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

The figure depicts the life-cycle of a defect using state transition testing. State transition testing is a technique that models how a system transitions from one state to another depending on events or conditions. The figure shows six states (S0 to S5) and seven transitions (T0 to T6). The correct sequence of state transitions that follows the figure is S0->S1->S2->S3->S5->S1->S2->S3. This sequence represents the following scenario:

• S0: The defect is not yet detected (initial state).
• T0: The defect is detected by testing (event).
• S1: The defect is reported and registered (state).
• T1: The defect is assigned to a developer for fixing (event).
• S2: The defect is being fixed by the developer (state).
• T2: The developer fixes the defect and delivers a new version (event).
• S3: The defect is verified by testing (state).
• T5: The testing fails to confirm that the defect is fixed (event).
• S5: The defect is rejected by testing (state).
• T6: The defect is reassigned to a developer for fixing (event).
• S1: The defect is reported and registered (state).
• T1: The defect is assigned to a developer for fixing (event).
• S2: The defect is being fixed by the developer (state).
• T2: The developer fixes the defect and delivers a new version (event).
• S3: The defect is verified by testing (state). The other sequences are incorrect, as they do not follow the transitions shown in the figure. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 40-41.

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.

Quality Assurance (QA) activities are focused on providing confidence that quality requirements will be fulfilled through planned and systematic processes. These activities are preventive in nature, aimed at ensuring quality is built into the product from the beginning.

• Requirements elicitation (A) is part of the requirements engineering process and is concerned with gathering the needs and conditions to meet for a new or altered product.
• Defect analysis (B) can be part of QA activities as it involves analyzing defects to prevent them in future development cycles.
• Functional Testing (C) and Performance Testing (D) are types of dynamic testing, which are actually Quality Control activities rather than Quality Assurance. They are concerned with the identification of defects in the product, not with the processes to prevent defects.

Since the question asks for an activity that is NOT part of Quality Assurance, options A and B are incorrect because they can be part of QA activities. Between C and D, while both are dynamic testing activities, Functional Testing (C) is more directly related to verifying the functionality against specified requirements, which is more aligned with Quality Control. Therefore, C is the best answer.

• Effort estimate does not depend on the budget of the project, but rather on the scope, complexity, and quality of the software product and the testing activities1. Budget is a constraint that may affect the feasibility and accuracy of the effort estimate, but it is not a factor that determines the effort estimate. Effort estimate is the amount of work required to complete the testing activities, measured in terms of person-hours, person-days, or person-months2.
• The other options are correct because:

References =

• 1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 154
• 2 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 155
• 3 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 156
• 4 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 157
• 5 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 158
• 6 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 159
• 7 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 16
• [8] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 160
• [9] ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, 2023, p. 161

According to the ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0, the life cycle of a defect typically follows a sequence from its discovery to its closure. In the provided figure, it starts with S0 (New), moves to S1 (Assigned), then to S2 (Resolved), followed by S3 (Verified). If the defect is not fixed, it can be Re-opened (S5) and goes back for verification (S3). Once verified, it is Closed (S4). References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Section 1.4.3, Page 17.

Testing can contribute to higher quality by helping to measure the quality of software. Quality is defined as the degree to which a component or system satisfies specified requirements and customer or user needs and expectations. Testing is a process of evaluating a component or system by applying inputs and observing outputs, and comparing them with expected results. Testing can help to measure the quality of software by providing information on its functionality, performance, usability, security, reliability, etc. Testing can also help to identify and report defects in software, which can lead to improvement actions and quality assurance activities. The other options are not accurate descriptions of how testing can contribute to higher quality. Testing does not ensure that remaining defects are documented, but rather that detected defects are reported. Testing does not remove errors in software, but rather finds defects in software behavior or quality. Testing does not eliminate the risk with software, but rather assesses and manages the risk with software. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 3.

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

• ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0: https://istqb-main-web-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/ISTQB_CTFL_Syllabus-v4.0.pdf

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】.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

In an incident report, essential details provide context and facilitate the investigation and resolution of the incident. The missing elements in the given incident report are:

I. Identification or configuration of the application: This detail is crucial as it specifies which version or configuration of the application is affected, helping in reproducing the issue. IV. The actions and/or conditions that came before pressing the button: Understanding the sequence of actions leading to the issue is vital for replicating and diagnosing the problem.

The name of the developer (II) and the recommendation of the developer (III) are not typically included in an incident report as they do not contribute to identifying or resolving the incident. The focus is on the incident's details, reproduction steps, and the system's state rather than on personnel or proposed solutions at this stage. Therefore, option B, which includes both I and IV, is the correct answer.

Static analysis involves analyzing the software's code, design, and structure without executing the program. It can uncover various types of defects, including security vulnerabilities (II) and non-conformance to specifications and standards (III). However, static analysis cannot replace dynamic testing (I), which involves executing the software to observe its behavior under various conditions. Dynamic testing can identify failures that static analysis cannot, such as those related to runtime issues and interaction between different parts of the software. Statement IV is false because static analysis does not detect failures; it detects defects. Failures are observed when the software is executed, which is beyond the scope of static analysis.

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.

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.

An incident is any event that occurs during testing that requires investigation. An incident report is a document that records the details of an incident. The next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation is to try to recreate the incident before reporting. This can help confirm that the incident is reproducible and not caused by a random or external factor. This can also help gather more information about the incident, such as the steps to reproduce it, the expected and actual results, the severity and priority of the incident, or any screenshots or logs that can illustrate the incident. Trying to identify the code fragment causing the problem is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this is a debugging activity that is usually performed by developers after receiving the incident report. Sending an email to the developer and not reporting the bug is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this is an informal and unstructured way of communicating incidents that can lead to confusion, inconsistency or loss of information. Reporting the incident as is without any further action is not the next step the tester should take prior to recording the deviation, as this can result in incomplete or inaccurate incident reports that can hamper the investigation and resolution of incidents. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, Chapter 3, page 32-33.

The ISTQB CTFL syllabus identifies several causes for defects in software. One prominent reason, as highlighted in the curriculum, is the pressure and rush to meet tight deadlines, which can lead to insufficiently reviewed or tested code being moved into further stages of testing or production. This scenario describes rushing to meet a deadline as a potential cause for defects because it may compromise the thoroughness of code development and testing.References:ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 1.4.1 "Why is Testing Necessary?".

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

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.

Statements II, III and V are true about test reports. Test reports are documents that provide information on the results and status of testing activities for a given period or phase. Test reports should give stakeholders information as basis for decisions, such as whether to release the software product, whether to continue testing, whether to change the scope or priorities of testing, etc. Test reports should summarize what happened through a period of testing, such as what test cases were executed, what defects were found, what risks were identified, what issues were encountered, what achievements were made, etc. Test reports should include information about remaining risks, such as what defects are still open, what test cases are still pending, what functionalities are still untested, what uncertainties are still unresolved, etc. Statements I and IV are not true about test reports. Test reports do not need to be approved by the test team, the development team, or the customer, unless it is specified by the test policy or the test plan. Test reports only need to be reviewed and verified by the test leader or the test manager before being distributed to the intended recipients. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 141.

State transition testing is a black-box testing technique where test cases are designed to cover states and transitions of a state machine.

Given the state model with the following transitions:

• PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION
• IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED
• IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED
• SHIPPED -> INVOICED
• INVOICED -> CANCELLED
• CANCELLED -> PLACED

To cover all transitions at least once, we need to create a sequence that covers all six transitions.

Option A: IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED -> PLACED- Misses SHIPPED -> INVOICED and INVOICED -> CANCELLED transitions.

Option B: IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> INVOICED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION- Covers all transitions.

Option C: PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> SHIPPED -> CANCELLED ​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​​ (Udemy)​sses INVOICED -> CANCELLED transition.

Option D: PLACED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> CANCELLED -> PLACED -> IN PRODUCTION -> CANCELLED- Misses SHIPPED -> INVOICED and INVOICED -> CANCELLED transitions.

Given these, Option B covers all the transitions【6†source】【9†source】.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• 10 Sample Exams ISTQB Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0

The test engineer should re-run the tests, in order to ensure that new defects have not been introduced by the fix. This is also known as regression testing, which is a type of testing that verifies that previously tested software still performs correctly after a change. Regression testing helps to detect any side effects or unintended consequences of a fix or a modification. The other options are incorrect reasons for re-running the tests. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, as they have already been run, and results recorded, because this ignores the possibility of new defects caused by the fix. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, they should be part of the developer tests, because this assumes that developer tests are sufficient and reliable, which may not be true. The test engineer should not re-run the tests, because the defect shows that the test cases need to be updated, because this does not address the impact of the fix on other test cases or functionalities. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 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)​.

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

This question relates to identifying product risks, which are potential problems associated with the product itself, such as software functionality, reliability, usability, and performance. Option A describes a scenario where the application might not meet performance requirements under specific conditions (up to 300 concurrent users), which directly impacts the product's ability to perform its intended function. This is a classic example of a product risk, as it concerns the product's quality and its ability to meet user needs. Options B, C, and D, on the other hand, relate to project risks, which are concerns related to the management and execution of the project, such as tool acquisition, environment configuration, and team expertise, rather than the quality of the product itself.

The following statements about risk-based testing are correct:

• II) Tests should be prioritized to find tie critical detects as early as possible. Risk-based testing involves prioritizing tests based on risk level, which reflects both the likelihood and impact of defects or failures. Tests with higher risk level should be executed earlier than tests with lower risk level, in order to find and fix critical defects as soon as possible.
• III) Non-testing activities may also help to reduce risk. Risk-based testing does not only involve testing activities, but also other activities that can help mitigate risks, such as reviews, inspections, audits, simulations or prototyping.

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

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

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

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

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

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

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

An incident report during testing should focus on factual observations of failures or defects in the system, including their impacts and how they deviate from expected results. Options A, C, and D describe specific issues that are directly related to the system's behavior or performance and are suitable for inclusion in an incident report. Option B, which describes the user interface as "complicated and confusing" and relates to the tester's personal difficulty in following the test script, is more subjective and relates to the tester's experience rather than an objective observation of a system failure. Therefore, option B is the least appropriate for an incident report​​.

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 applied to both input and output values. Based on the given requirement, we can identify two input values: age and weekend. Age should be an integer of 0 or above, and weekend means Friday to Sunday inclusive. The following statement is not correct:

• A) Thursday is a valid input boundary value. This statement is not correct, as Thursday is not a boundary value for the input weekend. The boundary values for the input weekend are Friday and Sunday, as they are at the edge of the equivalence partition that represents weekend days. The following statements are correct:
• B) A minimum of 6 valid test cases are derived from boundary value analysis based on input age. This statement is correct, as we can derive six valid test cases based on input age by using the minimum and maximum values for each equivalence partition defined by the requirement. The equivalence partitions for input age are: under 7 (0 to 6), 7 to 13 inclusive (7 to 13), and greater than 65 (66 and above). The minimum and maximum values for each partition are: 0 and 6, 7 and 13, and 66 and any value above it.
• C) $3.01 is a valid output boundary value. This statement is correct, as $3.01 is a boundary value for the output additional fee. The additional fee can have four possible values depending on the input age: $0 (for visitors aged under 7), $2.40 (for visitors aged 7 to 13 inclusive with a 20% discount), $1.50 (for visitors aged greater than 65 with a 50% discount), and $3 (for visitors aged between 14 and 65). The boundary values for the output additional fee are $0 and $3, as they are at the edge of an equivalence partition or at the smallest incremental distance on either side of an edge. Therefore, $3.01 is a valid output boundary value, as it is at the smallest incremental distance above $3.
• D) 7 and 13 are boundary values for the equivalence partition including age 10. This statement is correct, as 7 and 13 are boundary values for the equivalence partition that represents visitors aged 7 to 13 inclusive. This partition includes age 10, which is an internal value within the partition. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 4, page 37-38.

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.

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 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.

The correct answer can be derived by applying the given rules to each case:

• A is ST certified and has 12 years of testing experience, which is more than 10 years. Therefore, A does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown.
• B is not ST certified and has 7 years of testing experience, which is between 5 and 10 years. Therefore, B matches rule 3 and the result is limited access.
• C is not ST certified and has 3 years of testing experience, which is less than 5 years. Therefore, C does not match any of the rules and the result is unknown. Verified References: This question does not require any external references, as it is based on logical reasoning.

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

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

• TC1 (Priority 1)
• **TC​ (ISTQB not-for-profit association)​ity 2, dependent on TC1)
• TC2 (Priority 3, dependent on TC1)
• TC4 (Priority 4)
• TC5 (Priority 5)
• TC6 (Priority 6, dependent on TC4)

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

References:

• Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0
• ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 4.0 (2023)

Test exit criteria are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can be concluded. Test exit criteria are usually defined in the test plan and agreed by the stakeholders. Test exit criteria can be based on various factors, such as test coverage, defect status, quality level, risk level, etc. Test schedules would be the least likely to be used as the basis for test exit criteria, because test schedules are not directly related to the quality or performance of the software product, but rather to the time or resources allocated for testing. Test schedules can be used as the basis for test entry criteria, which are the conditions or requirements that must be met before testing can start. The other options are more likely to be used as the basis for test exit criteria. Cost of testing performed so far can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can indicate the return on investment or the cost-benefit ratio of testing. Confidence of testers in tested code can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can reflect the level of satisfaction or assurance of the testers about the quality or reliability of the software product. Number of unfixed defects can be used as a basis for test exit criteria, because it can indicate the level of risk or impact of the remaining defects on the software product. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 13.

The IEEE 829 standard is a widely used specification for test documentation, but it is not mandatory or universal. Most test documentation regimes follow this spec to some degree, with changes done to fit a specific situation or organization. The standard does not require any approval from management, marketing or development for any deviation, nor does it depend on the type of project (military or consumer market). The standard also does not guarantee high quality test documentation regimes, as it only provides a general outline and format, not the actual content or quality criteria. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 16.

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

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.

 State testing techniques are a type of dynamic testing techniques that are based on the behavior of the system under test for different input conditions and events. Dynamic testing techniques require the system to be executed with test cases, whereas static testing techniques do not. Static testing techniques can be applied before the code is ready for execution, such as reviews, inspections, walkthroughs, and static analysis. Static testing techniques can help find defects early in the development process, improve the quality of the code, and reduce the cost and effort of dynamic testing. References = ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 Syllabus, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1, Page 281; ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Page 292

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.

The fundamental testing process includes activities that are directly related to the planning, preparation, execution, and evaluation of tests, as well as the closure activities of the testing phase. Option D, "Build release and maintenance," falls outside the scope of the fundamental testing process as it relates more to software development and operations rather than specific testing activities. Options A, "Archiving automation code," B, "Test status reporting," and C, "Test process improvement," are all activities that can be part of or associated with the fundamental testing process. Archiving automation code is part of test closure, test status reporting is part of test monitoring and control, and test process improvement can be an outcome of test closure activities.

Test exit criteria are the conditions that must be fulfilled before concluding a particular testing phase. These criteria act as a checkpoint to assess whether we have achieved the testing objectives and are done with testing1. Test exit criteria are typically defined in the test plan document, which is one of the outputs of the test planning phase. The test plan document describes the scope, approach, resources, and schedule of the testing activities. It also identifies the test items, the features to be tested, the testing tasks, the risks, and the test deliverables2. According to the ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, the test plan document should include the following information related to the test exit criteria3:

• The criteria for evaluating test completion, such as the percentage of test cases executed, the percentage of test coverage achieved, the number and severity of defects found and fixed, the quality and reliability of the software product, and the stakeholder satisfaction.
• The criteria for evaluating test process improvement, such as the adherence to the test strategy, the efficiency and effectiveness of the testing activities, the lessons learned and best practices identified, and the recommendations for future improvements.

Therefore, the test plan document is the most appropriate test document to find the test exit criteria described. The other options, such as test design specification, project plan, and requirements specification, are not directly related to the test exit criteria. The test design specification describes the test cases and test procedures for a specific test level or test type3. The project plan describes the overall objectives, scope, assumptions, risks, and deliverables of the software project4. The requirements specification describes the functional and non-functional requirements of the software product5. None of these documents specify the conditions for ending the testing process or evaluating the testing outcomes. References = ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing | Baeldung on Computer Science, Entry And Exit Criteria In Software Testing - Rishabh Software, Entry and Exit Criteria in Software Testing Life Cycle - STLC [2022 Updated] - Testsigma Blog, ISTQB® releases Certified Tester Foundation Level v4.0 (CTFL).

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.

• The question is about marking the correct sentences among the given statements related to defects, failures, and mistakes. According to the ISTQB glossary, the definitions of these terms are1:
• Therefore, out of the five given statements, only two are correct, namely:
• The other three statements are incorrect, namely:

References:

• 1: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms 4.0, 2023, available at ISTQB) and ASTQB).

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.

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.

A test case is a set of input values, execution preconditions, expected results and execution postconditions, developed for a particular objective or test condition. A test case is a sequence of actions for test execution that can be followed by a tester or a test automation tool. A test case is specified during the test implementation activity, which is the activity that prepares the testware needed for test execution. A test case does not include actual results, as these are obtained during test execution and compared with the expected results. A test case does not describe items or events to test, as these are derived from the test basis during the test analysis activity. A test case is not derived during the test design activity, as this is the activity that specifies the test conditions or objectives that need to be tested. Verified References: [A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer], Chapter 3, page 23-24; Chapter 4, page 34.

 A correct list of boundary values for the age input should include the minimum and maximum values of each age group (0, 12, 13, 18), as well as the values just below and above each boundary (-1, 19). 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 A satisfies this condition, as it has all six boundary values (-1, 0, 12, 13, 18, 19). Option B has two values from the same equivalence class (12 and 13), option C has only four boundary values (0, 12, 18, 19), and option D has no boundary values at all. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 34.

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

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

 The following should be included in a test status report: total number of open and closed defects, actual effort spent, and number of executed, failed, and blocked tests. A test status report is a document that provides information on the results and status of testing activities for a given period or phase. A test status report should include information that is relevant, accurate, and timely for the intended audience and purpose. Some of the information that should be included in a test status report are: total number of open and closed defects, which can indicate the defect trend and defect density of the software product; actual effort spent, which can indicate the productivity and efficiency of the testing process; number of executed, failed, and blocked tests, which can indicate the test progress and test coverage of the software product. The following should not be included in a test status report: estimation details, defect reports, and impact analysis. Estimation details are not part of a test status report, but rather part of a test plan or a test estimation document. Estimation details provide information on the expected time, resources, and costs for testing activities, not on the actual results or status of testing activities. Defect reports are not part of a test status report, but rather separate documents that provide detailed information on individual defects found during testing. Defect reports include information such as defect description, defect severity, defect priority, defect status, defect resolution, etc. Defect reports can be referenced or summarized in a test status report, but not included in full. Impact analysis is not part of a test status report, but rather part of a risk assessment or prioritization process. Impact analysis provides information on the potential effects or consequences of a change or a defect on the software product or project. Impact analysis can be used to evaluate the amount or scope of testing to be performed, but not to report the results or status of testing activities. Verified References: A Study Guide to the ISTQB® Foundation Level 2018 Syllabus - Springer, page 141.

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

References:

• ISTQB CTFL Syllabus v4.0: ISTQB Official Website
• ISTQB Foundation Level Resources v4.0: ASTQB Resources