ISTQB ISTQB-CTFL Dumps

Boundary value analysis is not an experience-based technique, but rather a specification-based technique (also known as black-box technique). Experience-based techniques are techniques that rely on the tester’s knowledge and intuition to derive and select test cases based on their experience with similar systems, technologies, domains, risks, etc. Some examples of experience-based techniques are error guessing, exploratory testing, fault attack, checklist-based testing, etc. Specification-based techniques are techniques that rely on the tester’s analysis and interpretation of the requirements or specifications of the system under test to derive and select test cases based on some criteria or rules. Some examples of specification-based techniques are equivalence partitioning, boundary value analysis, decision table testing, state transition testing, etc. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 31.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

This answer is correct because error guessing is a test design technique where the experience and intuition of the tester are used to anticipate where errors, defects and failures have occurred or are likely to occur, and to design test cases to expose them. Error guessing can be based on factors such as the complexity of the system or component, the known or suspected weaknesses of the system or component, the previous history of defects, or the common types of errors in the domain or technology. Error guessing can be used as a complementary technique to other more systematic or formal techniques, or when there is insufficient information or time to apply them. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.5

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Statement testing aims to execute every executable statement in the source code at least once.

(D) is correct as statement testing ensures maximum statement execution.

(A) describes branch testing, which focuses on flow transfers.

(B) and (C) incorrectly mix decision testing and branch testing concepts.

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

A typical test plan includes various elements, such as resource requirements, test completion criteria, and suspension/resumption criteria. However, the list of product risks that have not been fully mitigated is generally not included in the test plan but rather in the risk management documentation.

The test plan focuses on planning and executing tests, including resource allocation and defining criteria for test suspension and resumption.

While risk management is crucial, unmitigated risks are typically documented in risk logs or separate risk management plans.

A defect report is a document that records the details of a defect found during testing. A defect report typically contains the following items:

Identifier: A unique identifier for the defect report

Summary: A concise summary of the defect

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

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

Priority: The level of urgency for resolving the defect

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

Resolution: The action taken to resolve the defect, such as fix, workaround, reject, etc. Out of these items, the one that is not needed to specify in a defect report is how to fix the defect. How to fix the defect is a technical solution that is usually determined by the developer who is assigned to resolve the defect. How to fix the defect is not part of the defect report, but rather part of the code change or patch that is delivered to fix the defect. The other items are needed to specify in a defect report, as they provide essential information for identifying, tracking and resolving defects. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 32-33.

This answer is correct because in Agile software development, work product documentation, such as user stories, acceptance criteria, or test cases, tends to be lightweight and concise, as the focus is on working software and frequent communication rather than comprehensive documentation. Manual tests tend to be often unscripted, as they are often produced using experience-based test techniques, such as error guessing or exploratory testing, which rely on the tester’s skills, knowledge, and creativity to find defects and provide feedback. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.2, Section 3.2.1.2

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

Type of customer

Amount of sale

Bonus percentage

Basic

G1

3%

Basic

G2

5%

Basic

G3

7%

Premium

G1

5%

Premium

G2

7%

Premium

G3

10%

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

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

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

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

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

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

Using equivalence partitioning, the investment ranges are divided into four partitions:

R500 to R10,000 (10%)

R10,001 to R50,000 (11%)

R50,001 to R100,000 (12%)

R100,001 to R500,000 (13%)

Thus, the minimum number of test cases required to cover all valid equivalence partitions for calculating the interest is 4​​.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

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

Other options follow valid sequences according to state transition rules.

This answer is correct because equivalence partitioning is a test design technique that divides the input domain of a system or component into partitions of equivalent data, such that each partition is expected to produce the same output or behavior. Equivalence partitioning aims to reduce the number of test cases by selecting one representative value from each partition. In this case, the input domain of the TAS can be divided into four partitions based on the bonus rules: less than 50k€, between 50k€ and 80k€, between 80k€ and 120k€, and more than 120k€. The test cases in the answer belong to the same partition, which is between 80k€ and 120k€, and they are expected to produce the same output, which is a bonus of 15%. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.1

Test automation provides numerous benefits to software testing, and one of the key advantages is the reduction of repetitive manual work. This benefit is explicitly covered in the ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus (v4.0).

Test automation allows testers to automate repetitive tasks such as regression testing, freeing up their time to focus on more complex and exploratory testing. This leads to improved efficiency and helps in avoiding human errors associated with repetitive tasks.

Option A: "More subjective assessment" contradicts the benefit of automation as it focuses on objectivity.

Option C: "Availability of the test automation tool vendor" is not a direct benefit of test automation, although vendor support can be valuable.

Option D: "Negligible effort to maintain the test assets" is misleading as maintaining automated tests often requires effort and attention to changes in the system under test.

Therefore, the correct answer is B​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (ISTQB)​.

Static testing refers to testing that doesn't involve executing code. It includes activities like reviews, inspections, and static analysis. Tools that support static testing help with activities such as analyzing source code, checking coding standards, and aiding in document reviews. These tools can automate or facilitate various aspects of static testing processes, such as highlighting potential issues in code or documents without executing the software.

The set of test inputs that achieve the relatively highest equivalence partition coverage for grading students is option D: 69, 79, 80, 89, 90. This set effectively tests the boundaries between each grade category, ensuring that the grading system accurately transitions from one grade to another at the correct thresholds​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

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

Analyzing and removing the cause of failures is not an objective of testing, but rather a task of development or maintenance. A failure is an event or behavior that deviates from the expected or specified result of a system under test. A failure is caused by an error (also known as a mistake or a fault) in the software code, design, or specification. Analyzing and removing the cause of failures is a process of locating and fixing errors in the software code, design, or specification, which is also known as debugging or defect resolution. Analyzing and removing the cause of failures does not aim to find or report defects, but rather to correct or prevent them. The other options are objectives of testing. Finding defects is one of the main objectives of testing, as it helps to improve the quality and reliability of the software product. Providing information for decision-making is another objective of testing, as it helps to support decision making and risk management. Gaining confidence about the level of quality of the software is another objective of testing, as it helps to assure that the software product meets its requirements and customer or user needs and expectations. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

Static testing, such as code reviews and static analysis, is particularly effective at identifying issues related to code structure and modularization. These techniques allow for the inspection of the code without executing it, making it easier to spot problems related to how the code is organized. Dynamic testing, on the other hand, focuses on the execution of code and is better suited for identifying runtime issues but does not easily reveal structural problems. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 highlights the strengths of static testing in uncovering such structural issue

Exercising at least one of the decision outcomes for all decisions within the code, ensures achieving full branch coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all branches in the control flow of the code are executed at least once by the test cases. A branch is a basic block of code that has a single entry point and a single exit point, and a decision is a point in the code where the control flow can take more than one direction, such as an if-then-else statement, a switch-case statement, a loop statement, etc. The decision outcomes are the possible paths that can be taken from a decision, such as the then branch or the else branch, the case branch or the default branch, the loop body or the loop exit, etc. The other statements are false, because:

The minimum number of test cases needed to achieve full branch coverage, is usually higher than that needed to achieve full statement coverage, which is a test coverage criterion that requires that all executable statements in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. This is because branch coverage is a stronger criterion than statement coverage, as it implies statement coverage, but not vice versa. For example, a single test case can achieve full statement coverage for an if-then-else statement, but two test cases are needed to achieve full branch coverage, as both the then branch and the else branch need to be exercised.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all unconditional branches within the code have not necessarily been exercised, as unconditional branches are branches that do not depend on any decision, and are always executed, such as a goto statement, a break statement, a return statement, etc. Unconditional branches are not part of the branch coverage criterion, as they do not represent different paths in the control flow of the code. However, they are part of the statement coverage criterion, as they are executable statements in the code.

If full branch coverage has been achieved, then all combinations of conditions in a decision table have not necessarily been exercised, as a decision table is a test design technique that represents the logical relationships between multiple conditions and their corresponding actions, in a tabular format. A decision table can have more combinations of conditions than the number of decision outcomes in the code, as each condition can have two or more possible values, such as true or false, yes or no, etc. For example, a decision table with four conditions can have 16 combinations of conditions, but the corresponding code may have only two decision outcomes, such as pass or fail. To exercise all combinations of conditions in a decision table, a stronger test coverage criterion is needed, such as condition combination coverage, which requires that all possible combinations of condition outcomes in the code are executed at least once by the test cases. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.3.1, Test Coverage Criteria Based on the Structure of the Software

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Branch Coverage, Statement Coverage, Branch, Decision, Decision Outcome, Unconditional Branch, Decision Table, Condition Combination Coverage

While configuration management is crucial for maintaining consistent versions of software artifacts and supporting the build process, it does not directly increase the chances of finding defects in the software under test. Version-controlled test ware ensures that the correct versions of test cases and other test artifacts are used, but it is the quality and thoroughness of the tests that determine the effectiveness of defect detection.

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

Configuration management is a process that establishes and maintains consistency among work products throughout their life cycle. Configuration management affects testing in various ways, such as:

Proper configuration management ensures that testers can uniquely identify the tested item, which can help traceability, reproducibility and accountability.

Proper configuration management ensures that testers have access to consistent versions of software components and testware, which can help reliability, compatibility and efficiency.

Proper configuration management ensures that testers can track changes and defects in software components and testware, which can help verification, validation and reporting.

Proper configuration management ensures that testers can control the configuration of the test environment, which can help stability, security and performance. Configuration management is not a prerequisite for test planning, as test planning can proceed without configuration management, although it may be less effective or accurate. Configuration management is not important for developers only, but for testers as well, as it affects the quality and consistency of the testing process and products. Configuration management has a significant influence on the test project, as it affects various aspects of testing, such as traceability, reproducibility, reliability, compatibility, efficiency, verification, validation, reporting, stability, security and performance. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 6, page 60-61.

The question is about identifying an example of testing contributing to higher quality. Quality is the degree to which a component, system or process meets specified requirements and/or user/customer needs and expectations1. Testing is the process consisting of all lifecycle activities, both static and dynamic, concerned with planning, preparation and evaluation of software products and related work products to determine that they satisfy specified requirements, to demonstrate that they are fit for purpose and to detect defects2.

Therefore, testing contributes to higher quality by verifying and validating that the software products and related work products meet the specified requirements, are fit for purpose and have no defects, or at least have a reduced number of defects. Testing also provides information about the quality of the software products and related work products to the stakeholders, who can make informed decisions based on the test results3.

Out of the four given statements, only option D is an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it shows that testing has detected a defect (a flaw in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function4) and that the defect has been resolved (fixed and confirmed) prior to release (delivery of the software product to the customer or end user). This means that testing has prevented a potential failure (an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits) from occurring in the operational environment, and thus has improved the quality of the software product.

Option A is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a reporting activity that summarizes the test results and evaluates the test objectives, but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test summary report is a document that records and communicates the outcomes of testing activities, including test completion criteria, test results, incident reports, test summary and evaluation, and lessons learned.

Option B is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a planning activity that estimates the resources and time needed for testing activities, but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test effort estimate is an approximation of the amount of work and/or the duration of time required to perform testing activities.

Option C is not an example of testing contributing to higher quality, as it is a preparation activity that sets up the test environment (an environment containing hardware, instrumentation, simulators, software tools, and other support elements needed to conduct a test), but does not directly affect the quality of the software product or related work products. A test environment installation is a process of installing and configuring the test environment according to the test environment specification.

One of the primary objectives of testing is to ensure that the software or system being tested meets all regulatory requirements. This is crucial in many industries where compliance with laws and standards is mandatory. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, testing aims to evaluate the quality of the software product and verify that it complies with specified requirements, including regulatory requirements​​.

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

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

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

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Test execution involves running test cases and documenting results. Test logs (A) provide evidence of executed tests, failures, and actual outcomes. Automated test scripts (B) are part of test implementation, test plans (C) belong to test planning, and test conditions (D) are identified during test analysis.

Experience based techniques (EBT) are techniques that use the knowledge, intuition and skills of the test engineers to design and execute tests. EBT use tests derived from the test engineers’ previous experience with similar technologies, domains, applications or systems. EBT are not based on the ability of the test engineer to implement various testing techniques, but rather on their personal judgment and creativity. EBT are not done as a second stage of testing, after non-experience-based testing took place, but rather as a complementary or alternative approach to other techniques. EBT require broad and deep knowledge in both testing and the application or technological domain, as this can help the test engineer identify potential risks, scenarios or defects. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 5, page 48-49.

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

The other options are not correct because they are not types of testing that measure their effectiveness by tracking which lines of code were executed by the tests. Acceptance testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software meets the acceptance criteria and the user requirements. Acceptance testing is usually performed by the end-users or customers, who may not have access to the source code or the technical details of the software. Acceptance testing is more concerned with the functionality, usability, or suitability of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. Integration testing is a type of testing that verifies that the software components or subsystems work together as expected. Integration testing is usually performed by the developers or testers, who may use both structural and functional testing techniques to check the interfaces, interactions, or dependencies between the components or subsystems. Integration testing is more concerned with the integration logic, data flow, or communication of the software, rather than its individual lines of code. Exploratory testing is a type of testing that involves simultaneous learning, test design, and test execution. Exploratory testing is usually performed by the testers, who use their creativity, intuition, or experience to explore the software and discover any defects, risks, or opportunities for improvement. Exploratory testing is more concerned with the behavior, quality, or value of the software, rather than its internal structure or implementation. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, Chapter 4: Test Techniques, Section 4.3: Structural Testing Techniques, Pages 51-54; Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Testing, Section 1.4: Testing Throughout the Software Development Lifecycle, Pages 11-13; Chapter 3: Static Testing, Section 3.4: Exploratory Testing, Pages 40-41.

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

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Exploratory testing is an unscripted approach where testers actively design and execute tests based on their intuition, experience, and knowledge of the system. A test charter (A) provides a guideline on what areas to explore, defining test objectives but leaving room for dynamic adaptation.

(B), (C), and (D) contradict exploratory testing principles, which focus on freedom rather than rigid documentation.

Exploratory testing is especially useful in agile environments, usability testing, and uncovering unexpected defects.

The extent of testing required for a software product depends on various factors, such as the level of risk, the budget, and the time available. The level of risk reflects the potential impact of failures on the stakeholders and the environment. The budget determines how much resources can be allocated for testing. The time available defines the schedule and deadlines for testing activities. The particular tester involved in testing is not a deciding factor for the extent of testing required, as testing should be based on objective criteria and not on personal preferences or abilities. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 14-15.

A static analysis tool is best suited for determining source code compliance with coding standards. These tools analyze the code without executing it and can check for adherence to coding standards, syntax errors, and other static properties of the code. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus emphasizes the role of static analysis tools in verifying that code meets predefined standards and guidelines.

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

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

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

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

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

Static testing involves reviewing and inspecting the code, requirements, or design documents without executing the code. It can prevent defects, is effective early in the software development life cycle, and can help eliminate defects in user stories.

Option 1: "It can prevent defects by manual examination of the functional specification" - This is a value of static testing.

Option 2: "It is effective since it can be performed very early in the software development life cycle" - This is a value of static testing.

Option 3: "It can detect the failures in the running application" - This is a v​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​namic testing, not static testing.

Option 4: "It can help eliminate defects in user stories" - This is a value of static testing.

Option 5: "It can verify externally visible behaviors" - This is a value of dynamic testing, not static testing.

Therefore, the correct set of statements representing values only for static testing is 1, 2, 4, which corresponds to answer C【6†source】.

To determine the optimal test execution schedule that minimizes the number of configuration switches and respects the dependencies, we start with the initial configuration, CONF1.

TC4: It has no dependencies and runs on CONF1 (initial configuration).

TC3: Depends on TC4 and runs on CONF1. Since TC4 is already executed, we can proceed with TC3.

TC2: Depends on TC4 and runs on CONF2. We switch to CONF2 after TC3.

TC1: No dependencies and runs on CONF2. Since we are already in CONF2, we can execute TC1 next.

TC5: Depends on TC1 and runs on CONF2. Since TC1 is already executed, we can proceed with TC5 without additional configuration switches.

By following this sequence (TC4, TC3, TC2, TC1, TC5), we respect the dependencies and minimize the number of configuration switches

The statement "Traceability may make it harder to understand the impact of changes" is incorrect. Traceability in testing actually facilitates understanding the impact of changes by linking test cases to requirements. This linkage helps ensure that any changes in the requirements are adequately reflected and verified in the test cases, thus supporting effective management of changes and maintaining the integrity of the system or product being developed​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

The whole team approach, often advocated in Agile methodologies, emphasizes collaboration and collective responsibility among all team members. This approach enhances the relationships within the team and improves overall collaboration, which in turn benefits the project's success. According to the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, the whole team approach fosters better communication and cooperation, leading to more effective problem-solving and higher-quality outcomes​​.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Boundary Value Analysis (BVA) focuses on test cases at the edges of partitions because defects often occur at boundaries. The temperature ranges are:

≤7 (Too cold → W)

[8-21] (Standstill → X)

[22-29] (Ideal → Y)

≥30 (Too hot → Z)

A two-point BVA means testing both the lower and upper boundary values of each partition.

The correct selection {7,8,21,22,29,30} includes:

7 → Boundary of Too Cold (W)

8 → Lower boundary of Standstill (X)

21 → Upper boundary of Standstill (X)

22 → Lower boundary of Ideal (Y)

29 → Upper boundary of Ideal (Y)

30 → Lower boundary of Too Hot (Z)

This ensures maximum boundary coverage.

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

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The Moderator (D) plays a key role in formal reviews by facilitating discussions, ensuring that reviews stay on track, and creating an open environment for feedback. The Manager (A) is responsible for overseeing the testing process but does not directly facilitate reviews. The Reviewer (B) is responsible for examining the work product, while the Review Leader (C) organizes reviews but does not necessarily mediate them.

When a manager asks when testing will be complete, the most appropriate and informative resource to provide an answer is test progress reports (Option A). Test progress reports contain detailed information on the status of testing activities, including what has been accomplished, what remains to be done, the results of the tests conducted, and any issues or risks that might impact the completion of testing. These reports allow for an informed assessment of the testing progress and estimation of when testing might be completed. Options B, C, and D do not provide the structured, detailed, and specific information required to accurately answer the manager's question about the completion of testing.

An exit criterion is a condition that defines when a test activity has been completed or when a test phase can be concluded. An exit criterion can be based on various factors, such as:

I) Estimates of defect density or reliability measures. These are quantitative measures that indicate how many defects are present in the software product or how likely it is to fail under certain conditions. These can be used as exit criteria to ensure that the software product meets a certain level of quality or performance before moving to the next phase or releasing it to the customer.

III) Accuracy measures, such as code coverage, functionality coverage or risk coverage. These are quantitative measures that indicate how much of the software product has been tested in terms of its code, functionality or risk. These can be used as exit criteria to ensure that the test suite is adequate or complete before moving to the next phase or releasing it to the customer.

IV) Residual risks, such as lack of code coverage in certain areas, unresolved defects or unknown factors. These are qualitative measures that indicate the remaining risks or uncertainties associated with the software product after testing. These can be used as exit criteria to ensure that the residual risks are acceptable or manageable before moving to the next phase or releasing it to the customer. The following factor is not a valid exit criterion:

II) The completion and publication of an exhaustive Test Report. This is not a valid exit criterion, as it does not reflect the quality or completeness of the testing process or product. A test report is a document that summarizes the results and outcomes of a test activity or phase. A test report can be used as an input for deciding whether to exit a test activity or phase, but it is not a condition that defines when to exit. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 2, page 13; Chapter 6, page 58-59.

The absence-of-errors fallacy is the mistaken belief that just because a software system is free of defects, it will meet the user's needs and expectations. Involving users early through practices like prototyping helps ensure that the development team is building the right system that meets user expectations, not just a system that is defect-free. This approach aligns with the testing principle that emphasizes understanding the users' needs and ensuring the system fulfills them. This principle is explained in the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0​​.

To achieve the highest level of transition coverage, one must consider all the possible transitions between the states in the given state model of the sales order software. The transitions in the sequence provided in Option B - "IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> INVOICED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION" cover all the states and transitions effectively. This covers the transitions from IN PRODUCTION to SHIPPED, SHIPPED to INVOICED, INVOICED to CANCELLED, CANCELLED to PLACED, and PLACED to IN PRODUCTION, thereby maximizing the transition coverage.

Risk level is determined by the combination of two factors: the likelihood of an event occurring and the impact or harm that could result from that event. This approach allows risks to be prioritized based on their potential effect on the project or system. The likelihood represents the probability of the risk event occurring, while the impact represents the severity of the consequences if the event does happen. This concept is fundamental in risk-based testing and helps guide decision-making during the testing process.

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

When scheduling test cases, priorities and dependencies must be considered. The best execution order will respect both the logical dependencies and the priorities assigned to each test case.

Given the options, the correct order considering the priorities and dependencies is:

TC1 (Priority 1)

**TC​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​ity 2, dependent on TC1)

TC2 (Priority 3, dependent on TC1)

TC4 (Priority 4)

TC5 (Priority 5)

TC6 (Priority 6, dependent on TC4)

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, understanding dependencies and scheduling tests accordingly is crucial for effective test execution【6†source】.

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

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

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

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

All testing levels are applicable, independent of which software development life-cycle process (V-model, iterative, incremental) is used. Testing levels are defined based on the scope and objectives of testing, not on the software development model. Component testing, integration testing, system testing and acceptance testing are common testing levels that can be applied to any software development model, as long as they are planned and executed properly. The V-model is a software development model that emphasizes the relationship between each development phase and its corresponding testing phase. Iterative and incremental models are software development models that divide the development process into smaller cycles or iterations, where each iteration produces a working version of the software that can be tested and evaluated. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 18.

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

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

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

The features of the test object to be tested and those excluded from the testing represent information that is usually included in a test plan and, in the given test plan, it is more likely to be specified within “Test Scope” rather than in the other two sections mentioned. The test scope defines the boundaries and limitations of the testing activities, such as the test items, the features to be tested, the features not to be tested, the test objectives, the test environment, the test resources, the test assumptions, the test risks, etc. The test scope helps to establish a common understanding of what is included and excluded from the testing, and to avoid ambiguity, confusion, or misunderstanding among the stakeholders. The other two sections, “Testing Communication” and “Stakeholders”, are also important parts of a test plan, but they do not directly address the features of the test object. The testing communication describes the methods, frequency, and responsibilities for the communication and reporting of the testing progress, status, issues, and results. The stakeholders identify the roles and responsibilities of the people involved in or affected by the testing activities, such as the test manager, the test team, the project manager, the developers, the customers, the users, etc. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

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

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Test Plan, Test Scope2

The key principles of software testing include: i. Testing shows the presence of defects, not their absence. iv. Defects cluster together. v. Testing is context dependent. vi. Beware of the pesticide paradox. vii. Absence of errors is a fallacy. These principles highlight the importance of recognizing the limitations and context of testing, as well as the potential for repeated tests to become less effective​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

The ISTQB CTFL syllabus identifies several causes for defects in software. One prominent reason, as highlighted in the curriculum, is the pressure and rush to meet tight deadlines, which can lead to insufficiently reviewed or tested code being moved into further stages of testing or production. This scenario describes rushing to meet a deadline as a potential cause for defects because it may compromise the thoroughness of code development and testing.

Use case testing is a technique that helps identify test cases that exercise the whole system on a transaction by transaction basis from start to finish. Use cases are descriptions of how users interact with the system to achieve a specific goal. Use case testing is not focused on data flow, but rather on process flow. Use case testing can be performed by professional testers, customers or end users, depending on the context. Use case testing does not require the test cases to be designed by customers or end users, but rather by anyone who has access to the use case specifications. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 4, page 36.

Applicable acceptance test cases for the given user story should focus on the specific requirement of deleting an individual item from the shopping list and ensuring that it is removed in less than 1 second. Therefore, the valid test cases are: i. Click on my online shopping list, select the unwanted item, delete the unwanted item, the unwanted item is deleted from the shopping list in less than 1 second. iii. Tab to the online shopping list and press enter, select the unwanted item, delete the unwanted item, the unwanted item is deleted from the shopping list in less than 1 second.

A software bug can cause harm to a company by directly affecting its operations, reputation, user satisfaction, and financials. Option D, "When calculating the final price in a shopping list, the price of the last item is not added," describes a defect that directly impacts the core functionality of a financial transaction, potentially leading to financial loss and customer dissatisfaction. This can have severe implications for the company's credibility and revenue. Options A, B, and C describe bugs that, while potentially annoying, do not have the same direct impact on the company's core operations and financial integrity as option D.

An oracle is a mechanism or source that can provide the expected result for a given test input or situation. Sometimes old version of a product can be used as an oracle, if it is assumed that the old version behaves correctly for the test cases that are executed on the new version. This is also known as back-to-back testing. Oracles do not help in reproducing the irreproducible bugs, as they only provide the expected results, not the actual results. Oracles are not derived from the design, but from the requirements or specifications. Oracles cannot be generated automatically using data generators, as data generators only provide test inputs, not test outputs. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 9.

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

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

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

Mistake: A human action that produces an incorrect result.

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

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

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

The other three statements are incorrect, namely:

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

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

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

The activities of checking test results and logs against specified coverage criteria, assessing the level of component or system quality based on test results and logs, and determining whether more tests are needed fall under the category of test monitoring and control. This phase involves ongoing assessment and adjustment of the test activities to ensure they meet the test objectives and quality goals​​.

Pair reviews are informal and typically involve two people reviewing the work product together, often in an informal setting. Walkthroughs are more formal and aim to educate stakeholders and evaluate the product, serving the dual purpose of improving the product and training participants. Technical reviews have a strong focus on improving the product's quality, often involving technical stakeholders. Inspections are the most formal review type and are aimed primarily at detecting defects.

A failure is an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits. A failure is observable by the software users or other stakeholders. A failure is caused by one or more defects in the software. In this case, the software not being able to meet the desired response time is an example of a failure, as it deviates from the stated requirement and affects the user experience. It is not a defect, which is a flaw in the software that causes the failure. It is not an error, which is a human action that produces an incorrect result. It is not a non-defect, as it clearly violates a specified requirement. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 4.

Statement coverage is a white-box test technique which focuses on executing all possible statements in the code at least once during testing. This helps in determining the percentage of executable statements that have been executed by the test suite, aiming to ensure that all parts of the program have been tested at least once​ (ISTQB Main Web)​.

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

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

Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is performed to verify that specific defects have been successfully fixed.

Option A: "Testing due to the application of a new version of the interface" would typically involve regression testing, not confirmation testing.

Option B: "Testing that fixes resolved the defects in the search function" fits the description of confirmation testing as it focuses on ensuring that specific issues have been addressed.

Option C: "Testing if a system still works after update of an operating system" is an example of regression testing, as it checks the overall system behavior after an update.

Option D: "Testing to ensure the adding of new functionalities haven't broken existing functions" is another example of re​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​ it checks for unintended consequences of new changes.

Therefore, the correct answer is B【6†source】【9†source】.

An incident is any event that occurs during testing that requires investigation. An incident management tool is a software tool that supports recording and tracking incidents throughout their life cycle. A QA manager of a start-up company needs to implement within a week a low cost incident management tool. The best option for this case is to manage the incidents in a spreadsheet posted on the intranet. This option has several advantages over other options:

It is low cost, as it does not require purchasing any additional software or hardware.

It is easy to implement within a week, as it does not require installing or configuring any complex software or hardware.

It is accessible and transparent, as it can be viewed and updated by anyone who has access to the intranet.

It is structured and organized, as it can store and display various information about incidents, such as identifier, summary, description, severity, priority, status, resolution, etc. The other options are not suitable for this case, as they have several disadvantages over the chosen option:

Documenting incidents on a large board in the lab is not a good option, as it is not accessible or transparent to anyone who is not physically present in the lab. It is also not structured or organized, as it may not store or display all the necessary information about incidents.

Purchasing and deploying an incident management tool is not a good option, as it is not low cost or easy to implement within a week. It may require spending a significant amount of money and time on acquiring, installing and configuring the software or hardware.

Managing the incidents through emails and phone calls is not a good option, as it is not structured or organized. It may lead to confusion, inconsistency or loss of information about incidents. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33.

Test planning is a key activity in the testing process that involves defining the objectives, approach, resources, and schedule of intended test activities. Setting the entry and exit criteria (I) and determining the number of resources required (III) are integral parts of test planning. Determining the validity of bug reports (II) is more aligned with test analysis or test management activities post-execution, and determining the expected result for test cases (IV) is part of test design. Therefore, options I and III (B) are the activities that belong to test planning​​.

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

Identifier: A unique identifier for the incident report

Summary: A concise summary of the incident

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

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

Priority: The level of urgency for resolving the incident

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

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

Testers are typically involved in creating detailed test execution schedules, among other tasks such as designing tests, executing tests, and logging defects. Creating a test strategy and test policy, promoting and advocating the test team, and introducing metrics are typically responsibilities of test managers or senior roles.

In the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, the responsibilities of testers include creating test cases, setting up test​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​nts, executing tests, and reporting defects, which align with creating detailed test execution schedules【6†source】.

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

A static analysis tool is a tool that analyzes a given program’s source code or executable code without executing it. A static analysis tool can perform various types of analysis on a program’s code, such as syntax checking, data flow analysis, control flow analysis, complexity measurement, coding standards compliance checking, etc. Control flow analysis is a type of analysis that examines how a program’s statements are executed in different paths or branches. One of the most likely outcomes of control flow analysis is identification of unreachable code, which is code that can never be executed due to logical errors or design flaws. Unreachable code can reduce readability and maintainability of the code, as well as increase complexity and size. The other options are not outcomes of control flow analysis, but rather outcomes of other types of analysis. Report on adherence to coding standards is an outcome of coding standards compliance checking. Number of comment lines and number of source code lines are outcomes of complexity measurement. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 8.

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

This answer is correct because a typical objective of testing is to ensure that a software has been tested using a combination of test techniques, such as black-box, white-box, or experience-based techniques, that are appropriate for the test objectives, test levels, and test types. Testing using a combination of test techniques can increase the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, as different techniques can target different aspects of the software quality, such as functionality, usability, performance, security, reliability, etc. Testing using a combination of test techniques can also reduce the risk of missing defects that could be detected by one technique but not by another. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.1.1, Section 2.3.2

This answer is correct because shift-left in testing is an approach that aims to perform testing activities as early as possible in the software development lifecycle, in order to find and fix defects faster and cheaper, and to improve the quality of the software product. Continuous integration is a practice that supports shift-left in testing, as it involves integrating and testing the software components frequently, usually several times a day, using automated tools and processes. Continuous integration can reduce the time between the introduction of a defect and its detection, thereby reducing the cost to fix it and the risk of accumulating defects that could affect the functionality or performance of the software product. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 3.1.1.3, Section 3.2.1.3

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Different test levels (unit, integration, system, acceptance) have specific objectives while sometimes overlapping to ensure comprehensive testing (D). Option A contradicts shift-left principles, B encourages late testing (which is ineffective), and C incorrectly assumes that all development activities require direct test actions.

In the given code snippet, the premium is increased by 1500 if the age is less than 30. Therefore, at the boundary value of age 29, the premium should be 2500 + 1500 = 4000, and at age 30, the premium should remain at its initial value of 2500, as the condition is no longer met. Option B correctly reflects this with 29, 4000 and 30, 2500 as the boundary value and the expected results, respectively.

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

A dynamic analysis tool is a tool that performs analysis of a software product based on its behavior during execution. A dynamic analysis tool can monitor various aspects of a program’s run-time performance, such as memory usage, CPU load, response time, or resource leaks. A dynamic analysis tool can monitor the allocation, use and de-allocation of memory during run-time of a program, which can help detect defects such as memory leaks, buffer overflows, or memory corruption. A dynamic analysis tool cannot provide support for traceability of tests, test results and incidents to source documents, as this is a function of a test management tool. A dynamic analysis tool cannot execute programs step-by-step in order to reproduce failures and find corresponding defects, as this is a function of a debugging tool. A dynamic analysis tool cannot provide support for release of baselines consisting of configuration items, as this is a function of a configuration management tool. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 6, page 56-57.

Product risk involves the potential issues that can affect the quality and functionality of the software product, such as defects, performance problems, and usability issues. Project risk, on the other hand, relates to the risks that can impact the project's schedule, budget, and resources, such as delays, cost overruns, and resource constraints. Understanding both types of risks is crucial for managing and mitigating potential problems in software projects.