Free and Premium iSQI CTFL_Syll2018 Dumps Questions Answers

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.

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.

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

!state diagram

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

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

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

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.

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

Decision testing is a white box (structure-based) test case design technique1. White box (structure-based) test case design techniques are techniques that use the structure or logic of the source code as a test basis to derive test cases and measure test coverage1. Decision testing is a technique that uses decisions (or branches) in the source code as a test basis to measure the coverage achieved by a test suite1. A decision (or branch) is a point in the source code where the control flow can take two or more alternative paths based on a condition1. Decision testing requires every decision (or branch) in the source code to take both true and false outcomes at least once by a test suite1. Therefore, decision testing is a white box (structure-based) test case design technique.

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

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

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

Test Case

State Transitions

(i) X-Z-V-W

S1 – S2 – S3 – S4 – S2

(ii) W-Y-U-U

S4 – S2 – S4 – S4 – S4

 Functional testing to test security at the system level, load testing at the system level to ensure the system availability is acceptable, regression testing at all levels, structure based testing at the component level only are the test types that will be required during the development1. A bank is developing a new service that will be delivered via the web. The user interactions are defined as a set of use cases and the service is designed to be available continuously 24/7. In view of the challenging characteristics of the service, the test manager has decided that the code should be thoroughly tested at component level. Therefore, the following test types will be required during the development:

• Functional testing to test security at the system level: This type of testing verifies that the software product performs its intended functions according to the user requirements and expectations1. Security is one of the functional aspects that needs to be tested at the system level, as it ensures that the software product protects itself from unauthorized access or harm1.
• Load testing at the system level to ensure the system availability is acceptable: This type of testing verifies that the software product can handle the expected or peak load of users or transactions without degrading its performance or functionality1. Availability is one of the quality attributes that needs to be tested at the system level, as it measures how well the software product performs its intended functions under specified conditions without interruption or failure1.
• Regression testing at all levels: This type of testing verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes or defect corrections1. Regression testing is required at all levels of testing, as changes or defect corrections can introduce new defects or affect existing functionality1.
• Structure based testing at the component level only: This type of testing uses the structure or logic of the source code as a test basis to derive test cases and measure test coverage1. Structure based testing is required at the component level only, as the test manager has decided that the code should be thoroughly tested at component level to ensure its quality and reliability1.

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

 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.

The question asks which of the test cases will ensure that the statement ‘Print ‘Hold’’ is exercised. The statement ‘Print ‘Hold’’ is executed when X > Y and Z < Y. Therefore, to exercise this statement, we need to choose a test case that satisfies these conditions. Among the options given in this question, only C satisfies these conditions. X = 42 > Y =43 and Z =42 < Y =43. Therefore, C is the correct answer.

A potential infinite loop is a type of defect that can be typically identified using static analysis by tools1. Static 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. Static analysis tools are software tools that automate the static analysis technique and provide various features and functionalities to support it1. Static analysis tools can identify a potential infinite loop by analyzing the control flow and data flow of the source code and checking for conditions or statements that may cause an endless repetition or iteration1. A potential infinite loop can cause serious problems in software performance, functionality, reliability, and security1. Therefore, a potential infinite loop is a type of defect that can be typically identified using static analysis by tools.

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.

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.

• An incident report is a document that records any event occurring during testing that requires investigation1. An incident report should contain sufficient information to enable reproduction of the incident and resolution of the defect1. According to IEEE 829 Standard for Software Test Documentation, an incident report should contain the following information:

Therefore, among the options given in this question, only D provides the best detail on an incident report. It contains a clear title, a reproducibility indicator, a description that includes both expected and actual results, a reference to the specification document, and a screen shot of the failure. The other options are either missing some important information or providing inaccurate or irrelevant information

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

The test tools that would be classified as test execution tools are D. b and d. Test execution tools are tools that automate the execution of test cases or test scripts, and compare the actual results with the expected results. Test execution tools can also record and replay user actions, generate test data, and report test results. Test harness and test comparators are examples of test execution tools. A test harness is a tool that creates a test environment for a component or system under test, by simulating the required dependencies, such as stubs, drivers, or mock objects. A test comparator is a tool that compares the actual outputs of a component or system under test with the expected outputs, and reports any differences or anomalies. A detailed explanation of test execution tools can be found in A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus, pages 111-1121.

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.

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

The test organization that has the highest level of independence is C. Independent test specialists for specific test types, such as usability, performance or certification test specialists. Test independence refers to the degree of separation between the tester and the developer or user of the system or component under test. Test independence can help to reduce bias and increase objectivity in testing. Independent test specialists are testers who have specialized skills and knowledge in specific test types or domains and who are not involved in the development or use of the system or component under test. Independent test specialists can provide more reliable and accurate results than testers who are part of the development team or user community. A detailed explanation of test independence can be found in [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus], pages 9-10.

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

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

Exhaustive testing is a technique that covers all possible combinations of inputs and preconditions2. However, it is not recommended to perform exhaustive testing, as it is usually impractical and impossible due to the large number of test cases required2. Instead, risk analysis and priorities should be used to focus testing efforts on the most important and critical aspects of the system under test2.

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.

•  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.

Testing can demonstrate that there are defects in the software, by finding and reporting them. Testing cannot demonstrate that there are no defects, because it is impossible to test all possible scenarios and inputs. Testing cannot demonstrate that the software is correct, because correctness is a subjective and relative concept that depends on the expectations and requirements of the stakeholders. Testing cannot demonstrate that there are no hidden defects in the software, because hidden defects are those that are not detected by testing or other quality assurance activities.

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.

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

Group

Equivalence Classes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 The correct roles and responsibilities in a formal review are as follows1:

• Review Leader - Plans and leads the review process
• Scribe - Documents all issues raised during the review meeting
• Author - Creates the work product under review
• Facilitator - Supports the review leader in conducting the review process
• Reviewers - Identify potential defects in the work product under review

Therefore, option B is the correct answer, as it correctly matches the role of scribe with the responsibility of collating potential defects found during the individual review activity. Options A, C, and D are incorrect, as they do not match the roles and responsibilities correctly. References: 1, Section 3.2.3

The correct matching of the descriptions with the different categories of test techniques is as follows:

• Black-box test techniques: Test cases are based on the test basis which may include the requirements, use cases and user stories (1), Test cases can show deviations from the requirements (3), These test techniques are applicable to both functional and non-functional testing (4)
• White-box test techniques: Test cases are based on the test basis which may include the software architecture or code (2)
• Experience-based test techniques: Tests are based on knowledge of developers, users and other stakeholders (5)

Therefore, option D is the correct answer. Options A, B, and C are incorrect, as they do not match the descriptions with the different categories of test techniques correctly.

References: , Section 4.2

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

References: Section 2.3, Section 2.4

Integration testing is the process of testing the interactions between different components or subsystems of a system. It has the following characteristics:

• It can be done in an incremental manner, meaning that components or subsystems are integrated and tested one by one until the whole system is integrated and tested.
• It is usually done before system testing, which is the process of testing the system as a whole against its requirements and specifications.
• It includes functional tests, which are tests that verify the functionality and behavior of the system or its components.
• It includes non-functional tests, which are tests that verify the quality attributes of the system or its components, such as performance, reliability, security, etc.

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

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

Preventing defects from being introduced into the code is not a valid objective of testing, because testing can only detect defects that are already present in the code, not prevent them from happening. Testing can help prevent future defects by providing feedback to developers and other stakeholders, but it cannot guarantee that no defects will be introduced. Preventing defects is more related to quality assurance activities, such as reviews, inspections, and standards12.

Functional and structural testing can both be applied at all test levels, from component testing to acceptance testing1 . Functional testing verifies whether the software meets the specified requirements and user expectations, while structural testing verifies whether the software meets the specified design and code standards1 . Both types of testing can be useful at any stage of the software development life cycle, depending on the test objectives and scope1 . The other options are incorrect, because they limit the application of functional and structural testing to certain test levels only.

Configuration management is related to ensuring the integrity of the testware, as it is a process that controls and documents changes to test items, test cases, test data, test scripts, test results, and test documentation throughout the testing lifecycle. The other options are not related to ensuring the integrity of the testware, but to other aspects of testing such as test execution, test environment setup, and test planning.

References: Section 4.1, Section 4.2

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.

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

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

Component testing is concerned with testing the smallest bodies of software, such as functions, classes, procedures, or modules. Component testing is also known as unit testing or module testing. Feature testing is a type of functional testing that focuses on verifying a specific feature or functionality of a system. Functional testing is a type of black-box testing that verifies that the system meets its functional requirements and specifications. Subsystem testing is a type of integration testing that verifies that a group of components work together as expected. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Section 2.2

 According to the syllabus, there are two main approaches for estimating test effort: metrics-based and expert-based. The metrics-based approach uses metrics from previous similar projects or industry data to calculate the test effort based on the size and complexity of the software under test. The expert-based approach relies on the experience and judgment of the owners of the testing tasks or subject matter experts who provide their estimates based on their knowledge of the software under test. The answer B is correct because it accurately describes the expert-based approach. The other answers are incorrect because they either confuse the metrics-based and expert-based approaches or describe them incorrectly.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.3.1, page 24-25.

The attributes that best match each level of testing are as follows14:

• Component testing: Stubs and drivers are often used (I), as they simulate the behavior of missing or incomplete components.
• Integration testing: Testing for functional and non-functional characteristics (VI), as integration testing verifies that components interact correctly and meet their specified requirements.
• System testing: The test environment should correspond to the production environment (II), as system testing evaluates the system’s compliance with its specified requirements under realistic conditions.
• Acceptance testing: Testing can be based on use cases (IV), as acceptance testing validates that the system meets the user’s needs and expectations

In a Scrum development life cycle model, regression testing is an increasingly important activity as the project progresses. Scrum is an agile framework that follows an iterative and incremental approach to software development, where the software is delivered in small units called sprints. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs as expected after changes or modifications. Regression testing is essential in Scrum, as new features or functionalities are added or modified in each sprint, which can introduce new defects or affect existing ones. Therefore, regression testing should be performed at the end of each sprint, as well as before releasing the software, to ensure that the software meets the quality standards and user expectations.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.3.2

The correct answer is B, as it achieves the highest equivalence partition coverage. Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test technique that divides the input domain into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived1. In this case, the input domain is the numerical grades, and the partitions are the ranges of grades that correspond to different letter grades. Option B covers all five partitions, as it includes test inputs from each range. Option A covers only four partitions, as it does not include any test input from the range above 89. Option C covers only three partitions, as it does not include any test input from the ranges above 79 and below 60. Option D covers only two partitions, as it does not include any test input from the ranges below 79. References: 1, Section 4.2.3

According to the syllabus, configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains the consistency of a product’s attributes throughout its life cycle. It involves identifying, controlling, tracking, and auditing changes to the product’s components and documentation. Configuration management supports the test process by enabling the tester to reproduce the tested item through unique identification and version control. This ensures that the tester knows exactly what has been tested and can trace any defects or incidents to the correct version of the software under test. The answer A is correct because it best describes how configuration management supports the test process. The other answers are incorrect because they describe other aspects of testing that are not directly related to configuration management.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 2.2.1, page 22-23.

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

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 5.1.2

Provides developers with information to isolate the failure is the incident report objective that this excerpt satisfies, because it gives details about how to recreate the failure using a specific test file and location . An incident report is a document that records any event that deviates from the expected or desired behaviour of the software under test . One of its objectives is to provide developers with information to isolate the failure, which means to identify and locate the cause of the failure in the software . The other options are not incident report objectives that this excerpt satisfies. Option B is wrong, because this excerpt does not belong to an incident report, but rather to a test report. A test report is a document that summarizes the results and outcomes of testing activities . Option C is wrong, because this excerpt does not provide project managers with information on the project risks, which means to identify and assess the potential threats or uncertainties that may affect the project objectives or outcomes . Option D is wrong, because this excerpt does not provide test managers with information to report test progress, which means to measure and communicate how much of the planned testing activities have been completed or remain to be done .

Static testing is a type of testing that does not involve executing the software or system under test, but rather analyzing it using various techniques, such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, static analysis tools, etc. Static testing can be applied to any work product that participants know how to read and understand, such as requirements specifications, design specifications, code, test cases, test plans, user manuals, etc. Static testing can help find defects and improve the quality of any work product at any stage of the software development lifecycle.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 3.1 and 3.2

The correct answer is A, as it includes the items that would be most useful to include in the defect report. A defect report is a document that describes and records any anomaly found during testing2. A defect report typically includes information such as:

• The expected results
• The actual results
• A description of the defect in order to reproduce, including screenshots and database dumps

These items are useful to include in the defect report, as they help the developers to understand and fix the defect2. Option B is incorrect, as it includes an item that would not be useful to include in the defect report. The urgency and priority to fix this is not useful to include in the defect report, as it is determined by the test manager or other stakeholders based on various factors such as severity, impact, risk, and business value2. Option C is incorrect, as it omits an item that would be useful to include in the defect report. The actual results are useful to include in the defect report, as they show what happened when the defect occurred2. Option D is incorrect, as it omits two items that would be useful to include in the defect report. The expected results and a description of the defect in order to reproduce are useful to include in the defect report, as they show what should have happened and how to replicate the defect2. References: 2, Section 2.9

Boundary value analysis is a technique to test the values at the boundaries of an equivalence partition. In this case, the age variable has two equivalence partitions: less than 30 and greater than or equal to 30. The boundary values are 29 and 30. The expected result for age 29 is that the premium is increased by 1500, so the final value is 4000. The expected result for age 30 is that the premium remains unchanged at 2500. This is explained in the syllabus under section 4.3, "Black-box Test Techniques"1. References: Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) Syllabus - ASTQB

The overall quality of the software can be increased by finding and fixing defects before releasing the software to the customers or users. A test case passes means that no defect was found in the tested functionality, which indicates a high quality. A test case fails, defect gets logged which subsequently gets fixed means that a defect was found and corrected, which improves the quality. Some tests are deferred because test environment is not available means that some functionality was not tested, which may leave some defects undetected, which reduces the quality. A bug is found but there is no corresponding test case means that a defect was found by chance or by other means than planned testing, which does not increase the quality of the testing process or the test coverage.

A correct reason to apply test automation is when there are a lot of repetitive testing tasks, as test automation can reduce the effort and time required to execute them, and improve the consistency and accuracy of the results. The other options are not valid reasons to apply test automation, as they do not consider the benefits and risks of test automation, the suitability of the test object for automation, or the availability of resources and skills for automation.

References: Section 6.3.1, Section 6.3.2

 According to the syllabus, dynamic analysis tools are tools that perform testing or analysis by executing the software or a part of it. Dynamic analysis tools can help detect defects or problems that only appear during runtime, such as memory leaks, performance issues, concurrency errors, etc. The answer A is correct because it suggests using a dynamic analysis tool for detecting a memory leak during performance testing. A memory leak is a situation where a code component fails to release memory after it has finished using it, causing memory exhaustion and degradation of performance. A dynamic analysis tool can monitor the memory usage of the code component and identify any memory leaks. The other answers are incorrect because they suggest using tools that are not suitable for detecting memory leaks during performance testing. A test execution tool is a tool that executes test cases automatically or semi-automatically. A configuration management tool is a tool that controls and tracks changes to the software components and documentation. A coverage measurement tool is a tool that measures how much of the code or functionality has been exercised by a test suite.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus, Section 4.6.1, page 53-54.

Managing the incidents in a spreadsheet posted on the intranet is the best option for a QA manager of a start-up company who needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. A spreadsheet is a simple and flexible tool that can be used to record, track, and report incidents. Posting the spreadsheet on the intranet can make it accessible and visible to the relevant stakeholders. This option can be implemented quickly and cheaply, without requiring much training or maintenance3 suggests this as follows:

A spreadsheet is a common tool that can be used for incident management, especially for small or simple projects. A spreadsheet can be used to create an incident report template that includes the necessary information and fields for each incident. The spreadsheet can also be used to sort, filter, group, or analyze the incidents based on various criteria. The spreadsheet can be shared or published on a network or web location that can be accessed by the project team and other stakeholders.

A, C, and D are not good options for a QA manager of a start-up company who needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. Managing the incidents through E-mails and phone calls (A) is not a good option, as it can be inefficient, unreliable, and inconsistent. E-mails and phone calls can be easily lost, overlooked, or forgotten, and they do not provide a centralized or structured way of recording, tracking, or reporting incidents. Purchasing and deploying an incident management tool © is not a good option, as it can be expensive, time-consuming, and complex. An incident management tool may require licensing fees, installation costs, configuration efforts, training sessions, and maintenance support. Documenting incidents on a large board in the lab (D) is not a good option, as it can be impractical, insecure, and incomplete. A large board in the lab may not have enough space or structure to document all the incidents in detail, and it may not be accessible or visible to all the stakeholders. A large board in the lab may also expose confidential or sensitive information to unauthorized people.

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

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

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

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

Decision Coverage can be calculated as follows:

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

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

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

It is not allowed as organizations can’t change the test levels as these are chosen on the basis of the SDLC (software development life cycle) model. The V-model is a type of SDLC model that defines four test levels: component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Each test level corresponds to a development phase in a parallel manner. Integration testing is an essential part of the V-model, as it verifies that the components work together correctly and consistently2 explains this as follows:

The V-model is a graphical representation of a systems development lifecycle. It is used to produce rigorous development lifecycle models and project management models. The V-model falls into three broad categories, the German V-Modell, a general testing model and the US government standard.

The V-model summarizes the main steps to be taken in conjunction with the corresponding deliverables within project execution and delivery. It describes software development activities from requirements specification to maintenance.

The V-Model demonstrates the relationships between each phase of the development life cycle and its associated phase of testing.

A, C, and D are incorrect answers. A implies that integration testing is not an important test level and can be dispensed with, which is not true as integration testing ensures that the system functions as a whole and meets its requirements. C implies that organizations can decide on which test levels to do depending on the context of the system under test, which is not true as test levels are determined by the chosen SDLC model and its objectives. D implies that integration testing is a very important test level and ignoring it means definite poor product quality, which is true but not relevant to why it is not allowed to do away with integration testing in a V-model.

A peer review is a review done by colleagues at the same organizational level, such as developers, testers, or managers. An informal review without moderator is called a walkthrough. A review done by developers and testers together is called an inspection. A review done by developers only is not a specific type of review.

References: Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) Syllabus - ASTQB, Section 3.1.1, Page 18

For the code fragment given below, one test case is required for statement coverage and two test cases are required for branch coverage. Statement coverage requires that every executable statement in the code is executed at least once. Branch coverage requires that every possible outcome of each decision point in the code is executed at least once. The following table shows how to achieve statement and branch coverage for the code fragment:

Test Case

Input

Output

Statement Coverage

Branch Coverage

1

x = 3

y = 9

S1, S2, S3

T1 = true

2

x = 5

y = 25

S1, S2

T1 = false

As shown in the table, test case 1 covers all three statements (S1, S2, S3) in the code fragment, achieving 100% statement coverage. Test case 2 covers only two statements (S1, S2) in the code fragment, but it exercises a different outcome of the decision point T1 (if x < 4), achieving 100% branch coverage.

It describes how test cases are derived from a use case. A use case is a description of a set of sequences of actions, including variants, that a system performs to yield an observable result of value to an actor1. An actor can be a human user or another system. Test cases are designed to cover various user behaviors, including basic, exceptional or alternative and error behaviors associated with each use case1. Option A is incorrect, as test cases derived from a use case are not based on non-functional requirements such as usability, but on functional requirements that describe what the system does1. Option C is incorrect, as test cases derived from a use case are not created using white-box test techniques, but using black-box test techniques that focus on the inputs and outputs of the system1. Option D is incorrect, as test cases derived from a use case are not based on pair testing, which is a technique that involves two testers working together to find defects1. References: 1, Section 4.2.4

Percentage of work done in test environment preparation is a metric that measures how much of the required test environment setup has been completed. This metric is useful for monitoring the test progress because it indicates whether the test environment is ready for executing the planned test cases or not.

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

This is an example of a failure, which is an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits. In this case, the calculator software failed to perform the addition function correctly and gave an incorrect result.

The statement that use case testing is designed to find defects in the process flow is true, because use case testing is a technique that tests the end-to-end user interactions and outcomes based on use cases or scenarios that describe how the software under test should be used . Use case testing can help to find defects in the process flow, such as missing steps, incorrect sequences, or invalid transitions . The other options are not true statements about use case testing. Option A is false, because use case testing is not designed to be used by real users, but rather by professional testers who design and execute test cases based on use cases or scenarios . Option C is false, because use case testing is not designed to find defects in the data flow, but rather in the process flow. Data flow testing is a different technique that tests how data values are defined, used, and modified by the software under test . Option D is false, because use case testing is not always designed by customers or end users, but rather by testers who analyse the requirements or specifications of the software under test to identify use cases or scenarios .

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

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

A 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.

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.

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.

 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.

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.

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

The 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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

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

The 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.

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.

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.

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

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

The 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.

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.

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.

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 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The 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 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.

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.

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.