CTFL_Syll_4.0 Exam Dumps : ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation From Exact Extract:

This is a classic application of theDecision Table Testingtechnique.

We are combining two conditions:

Purchase Volume, which has3 equivalence classes:

1 to 100 units → 0%

101 to 1000 units → 5%

More than 1000 units → 10%

Customer Type, which has2 categories:

Frequent Customer = YES → 5% extra

Frequent Customer = NO → 0%

This gives:

3 (bulk discount levels) × 2 (frequent customer options) = 6 unique decision rules

Each combination of these input conditions defines a separate test scenario with its own outcome.

“Decision table testing is used to identify the different combinations of inputs and their associated outputs. Each unique combination of input values defines a rule.”

(ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, Section 4.2.3 – Decision Table Testing, Page 40)

Thus,Option D (6 decision rules)is the correct answer.

Planning poker is a consensus-based estimation technique used in Agile. It involves team members selecting cards with their estimate for a user story, then discussing the differences in estimates.

Option A:Incorrect. While three-point estimation is valid, planning poker focuses on team consensus rather than individual estimation techniques.

Option B:Incorrect. The goal of planning poker is not to force unanimity but to reach a reasonable consensus.

Option C:Incorrect. Averaging estimates is not how planning poker works.

Option D:Correct. The members with the highest and lowest estimates discuss their reasoning to foster understanding and adjust estimates accordingly in subsequent rounds.

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

Initial Configuration:CONF1.

Dependencies:

TC1 depends on nothing.

TC2 depends on TC4.

TC3 depends on TC4.

TC4 depends on nothing.

TC5 depends on TC1.

Configuration Requirements:

TC1 requires CONF2.

TC2 requires CONF2.

TC3 requires CONF1.

TC4 requires CONF1.

TC5 requires CONF2.

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

Start withTC4(no dependencies, CONF1).

Continue withTC3(depends on TC4, CONF1).

Switch to CONF2.

ExecuteTC2(depends on TC4, CONF2).

Continue withTC1(no dependencies, CONF2).

Finally, executeTC5(depends on TC1, CONF2).

Therefore, the correct order is:

TC4(CONF1)

TC3(CONF1)

TC2(CONF2)

TC1(CONF2)

TC5(CONF2)

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