as much as possible.

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

Test analysis and design is the phase of the test process where test cases and test data are designed and prioritized, based on the test basis and test objectives. Therefore, option C is correct, as it includes tasks I, II, and III. Option A is incorrect, as it includes tasks IV and V, which are part of test implementation and execution phase. Option B is incorrect, as it includes task IV, which is part of test implementation and execution phase. Option D is incorrect, as it does not include task III, which is part of test analysis and design phase.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 2.2

Code coverage can be used to ensure that all code is exercised by tests, because it measures how much of the code or functionality of the software under test has been exercised by the test cases . Code coverage can help to identify untested or dead code, improve test design, and assess test quality . The other options are not true statements about code coverage. Option A is false, because 100% code coverage does not imply 100% coverage of requirements, as there may be defects or gaps in the requirements or in the mapping between requirements and code . Option B is false, because 100% code coverage does not guarantee that there are no coding errors, as there may be logical or functional errors that are not detected by code coverage . Option D is false, because code coverage does not ensure that all decisions are correctly implemented in the code, as it only measures whether the decisions are executed or not, but not whether they produce the correct results .

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

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

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

  A bug report is a document that records the details of a defect or failure found during testing, such as the steps to reproduce, the expected and actual results, the severity and priority, etc. A bug report should also include any observations or suggestions that may help correct the bug, such as the possible cause, the affected components, the related requirements, etc. This information can help the developers to locate and fix the bug more efficiently and effectively. Therefore, if a tester thinks of a likely cause for a specific bug, they should make a comment about it in the bug report.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 6.

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

Debugging the software to find the reason for defects is not a common objective of testing. Debugging is the process of finding, analyzing, and removing the causes of failures in software. Debugging is usually done by developers after testers have reported defects found during testing. Testing is the process of evaluating software by applying test cases to find defects and provide information on its quality. Testing has several common objectives, such as:

• Providing information on the status of the system, such as its readiness for release, its compliance with requirements, its risks and issues, etc.
• Preventing defects, by applying good practices throughout the software development lifecycle, such as reviews, inspections, static analysis, etc.
• Finding defects in the software, by applying test cases that cover different aspects of the software functionality, quality, performance, security, etc.

Therefore, statement D is not correct.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.1 and 1.2

The order in which the specifications for test cases, test conditions and test procedures are developed as a part of the test development process is as follows:

• Test Condition: A test condition is an item or event of a component or system that could be verified by one or more test cases, such as a function, transaction, feature, quality attribute, or structural element.
• Test Case: A test case is a set of input values, execution preconditions, expected results and execution postconditions, developed for a particular objective or test condition, such as to exercise a particular program path or to verify compliance with a specific requirement.
• Test Procedure: A test procedure is a document providing detailed instructions for the execution of one or more test cases.

Therefore, the correct order is test condition --> test case --> test procedure.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 4.2.1 and Glossary

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

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

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

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

TC1 - £23 total charges including buggy hire; TC2 - £16 total charge but no buggy allowed. This answer can be derived from the decision table by matching the conditions of each test case with the corresponding rules and actions. For TC1, the conditions are: Loyalty Card holder = Y, 18 Holes = Y, Buggy/Cart Request = Y. These conditions match Rule 1, which has the actions: Green Fee = £18, Buggy Hire = £5, Total Charge = £23. For TC2, the conditions are: Loyalty Card holder = N, 18 Holes = N, Buggy/Cart Request = Y. These conditions match Rule 3, which has the actions: Green Fee = £16, Buggy Hire = Not Allowed, Total Charge = £16

According to the syllabus, exploratory testing is a technique that involves simultaneous learning, test design and test execution. A tester dynamically designs and executes tests based on their knowledge, exploration of the test item and the results of previous tests. A time-boxed test session is a fixed period of time during which testing is performed. A test charter is a document that contains test objectives, scope, risks and other information to guide the testing. The answer A is correct because it describes an approach that can be used for exploratory testing. The other answers are incorrect because they describe other techniques, such as error guessing (B), compliance testing © and user acceptance testing (D).

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.5.2, page 51-52.

 Logging the outcome of test execution and reporting bugs is an activity that is performed as part of the Test Implementation and Execution activity, because it involves recording and communicating any deviations from the expected results or behaviour of the software under test1 . Test Implementation and Execution is the process of running the test cases or procedures on the software under test and comparing the actual results with the expected results1 . The other options are not activities that are performed as part of the Test Implementation and Execution activity, but rather as part of other activities. Option B is an activity that is performed as part of the Test Analysis activity, because it involves evaluating the testability of the test basis and test objects to identify test conditions1 . Option C is an activity that is performed as part of the Test Closure activity, because it involves assessing if the specified exit criteria should be changed to determine when to stop testing1 . Option D is an activity that is performed as part of the Test Planning activity, because it involves selecting metrics for monitoring test execution and defect resolution to measure the progress and quality of testing1 .

According to the user story checklist, the user story must contain the reason for the need, which is usually expressed by using the word “so that” or “because”. For example, the user story could be rewritten as:

User Story US2018 As a bank account customer, I would like to transfer money from one account to another using the mobile banking application by using the drag and drop feature, so that I can easily manage my finances.

This way, the user story provides a clear value proposition and a justification for the need. The reason also helps to define the scope and priority of the user story, as well as to verify the acceptance criteria.

References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 5.2.1 User Stories, p. 62-631; ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Sample Exam Questions and Answers, Question 83, p. 232

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

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 3.2.1

 According to the syllabus, the choice of a particular type of software development life cycle (SDLC) model depends on various factors, such as project size, complexity, scope, budget, schedule, quality requirements, risk level, customer involvement, etc. The type of product being developed is one of the most important factors that influences the selection of an SDLC model, as different products may have different characteristics, expectations, and challenges that require different approaches to development. For example, a product that has well-defined and stable requirements may benefit from a sequential SDLC model like waterfall or V-model, while a product that has vague or changing requirements may benefit from an iterative SDLC model like incremental or agile. The answer D is correct because it best reflects the reason for selecting a particular type of SDLC model. The other answers are incorrect because they are not good reasons for selecting a particular type of SDLC model. Tester skill level with the SDLC model (A) may affect the effectiveness and efficiency of testing activities, but it should not be the primary factor for choosing an SDLC model. Testers should be able to adapt to different SDLC models depending on the project context and objectives. The project manager’s preference (B) may reflect their personal experience or opinion, but it should not be the sole factor for choosing an SDLC model. The project manager should consider various factors and consult with other stakeholders before selecting an SDLC model. The project team’s overall familiarity with the model © may affect the productivity and collaboration of the team members, but it should not be the main factor for choosing an SDLC model. The project team should be able to learn and apply different SDLC models depending on the project context and objectives.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 1.1.1, page 9-10.

The introduction of a test management tool does not represent one of the three triggers for maintenance testing an operational system, because it does not affect the functionality or performance of the system itself. Maintenance testing is triggered by system modification (such as corrective, adaptive, perfective or preventive changes), data migration (such as moving data from one platform or format to another), or system retirement (such as decommissioning or replacing an old system)1 .

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

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

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

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

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

Component integration testing is the process of testing the interactions between different components of a system. It should always be done before system testing, which is the process of testing the system as a whole. Integration testing can reveal defects in the interfaces and interactions between components, which can affect the functionality and performance of the system. System testing can reveal defects in the system requirements, design, and behavior, which can affect the quality and usability of the system. Therefore, it is logical to perform integration testing before system testing, to ensure that the components work together correctly before testing the system as a whole.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.1.2 and 5.2.2

Defect density is a metric that measures the number of defects identified in the system under test divided by the size of the system. The size of the system can be measured in different ways, such as lines of code, function points, or modules. Defect density can be used to compare the quality of different systems or different versions of the same system.

References: [Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus], Section 8.3.1

Tests designed by a person in the development team other than the person who wrote the code is not the lowest level of independence. The lowest level of independence is tests designed by the person who wrote the code, as this may introduce bias or blind spots in testing. Tests designed by another person in the development team is one level higher than tests designed by the person who wrote the code, as this may provide a different perspective or expertise in testing. defines the levels of independence as follows:

The level of independence of testing is related to the degree of separation between those who are responsible for developing software and those who are responsible for testing software.

The following levels of independence can be distinguished:

• Level 0: No independent testing; tests are designed by the same person who wrote the code.
• Level 1: Tests are designed by another person in the development team; e.g., another programmer or software designer.
• Level 2: Tests are designed by a person from a different group within the organization; e.g., an independent test team or group.
• Level 3: Tests are designed by a person from a different organization or company; e.g., an outsourcing partner or contractor.

A, B, and C are correct statements. A test team with high level of independence may suffer from lower familiarity with the product (A), as they may not have access to all the information or knowledge about the system under test. Development team may find many defects since they are familiar with the code (B), as they may have more insight into how the system works internally and where potential problems may occur. Tests designed by a person from different group in the organization is the highest level of independence within an organization ©, as this provides maximum separation between development and testing activities.

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

The requirement given in

the image specifies

the charge for

a money transfer based on

the amount

of money transferred.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

66, Weekend = No -> No charge

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Statement coverage and decision coverage are both less than 100%. Statement coverage is a criterion that requires every executable statement in the source code to be executed at least once by a test suite1. Decision coverage is a criterion that requires every decision (or branch) in the source code to take both true and false outcomes at least once by a test suite1. The flow graph below shows the logic of a program for which 100% statement coverage and 100% decision coverage is required on exit from component testing. The flow graph has 9 nodes (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I) and 10 edges (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10). The edges represent executable statements and the nodes represent decisions or branches.

!flow graph

The following test cases have been run:

• Test Case 1 covering path A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I
• Test Case 2 covering path A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H
• Test Case 3 covering path A-B-C-D-E-F
• Test case 4 covering path A-B-C-D-E

To calculate the statement coverage and decision coverage achieved by these test cases, we can use the following formulas:

• Statement coverage = (Number of statements executed / Total number of statements) x 100%
• Decision coverage = (Number of decisions exercised / Total number of decisions) x 100%

In this case, the number of statements executed by the test cases is 8 (edges 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9). The total number of statements in the flow graph is 10 (edges 1 to 10). Therefore, the statement coverage achieved by the test cases is:

• Statement coverage = (8 / 10) x 100% = 80%

The number of decisions exercised by the test cases is also 8 (nodes A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H). The total number of decisions in the flow graph is also 10 (nodes A to J). Therefore, the decision coverage achieved by the test cases is:

• Decision coverage = (8 / 10) x 100% = 80%

Therefore, statement coverage and decision coverage are both less than 100%. To achieve 100% statement coverage and decision coverage, two more test cases are needed to cover edges 8 and 10 and nodes I and J.

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

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

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

Metrics are quantitative measures that can be used to monitor and control various aspects of software testing processes and products1. Metrics can be used to monitor progress along with test preparation and execution by providing information about the status of testing activities, such as test planning, test design, test execution, test evaluation, defect management, etc1. Among the options given in this question, only C is a suitable metric for monitoring progress along with test preparation and execution. The failure rate in testing already completed is a metric that measures how many tests have failed out of the total number of tests executed1. This metric can indicate the quality of the software product under test and the effectiveness of the test cases1. It can also help to identify areas that need more attention or improvement in testing1. Therefore, this metric can be used to monitor progress along with test preparation and execution.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The statement that best defines static techniques is D. Manual examination and automated analysis of code or project documentation. Static techniques are techniques that analyze the code or other software artifacts (such as requirements, specifications, designs, models, test cases, etc.) without executing them, and provide information about their quality, defects, complexity, maintainability, etc. Static techniques can be performed manually or automatically by using tools or methods such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, standards, guidelines, static analysis tools, code metrics tools, etc. Static techniques can help to improve the quality and consistency of code or other software artifacts throughout the software development life cycle and reduce the cost and effort of testing and debugging. A detailed explanation of static techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 27-34.

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

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

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

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

To be based on an analysis of the structure of the component or system. White box testing techniques are based on the internal structure and code of the system, not on its specifications or functionality. White box testing techniques include statement coverage, decision coverage, branch coverage, path coverage, etc. White box testing techniques are usually performed at lower levels of testing, such as unit testing or component testing. A detailed explanation of white box testing techniques can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 68-74.

The statement that best characterizes maintenance testing is A. Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to delivered software and uses impact analysis to minimize the amount of regression testing needed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on a software product after it has been delivered to the customer or user, and aims to ensure that the software product still meets its requirements and expectations after any changes or modifications. Maintenance testing is triggered by changes to delivered software, such as bug fixes, enhancements, patches, updates, etc., and uses impact analysis to determine the scope and extent of regression testing needed. Impact analysis is a technique that analyzes the potential effects of changes on the existing software product and its components, dependencies, interfaces, etc., and identifies which parts of the software product need to be retested or modified. Impact analysis helps to minimize the amount of regression testing needed by focusing on the most affected or critical parts of the software product. A detailed explanation of maintenance testing can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 81-82.

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

Testing support tools are software tools that assist testers in performing testing activities, such as test management, test design, test execution, test evaluation, and defect management1. According to the ISTQB syllabus, some typical targets of testing support tools are to automate activities that require significant resources when done manually, automate activities that cannot be executed manually, and automate repetitive tasks1. Automating repetitive inspections is not a typical target of testing support tools, as inspections are static testing techniques that involve human review and analysis of software artifacts1.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Experience-based test design techniques are techniques that use the skill, intuition, and experience of testers to derive test cases, using error guessing and exploratory testing1. Error guessing is a technique that uses common sense and previous experience to guess where defects might occur in a system1. Exploratory testing is an approach that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution1. Experience-based test design techniques are typically used when there is insufficient information or time to apply other more formal techniques1. They do not use decision tables, identify the structure of the system or software, or establish traceability from test conditions back to the specifications and requirements.

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

The statement that BEST describes the relationship between test planning and test execution is A. Test planning ensures the level of detail in test procedures is appropriate for test execution. Test planning is the process of defining the objectives, scope, approach, resources, schedule, risks, and deliverables for testing activities. Test planning also involves designing and creating test cases and test procedures for test execution. Test procedures are detailed instructions on how to execute each test case and record the results. Test planning ensures that the level of detail in test procedures is appropriate for test execution, by considering factors such as complexity of the system under test, skills and experience of testers, availability of tools and environments, etc. Test planning also ensures that test procedures are consistent with the test objectives and cover all relevant aspects of testing (such as functional testing, non-functional testing, regression testing etc.). A detailed explanation of test planning can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 13-151.

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

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

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

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

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

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