ISTQB-CTFL ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL v4.0) Questions and Answers

A test tool used for the analysis of a developer's code prior to its execution falls under the category of static testing tools. Static testing involves examining the code and documentation without executing the code. These tools are used to perform static analysis, which helps in identifying potential defects and code quality issues early in the development process. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus specifies that static analysis tools are essential for finding defects that do not manifest themselves during the execution of the program.

One possible risk of introducing test automation is that the selected tool may not be fit-for-purpose. This means that the tool might not meet the specific needs and requirements of the project, leading to inefficiencies and possibly failing to provide the expected benefits. It is crucial to evaluate and select the appropriate tool based on the project's context and objectives. The ISTQB CTFL syllabus highlights the importance of careful tool evaluation and selection to ensure it aligns with the testing goals and the development environment.

Statement coverage measures the percentage of executable statements that have been exercised by a test suite. Achieving 80% statement coverage means that 80% of the executable code lines have been tested. This metric helps in understanding how much of the code has been covered during testing. However, it does not guarantee branch coverage, variable initialization, or detection of all possible defects. The ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0 explains statement coverage as a measure of the extent to which the code has been tested, without implying other types of coverage or testing goals​​.

Static analysis tools are software tools that examine the source code of a program without executing it. They can detect various types of issues, such as syntax errors, coding standards violations, security vulnerabilities, and potential bugs12. However, static analysis tools cannot identify issues that depend on the runtime behavior or performance of the program, such as very low MTBF (Mean Time Between failure)3. MTBF is a measure of the reliability of a system or component. It is calculated by dividing the total operating time by the number of failures. MTBF reflects how often a system or component fails during its expected lifetime. Static analysis tools cannot measure MTBF because they do not run the program or observe its failures. MTBF can only be estimated by dynamic testing, which involves executing the program under various conditions and collecting data on its failures4. Therefore, very low MTBF is an issue that cannot be identified by static analysis tools. The other options, such as potentially endless loops, referencing a variable with an undefined value, and security vulnerabilities, are issues that can be identified by static analysis tools. Static analysis tools can detect potentially endless loops by analyzing the control flow and data flow of the program and checking for conditions that may never become false5. Static analysis tools can detect referencing a variable with an undefined value by checking the scope and initialization of variables and reporting any use of uninitialized variables6. Static analysis tools can detect security vulnerabilities by checking for common patterns of insecure code, such as buffer overflows, SQL injections, cross-site scripting, and weak encryption. References = What Is Static Analysis? Static Code Analysis Tools - Perforce Software, How Static Code Analysis Works | Perforce, Static Code Analysis: Techniques, Top 5 Benefits & 3 Challenges, What is MTBF? Mean Time Between Failures Explained | Perforce, Static analysis tools - Software Testing MCQs - CareerRide, ISTQB_Chapter3 | Quizizz, [Static Code Analysis for Security Vulnerabilities | Perforce].

One of the common risks associated with test automation tools is the underestimation of the effort required to maintain test scripts. Test scripts can become outdated or broken due to changes in the application, requiring significant effort to update and maintain them. This risk is highlighted in the ISTQB CTFL syllabus under the discussion of the benefits and risks of test automation.

This question asks for a non-functional aspect of testing the download process of a mobile application. Option A, "It was easy to locate, download and install the application," refers to usability, which is a non-functional quality attribute. Non-functional testing involves testing the system's attributes, such as usability, performance, reliability, etc., rather than specific behaviors or functions. Options B, "The application was correctly downloaded," C, "The application created an installation log file in a given folder," and D, "The application installed only after the user's approval," describe functional aspects, focusing on what the software does rather than how it performs or is experienced by the user.

There are two main approaches to test estimation:

Expert-based approach:

The Wideband Delphi estimation technique is an example of this approach.

Involves consulting expert​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​ate testing efforts.

This technique gathers estimates from multiple experts, discusses their differences, and achieves consensus.

Metrics-based approach:

Relies on historical data and metrics to predict future testing efforts.

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, the expert-based approach relies on experts' experience and knowledge, which aligns with the Wideband Delphi technique【6†source】.

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

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

The other options are correct because:

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

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

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

References =

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The purpose of a review is to find defects and improve the quality of the work product, not to criticize or blame the author. Reporting defects objectively means describing them factually and constructively, without using negative or emotional language that could offend the author or damage their motivation. This way, the author can take the feedback positively as an effort at improving the product and not as a personal assault. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 138.

A typical product risk involves issues directly related to the software product's functionality, performance, usability, reliability, etc. Option A, "Poor usability of the software," directly impacts the end-user's interaction with the software and is a quality attribute of the product itself, making it a product risk. Options B, "A problem in the code developed by a 3rd party," C, "Low quality of the configuration data, test data and tests," and D, "Problem in defining the right requirements," can be considered either product or project risks depending on the context, but option A is the most directly associated with a typical product risk concerning the quality and usability of the software.

The principle of early testing is applicable to all recognized software development models, including sequential, iterative, and incremental models. Starting test activities early in the lifecycle helps in identifying and addressing defects as soon as possible, which can save time and costs by preventing defects from propagating to later stages of development. This proactive approach enhances the overall quality and efficiency of the software development process. Reference: ISTQB CTFL Syllabus V4.0, Section 1.3

A formal review is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. A formal review can have various roles involved, such as manager, moderator, author, reviewer and scribe. The manager responsibilities in formal review include all except one of the following:

Planning the review (correct responsibility)

Determines if the review objectives have been met (incorrect responsibility)

Decide on the execution of reviews (correct responsibility)

Allocate time for review (correct responsibility) The responsibility of determining if the review objectives have been met belongs to the moderator role, not to the manager role. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 28-29.

A new navigation system compared with a previous system is the most suitable application for testing by use cases, because it involves a high level of interaction between the user and the system, and the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are based on the user’s needs and goals. Use cases can help to specify the functional requirements of the new navigation system, such as the ability to enter a destination, select a route, follow the directions, receive alerts, etc. Use cases can also help to compare the accuracy and usability of the new system with the previous system, by defining the success and failure scenarios, the preconditions and postconditions, and the alternative flows of each use case. Use cases can also help to design and execute test cases that cover the main and exceptional paths of each use case, and to verify the satisfaction of the user’s expectations.

The other options are not the most suitable applications for testing by use cases, because they do not involve a high level of interaction between the user and the system, or the expected behavior and outcomes of the system are not based on the user’s needs and goals. A billing system used to calculate monthly charge based on a large number of subscriber parameters is more suitable for testing by data-driven testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using a large set of input and output data. The ability of an antivirus package to detect and quarantine a new threat is more suitable for testing by exploratory testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and security of a system or component by using an informal and flexible approach, based on the tester’s experience and intuition. The suitability and performance of a multimedia (audio video based) system to a new operating system is more suitable for testing by compatibility testing, which is a technique for testing the functionality and performance of a system or component by using different hardware, software, or network environments. References = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.1.1, page 28-29; Section 4.1.1, page 44-45; Section 4.2.1, page 47-48.

Independent testing is testing performed by a person or group that is independent of the development team. Independent testing can have various degrees of independence, ranging from testers who are part of the same organization as developers to testers who are external contractors or consultants. Independent testing can have various benefits, such as reducing bias, increasing objectivity, improving quality, or providing different perspectives. Independent testing is not necessary because developers don’t know any testing, as this is a wrong and disrespectful statement. Developers can perform various types of testing, such as unit testing, component testing, or integration testing. However, independent testing can complement developer testing by providing additional levels of verification and validation, such as system testing, acceptance testing, or non-functional testing. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 16-17.

 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.

A project risk relates to potential issues that could affect the overall success of the project. Among the options provided, the risk that "Team members' skills may not be sufficient for the assigned work" is clearly a project risk because it pertains to the potential failure of the project due to inadequate skillsets among the team. This risk affects the entire project's ability to meet its objectives.

When working on a project with incomplete requirements and under pressure to deploy, exploratory testing is particularly suitable. This type of testing allows testers to use their expertise and intuition to explore the system's functionality and identify defects without needing detailed specifications. Exploratory testing is flexible and can quickly adapt to changes and gaps in the requirements​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Product risks are risks that impact the quality or functionality of the software, whereas project risks affect the process, resources, or timeline.

(A) is correct because incorrect calculations impact software correctness.

(B), (C), and (D) are project risks as they relate to team coordination, staffing, and scheduling rather than software defects.

Identifying product risks early improves defect detection and ensures better coverage for high-risk areas.

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​​.

A successful review process involves all participants being trained in the review type and understanding its objectives. This ensures that everyone can contribute effectively and understand what is expected from the review. Proper training helps to identify defects accurately and facilitates constructive feedback, leading to a more efficient and effective review process. Hence, statement C is correct according to the ISTQB CTFL syllabus​​.

Static testing is a form of testing that does not involve executing the software, but rather analyzing it for defects, errors, or violations of standards. Static testing can be applied to any software development product, including requirements specifications, design specifications, code, test cases, test plans, user manuals, etc. Static testing can be done by using various techniques such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, checklists, static analysis tools, etc. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 7.

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.

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】.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Decision rules define possible combinations of conditions and outcomes.

For this scenario:

Bulk discount has 3 categories (0%, 5%, 10%)

Frequent customer discount has 2 categories (Yes = +5%, No = 0%)

The total number of decision rules is:

3 bulk discount options × 2 frequent customer options = 6 rules.

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

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.

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

A test status report is a document that provides a snapshot of the testing activities and their progress during a particular period. It should include information about any impediments encountered during the test execution and the actions taken to resolve them, which helps stakeholders understand the challenges and how they were addressed​​ .

Option B describes an activity related to test completion rather than ongoing status reporting. Option C is incorrect because the structure and contents of the report may vary based on the audience's needs. Option D, while important, is not the primary purpose of a test status report, which focuses more on the current status and impediments.

In software testing terminology, a failure is an observable deviation of the software from its expected behavior. A defect (or bug) is the cause of the failure in the software's code. In this case, the observed slowdown is the failure, while the underlying memory leak in the application code is the defect causing this failure. This distinction is clearly outlined in the ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0, which differentiates between failures (observable issues) and defects (underlying issues in the code)​​.

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.

Configuration management in the context of testing involves the systematic control of changes to the configuration items, including testware such as test scripts, test data, and test environments. It ensures that all changes are tracked and recorded, enabling the version control and management of testware​​ .

Option A is related to test execution rather than configuration management. Option C describes quality management in a broader sense, not specifically configuration management. Option D is specific to the configuration of tools, not the overall management of testware versions.

The three-point test estimation technique is a method of estimating the test effort based on three initial estimates: the most optimistic, the most likely, and the most pessimistic. The technique uses a weighted average of these three estimates to calculate the final estimate, which is also known as the expected value. The formula for the expected value is:

Expected value = (most optimistic + 4 * most likely + most pessimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the expected value is:

Expected value = (6 + 4 * 30 + 54) / 6 Expected value = 30 person hours

However, the expected value is not the only factor to consider when estimating the test effort. The technique also calculates the standard deviation, which is a measure of the variability or uncertainty of the estimates. The formula for the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (most pessimistic - most optimistic) / 6

Using the given values, the standard deviation is:

Standard deviation = (54 - 6) / 6 Standard deviation = 8 person hours

The standard deviation can be used to determine a range of possible values for the test effort, based on a certain level of confidence. For example, using a 68% confidence level, the range is:

Expected value ± standard deviation

Using the calculated values, the range is:

30 ± 8 person hours

Therefore, the final estimate is between 22 person hours and 38 person hours, which is option A.

The unscripted tests produced by the tester’s experience during the two-hour test session belong to the testing quadrant Q3. The testing quadrants are a classification of testing types based on two dimensions: the test objectives (whether the testing is focused on supporting the team or critiquing the product) and the test basis (whether the testing is based on the technology or the business). The testing quadrants are labeled as Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4, and each quadrant represents a different testing perspective, such as unit testing, acceptance testing, usability testing, or performance testing. The testing quadrant Q3 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of critiquing the product from the business perspective, such as exploratory testing, usability testing, user acceptance testing, alpha testing, beta testing, etc. The unscripted tests performed by the tester in the given scenario are examples of exploratory testing and usability testing, as they are based on the tester’s experience, intuition, and learning of the web application, and they focus on some specific usability issues, such as the user interface, the user satisfaction, the user feedback, etc. The other options are incorrect, because:

The testing quadrant Q1 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of supporting the team from the technology perspective, such as unit testing, component testing, integration testing, system testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by developers or testers who have access to the source code, the design, the architecture, or the configuration of the software system, and they aim to verify the functionality, the quality, and the reliability of the software system at different levels of integration.

The testing quadrant Q2 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of supporting the team from the business perspective, such as functional testing, acceptance testing, story testing, scenario testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by testers or customers who have access to the requirements, the specifications, the user stories, or the business processes of the software system, and they aim to validate that the software system meets the expectations and the needs of the users and the stakeholders.

The testing quadrant Q4 corresponds to the testing types that have the objective of critiquing the product from the technology perspective, such as performance testing, security testing, reliability testing, compatibility testing, etc. These testing types are usually performed by testers or specialists who have access to the tools, the metrics, the standards, or the benchmarks of the software system, and they aim to evaluate the non-functional aspects of the software system, such as the efficiency, the security, the reliability, or the compatibility of the software system under different conditions or environments. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Testing Quadrant, Exploratory Testing, Usability Testing, Unit Testing, Component Testing, Integration Testing, System Testing, Functional Testing, Acceptance Testing, Story Testing, Scenario Testing, Performance Testing, Security Testing, Reliability Testing, Compatibility Testing

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)​.

Decision tables are used to model complex decision logic by considering different combinations of conditions and actions. Based on the given decision table for prescribing drug therapy:

Column 1 and Column 3 both result in the same actions (prescribing Amoxicillin).

These columns can be merged because the actions taken do not depend on whether the patient is taking anticoagulant therapy (both are 'T' for this condition).

Thus, combining these columns simplifies the decision table without losing any information.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Business, development, and testing (C) are the three key perspectives in agile user story refinement:

Business (Product Owner, Stakeholders) – Ensures the story aligns with user needs and business goals.

Development (Developers) – Provides insights on feasibility and technical constraints.

Testing (Testers, QA) – Ensures testability, acceptance criteria, and risk identification.

(A) is incorrect because the product owner is part of business stakeholders.

(B) is incorrect because architecture is part of development, but not the primary driver of user stories.

(D) is incorrect because acceptance testing is a process, not a stakeholder group.

A cross-functional team collaboration ensures well-defined, testable, and feasible user stories.

Rule 5 in the decision table indicates that when the object is within 5 metres of the vehicle and the sensitivity mode is switched "on", no LED is lit. This matches the conditions and actions described in the decision table provided, ensuring that only the red LED is lit when the sensitivity mode is on and the object is within 1 metre, otherwise no LED is lit .

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.

The question is about selecting the correct test values for x based on equivalence partitioning. Equivalence partitioning is a software test design technique that divides the input data of a software unit into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived. In this case, the given equivalence classes are:

(x \leq -100)

(-100 < x < 100)

(100 \leq x < 1000)

(x \geq 1000)

Option D provides a value from each of these partitions:

For (x \leq -100), it gives -1000.

For (-100 < x < 100), it gives -100 and 100.

For (100 \leq x < 1000), it gives 500.

For (x \geq 1000), it gives 1500.

So, option D covers all four given equivalence classes with appropriate values.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The ratio-based estimation method relies on historical relationships between development and testing effort.

Using the given 5:3 ratio:

Thus, the correct answer is 270 person-days (D).

(A) and (C) are incorrect as they overestimate the effort.

(B) underestimates the testing effort based on the ratio.

Ratio-based estimation helps allocate resources effectively based on past project data.

Maintenance testing is triggered by changes such as bug fixes, enhancements, or environmental changes.

Option A: "Completion of architecture of the bank system" is not a typical scenario for maintenance testing, as it describes a design phase rather than an operational change.

Option B: "Release of the early draft of the low level project design of an IoT application" is again not suitable for maintenance testing, as it refers to the design phase.

Option C: "Defect was found in a pre-released version of the customer service application" is closer but not quite accurate, as maintenance testing focuses on changes mad​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​system is released.

Option D: "Delivery of the hot fix to mobile operating system and ensuring that it still works" is the best example as it directly involves testing after a fix has been implemented.

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

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.

The statement that refers to good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model is option D, which says that involvement of testers in work product reviews should occur as early as possible to take advantage of the early testing principle. Work product reviews are static testing techniques, in which the work products of the software development process, such as the requirements, the design, the code, the test cases, etc., are examined by one or more reviewers, with or without the author, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Involvement of testers in work product reviews can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. The early testing principle states that testing activities should start as early as possible in the software development lifecycle, and should be performed iteratively and continuously throughout the lifecycle. Applying the early testing principle can help to prevent, detect, and remove defects at an early stage, when they are easier, cheaper, and faster to fix, as well as to reduce the risk, the cost, and the time of the testing process. The other options are not good testing practices to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, but rather specific testing practices that may or may not be applicable or beneficial for testing, depending on the context and the objectives of the testing activities, such as:

Tests should be written in executable format before the code is written and should act as executable specifications that drive coding: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with test-driven development, which is an approach to software development and testing, in which the developers write automated unit tests before writing the source code, and then refactor the code until the tests pass. Test-driven development can help to improve the quality, the design, and the maintainability of the code, as well as to provide fast feedback and guidance for the developers. However, test-driven development is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be feasible, suitable, or effective for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the requirements are unclear, unstable, or complex, when the test automation tools or skills are not available or adequate, when the testing objectives or levels are not aligned with the unit testing, etc.

Test levels should be defined such that the exit criteria of one level are part of the entry criteria for the next level: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with sequential software development models, such as the waterfall model, the V-model, or the W-model, in which the software development and testing activities are performed in a linear and sequential order, with well-defined phases, deliverables, and dependencies. Test levels are the stages of testing that correspond to the levels of integration of the software system, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Test levels should have clear and measurable entry criteria and exit criteria, which are the conditions that must be met before starting or finishing a test level. In sequential software development models, the exit criteria of one test level are usually part of the entry criteria for the next test level, to ensure that the software system is ready and stable for the next level of testing. However, this is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be relevant, flexible, or efficient for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the software development and testing activities are performed in an iterative and incremental order, with frequent changes, feedback, and adaptations, as in agile software development models, such as Scrum, Kanban, or XP, when the test levels are not clearly defined or distinguished, or when the test levels are performed in parallel or concurrently, etc.

Test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly: This is a specific testing practice that is associated with uniform software development models, such as the spiral model, the incremental model, or the prototyping model, in which the software development and testing activities are performed in a cyclical and repetitive manner, with similar phases, deliverables, and processes. Test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. In uniform software development models, the test objectives may be the same for all test levels, as the testing process is repeated for each cycle or iteration, with similar focus, scope, and perspective of testing. However, this is not a good testing practice to be applied regardless of the chosen software development model, as it may not be appropriate, realistic, or effective for testing in some contexts or situations, such as when the software development and testing activities are performed in a hierarchical and modular manner, with different phases, deliverables, and dependencies, as in sequential software development models, such as the waterfall model, the V-model, or the W-model, when the test objectives vary according to the test levels, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing, or when the test objectives change according to the feedback, the learning, or the adaptation of the testing process, as in agile software development models, such as Scrum, Kanban, or XP, etc. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.1, Testing and the Software Development Lifecycle1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles1

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

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles1

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

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

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

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.4, Test Implementation1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.5, Test Execution1

ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.6, Test Closure1

ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Work Product Review, Static Testing, Early Testing, Test-driven Development, Test Level, Entry Criterion, Exit Criterion, Test Objective, Test Basis, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2

An inspection is a type of review that follows a defined process with formal entry and exit criteria and roles and responsibilities for participants. An inspection can be performed by peers with different roles, such as moderator, author, reviewer and scribe. The following statement about inspection is not true:

B) The main purpose of an inspection is to find solutions to the problems. This statement is not true, as the main purpose of an inspection is to find defects or issues in a work product, not to find solutions to the problems. Finding solutions to the problems is a debugging or problem-solving activity that is usually performed by the author or developer after receiving the inspection report. The following statements about inspection are true:

A) An inspection may be led by a trained moderator who shall not be the author. This statement is true, as an inspection requires a moderator role who leads the inspection process and ensures that it follows the rules and standards. The moderator should be trained in inspection techniques and should not be the author of the work product under inspection, in order to avoid bias or conflict of interest.

C) An inspection can be performed by peers. This statement is true, as an inspection involves peer review, which means that the work product under inspection is evaluated by people who have similar roles or expertise as the author, but who are not directly involved in creating or modifying the work product.

D) An inspection shall follow a formal process based on rules and checklists with entry and exit criteria. This statement is true, as an inspection follows a formal process that consists of six main steps: planning, kick-off meeting, individual preparation, review meeting, rework and follow-up. Each step has defined rules and checklists to guide the participants and ensure consistency and quality. Each step also has entry and exit criteria to ensure that the prerequisites and objectives are met before moving to the next step. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 28-29.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Test analysis involves identifying the features to be tested and deriving test conditions. It is the phase where testers analyze the test basis (e.g., requirements, specifications) to identify testable aspects of the system. Test design (A) focuses on creating test cases, test implementation (C) involves preparing the test environment, and test execution (D) runs the tests.

This answer is correct because a walkthrough is a type of review where the author of the work product leads the review process and explains the work product to the reviewers. The reviewers are not required to prepare for the review in advance, and the main objective of the walkthrough is to establish a common understanding of the work product and to identify any major defects or issues. A walkthrough is usually informal and does not follow a defined process or roles. In this case, the review for a high-level architectural document written by a software architect matches the characteristics of a walkthrough. References: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.4.2.2

To achieve 100% branch coverage of the process flow, we need to test both the true and false outcomes of the condition (User presses Cancel). Branch coverage is a type of structural testing that measures how many decision outcomes in a program have been executed by a test suite. Branch coverage can be used to assess the adequacy or completeness of a test suite.

To test the true outcome of the condition, we need a test case that simulates the user pressing Cancel after booking a bill. This test case will exit the loop and end the process flow.

To test the false outcome of the condition, we need a test case that simulates the user not pressing Cancel after booking a bill. This test case will repeat the loop and book another bill.

Therefore, we need at least two test cases to achieve 100% branch coverage of the process flow. One test case for each possible outcome of the condition.

Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 40-41.

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)​.

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.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The primary objectives of testing, as outlined in the ISTQB CTFL v4.0 syllabus, include verifying whether specified requirements are met (A), detecting failures and defects (B), and validating that the test object functions as expected (D). However, "finding errors" (C) is not a direct objective. Errors result from human mistakes, but testing primarily identifies defects, which are flaws in the system that cause failures. Testing aims to reveal defects rather than directly identify errors in the code.

The Waterfall model exemplifies a software development model that does not support the principle of early testing. In the Waterfall model, each phase must be completed before the next begins, which delays testing until after the completion of the earlier phases like requirements gathering and design. This can often result in finding defects later in the development cycle, making them more expensive and time-consuming to fix​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

Equivalence partitioning is a black-box test design technique where inputs to the software or system are divided into groups that are expected to exhibit similar behavior. For an integer field that should accept values from 1 to 15, the valid equivalence class is 1 through 15. The invalid equivalence classes are numbers less than 1 and numbers more than 15. Therefore, option D, "Less than 1, 1 through 15, more than 15," correctly identifies the valid equivalence class along with the two invalid classes, covering all possible input scenarios for the field. Options A, B, and C either do not accurately capture the valid range or incorrectly specify the range boundaries.

Option D correctly explains what is represented by the lines A, B and the axes X, Y in a testing metrics chart. According to option D:

X-axis represents Time

Y-axis represents Count

Line A represents Number of open bugs

Line B represents Total number of executed tests

This information is essential in understanding and analyzing the testing metrics of a completed project.

According to the ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, page 18, a failure is “an event in which a component or system does not perform a required function within specified limits”. In this case, the calculator software does not perform the required function of calculating the correct result for 5+6 within the specified limits of accuracy and precision. Therefore, this is an example of a failure.

The other options are incorrect because:

A mistake is “a human action that produces an incorrect result” (page 25). A mistake is not an event, but an action, and it may or may not lead to a failure. For example, a mistake could be a typo in the code, a wrong assumption in the design, or a misunderstanding of the requirement.

A fault is “a defect in a component or system that can cause the component or system to fail to perform its required function” (page 16). A fault is not an event, but a defect, and it may or may not cause a failure. For example, a fault could be a logical error in the code, a missing specification in the design, or a contradiction in the requirement.

An error is “the difference between a computed, observed, or measured value or condition and the true, specified, or theoretically correct value or condition” (page 15). An error is not an event, but a difference, and it may or may not result in a failure. For example, an error could be a rounding error in the calculation, a measurement error in the observation, or a deviation error in the condition.

References = ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms, Version 4.0, 2018, pages 15-18, 25; ISTQB CTFL 4.0 - Sample Exam - Answers, Version 1.1, 2023, Question 96, page 34.

Acceptance testing is a level of testing performed to verify that a software product meets the agreed acceptance criteria and is acceptable for delivery. Acceptance testing is often performed by the customers or system users, who are the main stakeholders of the software product. The main goal of acceptance testing is to build confidence in the system, not find defects, as defects should have been detected and fixed in earlier levels of testing. Acceptance testing is the last level of testing performed prior to system release, unless there are any changes or fixes that require re-testing. Testing of disaster recovery and backup/restore is usually part of acceptance testing, as these are important aspects of system reliability and security that affect the customer satisfaction and trust. Therefore, statement A is not correct, while statements B, C and D are correct. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 2, page 20-21.

Checklist-based testing involves using checklists that contain items, such as potential test conditions, that should be tested. These checklists are often based on insights into what is important to the user, potential areas where software might fail, and specific aspects that need to be tested. It provides a structured yet flexible approach to testing, ensuring key areas are covered while allowing testers to use their experience and understanding of the system. Checklist-based testing is not limited to non-functional testing but can be applied to various types of testing, including functional testing.

Defect clustering is a testing principle that states that a small number of modules contain most of the defects detected during pre-release testing, or are responsible for most of the operational failures. Defect clustering can be explained by Pareto’s principle (also known as the 80-20 rule), which states that approximately 80% of the problems are found in 20% of the modules. Defect clustering suggests a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, as it implies that more effort should be allocated to test the modules that have shown high defect density or criticality. Pesticide paradox is another testing principle that states that if the same tests are repeated over and over again, eventually they will no longer find any new defects. Pesticide paradox suggests a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but not based on defect clustering, but rather on test diversity and coverage. Early testing is a testing principle that states that testing activities should start as early as possible in the software development life cycle and should be focused on defined objectives. Early testing does not suggest a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but rather a proactive approach to prevent defects from occurring or propagating. Absence-of-errors fallacy is a testing principle that states that finding and fixing defects does not help if the system built is unusable and does not fulfill the users’ needs and expectations. Absence-of-errors fallacy does not suggest a change to the current test strategy for the next test cycle, but rather a focus on quality attributes and user requirements. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 1, page 9-10.

Debugging the software to find the reason for defects is not a common objective of testing, but rather a task of development or maintenance. Debugging is a process of locating and fixing errors in the software code, while testing is a process of finding and reporting defects in the software behavior or quality. Testing does not aim to fix defects, but rather to provide information on their existence and impact. The other options are common objectives of testing. Finding defects in the software is one of the main objectives of testing, as it helps to improve the quality and reliability of the software. Preventing defects is another objective of testing, as it helps to avoid rework and reduce costs and risks. Providing information on the status of the system is another objective of testing, as it helps to support decision making and risk management. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after changes. Regression testing can help prevent re-opening of defects fixed earlier by ensuring that they do not cause any new failures or side effects. The first recommendation to the company is to verify existing regression test suite are adequate, and augment it, if required, in order to ensure that defects fixed earlier get re-tested in each subsequent build. This can help improve the coverage and effectiveness of regression testing and detect any regression defects as soon as possible. Automating existing test suites may also help reduce the time and effort required for regression testing, but this is not the first recommendation, as automation may not be feasible or cost-effective for all test cases. Analyzing the product modules containing maximum defects and getting them thoroughly tested and defects fixed as a one-time activity may also help reduce the defect density and improve the quality of those modules, but this is not the first recommendation, as it does not address the root cause of re-opening defects fixed earlier. Training or replacing the teams responsible for development and testing of the modules containing maximum number of defects may also help improve their skills or performance, but this is not the first recommendation, as it may not be necessary or appropriate for all teams. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 2, page 19; Chapter 4, page 45.

You should choose a test technique because you need to match the way you test to the content of the product under test. A test technique is a method or process for deriving and selecting test cases based on some criteria or rules. Different test techniques are suitable for different types of software products, depending on their characteristics, functionalities, requirements, specifications, risks, etc. Choosing a test technique helps to ensure that the test cases are relevant, effective, and efficient for the product under test. The other options are not correct reasons to choose a test technique. Time constraints are not a factor for choosing a test technique, but rather for prioritizing or optimizing testing activities. Covering the full scope of the product’s functionality is not a guarantee of choosing a test technique, but rather a goal of testing. Choosing a test technique is not a common practice in software testing, but rather a professional skill and responsibility. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 31.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

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

Independent testing offers several advantages, such as unbiased testing and detection of different defects. However, a drawback is that an independent test team may be isolated from the development team and project team. This can lead to communication gaps, reduced collaboration, and a lack of understanding of the project context.

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) syllabus v4.0, an independent test team may not have the same level of understanding of the system as the development team, leading to potential issues in communication and integration​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​.

Testing is necessary for various reasons, such as:

To detect defects and failures that may affect the quality, performance, reliability or security of a software product or system

To verify that a software product or system meets its specified requirements, expectations and standards

To validate that a software product or system fulfills its intended purpose and satisfies its stakeholders’ needs

To provide information and feedback about the status and risks of a software product or system

To comply with regulations or contractual obligations that mandate testing for certain types of software products or systems The following statements describe some reasons why testing is necessary:

A) The customer decided that 100% branch coverage shall be achieved. This is a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a contractual obligation or a quality standard that requires testing to measure and achieve a certain level of code coverage.

C) For avionics and pharmaceutical systems software testing is mandated by standards. This is a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a regulation or a compliance requirement that mandates testing for certain types of software products or systems that have high safety or security risks.

D) The risks associated with delivering the system are far higher than the cost of testing. This is a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a risk-based approach that considers testing as an investment to reduce the probability and impact of potential failures or defects. The following statement does not describe a reason why testing is necessary:

B) The acquisition of test automation tools was based on the assumption that it will be used m all projects. This is not a reason why testing is necessary, as it reflects a business decision or a resource allocation that does not justify the need or purpose of testing. Test automation tools are not always suitable or beneficial for all projects, and testing can be performed with or without test automation tools. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 1, page 5-6.

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

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

A test plan is a management document that outlines the scope, objectives, schedule, resources, and risks of the testing process. The budget and schedule (A) are essential components as they help plan resources and timeline constraints.

(B) is incorrect because defect analysis is part of the test summary report, not the test plan.

(C) is incorrect because final reports summarize execution, while the test plan is created before testing starts.

(D) is incorrect because test logs are execution artifacts rather than planning elements.

A test plan guides testing activities and ensures alignment with project objectives.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

A correct list of boundary values for the P input should include the minimum and maximum values of the valid range (15 and 350), as well as the values just below and above the boundaries (14 and 351). Boundary value analysis is a test design technique that involves testing the values at or near the boundaries of an input domain or output range, as these values are more likely to cause errors than values in the middle. Option B satisfies this condition, as it has all four boundary values (14, 15, 350, 351). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 99999), option C has two values outside the range (999 and 100000), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

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.

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.

Configuration management of testware is a critical aspect of maintaining the integrity and traceability of test assets throughout the testing lifecycle. The main benefit of configuration management is to ensure that all testware items, such as test cases, test scripts, test data, and test results, are systematically identified, version controlled, and tracked for changes in relation to each other.

Option C accurately describes this benefit. By applying configuration management principles to testware, teams can manage changes to test assets efficiently, ensuring that the testware remains consistent, up-to-date, and aligned with the version of the software under test. This control mechanism facilitates the reproducibility of tests, enhances the reliability of testing activities, and supports traceability from requirements through to defects.

Options A, B, and D describe other aspects of test management and testing processes but do not capture the core benefit of configuration management of testware, which is centered on the systematic control and tracking of testware items.

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

A decision table is a technique that shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). A decision table consists of four quadrants: conditions (inputs), actions (outputs), condition entries (values) and action entries (results). The following statements about decision tables are true:

II. Test cases derived from decision tables can be used for component tests. Decision tables can be used to test components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions. Decision tables can help cover all possible combinations or scenarios in a systematic way.

III. Several test cases can be selected for each column of the decision table. A column of a decision table represents a unique combination of condition entries and action entries. Several test cases can be selected for each column by varying other input values or expected results that are not part of the decision table. The following statements about decision tables are false:

I. Generally, decision tables are generated for low risk test items. Decision tables are not related to risk level, but rather to complexity level. Decision tables are generated for test items that have complex logic or multiple conditions and actions that need to be tested.

IV. The conditions in the decision table represent negative tests generally. The conditions in the decision table represent both positive and negative tests, depending on whether they are valid or invalid inputs for the test item. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 4, page 42-43.

Test Management tools are designed to support the planning, execution, and monitoring of the testing process. They provide features for managing test cases, test runs, tracking defects, and reporting on testing activities. However, the statement in option C describes Test Management tools as monitoring and reporting on the system's behavior during testing activities, which is not accurate. Test Management tools focus on the testing process itself rather than on the behavior of the system under test.

Test data preparation tools (A) indeed create and manage test data for use during test execution.

Test execution tools (B) automate the execution of test cases and the comparison of actual outcomes against expected results.

Test comparators (D) are tools that compare actual outcomes with expected outcomes, highlighting discrepancies.

Therefore, option C is the correct answer as it inaccurately describes the function of Test Management tools.

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.

The relationship between impact analysis and regression testing in maintenance testing is that impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Maintenance testing is a type of testing that is performed on an existing software product after it has been delivered or deployed, in order to ensure that it still meets its requirements and functions correctly after a change or a modification. Maintenance testing can be triggered by various reasons, such as corrective maintenance (fixing defects), adaptive maintenance (adapting to new environments), perfective maintenance (improving performance), preventive maintenance (avoiding future problems), etc. Impact analysis is a technique that is used to assess the extent and nature of changes introduced by maintenance activities on the software product or project. Impact analysis helps to identify which parts of the software product are affected by the changes, which parts need to be modified or updated accordingly, which parts need to be retested or verified for correctness or compatibility, etc. Regression testing is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change or a modification. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of maintenance activities on the software product’s functionality or quality. Regression testing can be performed at various levels and scopes depending on the impact analysis results. Therefore, in maintenance testing, impact analysis is used to evaluate the amount of regression testing to be performed. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 20.

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

Matching the main review process activities with the specific review activities, we see that planning includes estimating effort and timeframe (2) and selecting people to participate (4). Initiating a review involves distributing work products and other material (5). Issue communication and analysis includes evaluating the review findings (6). Fixing and reporting would entail creating defect reports (1) and recording the updated status of defects (3).

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Testing and debugging are separate but related activities. Testing executes the software to identify failures that result from defects (A). Debugging is the developer's responsibility and involves finding the cause of a failure (defect), analyzing it, and fixing the defect. The ISTQB syllabus explicitly differentiates these activities. Testing does not modify the software, whereas debugging does.

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

, Requirements Engineering Fundamentals.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Equivalence partitioning (EP) divides input values into classes where test cases represent all possible values of each partition. The partitions in this scenario are:

≤7 (too cold → W)

8-21 (standstill → X)

22-29 (ideal → Y)

≥30 (too hot → Z)

Option C ({7,10,25,29}) covers all partitions by selecting representative values:

7 → Too cold (W)

10 → Standstill (X)

25 → Ideal (Y)

29 → Upper boundary of ideal (Y)

Other options do not cover all partitions adequately.

Good traceability between the test basis and test work products provides several advantages: i. Analyzing the impact of changes: Traceability allows for easy identification of which parts of the test work products will be affected by changes in the requirements or design, facilitating impact analysis. iv. Making testing auditable: Traceability ensures that there is a clear connection between the requirements and the test cases, which makes the testing process auditable and provides evidence that all requirements have been tested​​.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

The correct tool for creating test cases, test data, and test procedures is a test design and implementation tool (A).

(B) is incorrect as static testing tools focus on code analysis, not test case creation.

(C) is incorrect because DevOps tools manage automation pipelines, not test design.

(D) is incorrect because test execution tools focus on running tests rather than designing them.

Test design tools help optimize test coverage, reduce redundancy, and improve efficiency.

Component testing is a test level. A test level is a group of test activities that are organized and managed together based on some common characteristics or objectives. A test level can be defined based on various factors, such as the scope and target of testing, the phase and model of development, the stakeholders and roles involved in testing, etc. Component testing (also known as unit testing or module testing) is a test level that focuses on verifying the functionality and quality of individual software components (such as modules, classes, functions, methods, etc.). Component testing can be performed by developers or testers using various techniques and tools depending on the type and complexity of the components. The other options are not test levels. Integration testing is another test level that focuses on verifying the functionality and quality of groups of software components that interact with each other or with external systems. Functional testing is a type of black-box dynamic testing that verifies that the system under test performs its intended functions according to its requirements or specifications. Experience-based testing is a category of test design 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. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 19.

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.

When developers are trying to identify and remove a defect, they need clear information on what went wrong and what was expected. The items that will be most useful to developers in this context are the expected results (item 1), the actual results (item 2), and a description of the defect including steps to reproduce, screenshots, and database dumps (item 5). This information helps developers understand the nature of the defect and provides the necessary details to reproduce and diagnose the issue effectively.

A decision table is a technique that should be used to cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an Automated Teller Machine (ATM). A decision table shows combinations of inputs and/or stimuli (causes) with their associated outputs and/or actions (effects). A decision table consists of four quadrants: conditions (inputs), actions (outputs), condition entries (values) and action entries (results). A decision table can be used to test components that have multiple inputs and outputs that depend on logical combinations of conditions. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify three input conditions: the bank card is valid, the PIN code is correct, and money is available in the user’s account. We can also identify four output actions: the card is rejected, the ATM asks for another PIN code, the ATM asks for another amount, and the ATM dispenses the money. A decision table can show all possible combinations of these conditions and actions in a systematic way.

Use case based testing is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Use case based testing is a technique that verifies that a software product or system meets its specified requirements or user stories by executing realistic scenarios or workflows. Use case based testing can be used to test components that have complex or dynamic interactions with users or other systems. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify several use cases, such as withdraw money, check balance, transfer money, etc. Each use case can have one or more scenarios that describe the steps and outcomes of the interaction. However, use case based testing may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some scenarios may be omitted or overlooked.

Boundary value analysis is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. 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 test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify boundary values for the input amount, such as the minimum and maximum amount allowed by the system or the user’s account. However, boundary value analysis may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not have boundary values or may not be related to input values.

Equivalence class partitioning is not a technique that can cover all possible combinations of input conditions for withdrawing money from an ATM. Equivalence class 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 class partitioning can be used to test components that have input values that can be divided into partitions of equivalent data. For example, for testing the ATM, we can identify equivalence partitions for the input amount, such as valid amount (within the range allowed by the system and the user’s account) and invalid amount (outside the range allowed by the system or the user’s account). However, equivalence class partitioning may not cover all possible combinations of input conditions, as some conditions may not be related to input values or may have more than two partitions. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 34-46.

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​​.

Component testing (also known as unit testing or module testing) is a level of testing that focuses on verifying the functionality and quality of individual software components (such as modules, classes, functions, methods, etc.). Component testing mainly tests interfaces and interaction between components, as well as internal logic and data structures of the components. Component testing may be applied using a test-first approach (such as test-driven development or behavior-driven development), where tests are written before the code is implemented. Component testing does not identify defects in modules and classes, as this is a result of component testing, not an objective. Simulators and stubs may be required for component testing, as they can simulate or replace missing or incomplete components or external systems that are needed for testing. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 19.

The correct set of data for valid equivalence class partitions should include one value from each equivalence class, and no value from outside the range. Option C satisfies this condition, as it has one value from each of the four equivalence classes (50, 100, 250, 500). Option A has two values from the same equivalence class (100 and 200), option B has values outside the range (0 and 0.99), and option D has two values from the same equivalence class (1000 and 500). Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 35.

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.

A test progress report is prepared during a test activity and provides updates on the current status of testing activities, including progress made, issues encountered, and test metrics. A test summary report, on the other hand, is prepared at the end of a test activity and provides a comprehensive overview of the testing carried out, including the final status, test results, defect summaries, and overall conclusions.

Entry and exit criteria are used to determine when to start and stop testing, respectively.

Entry Criteria:

These are conditions that should be met before testing begins.

Examples:

2. The test automation tool has been installed and properly configured

4. The performance test environment has been set-up and is available

5. The user stories have proper acceptance criteria defined

Exit Criteria:

These are conditions that should be met before testing concludes.

Examples:

1. A defined level of code coverage has been achieved

3. The number of unresolved defects is within the predefined limit

6. The testing budge​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​ spent and the project sponsor bears the risk of not testing any further

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 syllabus, these criteria help in effectively managing the testing process【6†source】.