Explanation / Rationale

“test” and “error” transitions cannot occur in one test case.
Neither can both “done” transitions.
This means we need at least three test cases to achieve transition coverage. For example:

TC1: test, done
TC2: run, error, done
TC3: run, pause, resume, pause, done

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. This is an example of a risk monitoring activity, not risk analysis
b) Is not correct. This is an example of an architectural decision, not related with testing
c) Is not correct. This is an example of performing a quantitative risk analysis and is not related to thoroughness or scope of testing
d) Is correct. This shows how risk analysis impacts the thoroughness of testing (i.e., the level of detail)

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The client is in a different location and time zone, so it may be difficult to communicate face-to-face
b) Is not correct. Dashboards are usually available to any user at any time, so the difference in time zones will not be as much of a hindrance to communication as verbal, face-to-face communication
c) Is not correct. Although the time difference between Europe and America is several hours, and this may cause some inconvenience, it's certainly not as great as with communicating face-to-face
d) Is not correct. Video conferencing tools are a convenient means of communication. Although communication between Europe and America during working hours usually requires one party to connect in the very early or very late hours, this is not as much of an inconvenience as verbal, face-to-face communication

Explanation / Rationale

Some defect types that can only be detected by static testing, such as unreachable code, design patterns not implemented as desired and defects in non-executable work products. Some defect types that can be found by both static testing and dynamic testing, such as a programming defect that can be observed by a reviewer in a code review and which causes an observable failure during dynamic testing. And some defect types that can only be detected by dynamic testing, such as performance issues or memory issues that can only be observed when executing the code or system.

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

Considering the attributes:

• Specified for walkthroughs, technical reviews, and inspections; thus, the reviews being performed cannot be informal reviews
• The purpose of evaluating quality is one of the most important objectives of a walkthrough
• This is not allowed for inspections and is typically not done in technical reviews. A moderator is needed in walkthroughs and is allowed for informal reviews
• All types of reviews can include individual preparation (even informal reviews)
• All types of reviews can produce a review report, although informal reviews do not require documentation

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The combination (T, T, F) does not match any rule. This is an example of omission, not a contradiction
b) Is not correct. The combination (T, F, T) matches only one column, R2, so there is no contradiction
c) Is not correct. Both combinations (T, T, T) and (F, T, T) match only one column, R1, so there is no contradiction
d) Is correct. The combination (F, F, F) matches both R2 and R3, but R2 and R3 have different actions, so this shows a contradiction between R2 and R3.

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. It is often possible to use dynamic testing to cause a test object to fail in ways that could never be achieved by the users, such as by using fault injection. However, if the failure can never occur with real end users, then identifying it is not especially valuable as testing is ultimately aimed at improving the work product for the end users. Spending time testing for failures that cannot occur with real users is not an efficient use of a tester’s time
b) Is not correct. Static testing in the form of static analysis is used by developers to identify defects in their program code earlier than can be achieved through dynamic testing. Note, however, that static testing (and static analysis) is used to detect defects, not failures, which are found by dynamic testing. Thus it is the use of the term ‘failures’ that makes this an incorrect option
c) Is not correct. Static analysis directly detects anomalies in code, which may be defects, and this is normally for the developer, not the customer. The provision of evidence for release by the use of static analysis of elements that provide no output is nonsense
d) Is correct. Reviews are a form of static testing that can be applied from the very start of the software development lifecycle and are used to find defects that can be removed before subsequent development activities waste effort on faulty requirements. If the defects are not detected and removed early on, then when the defect is found derived work products, such as the design and code, will need to be changed as they were based on faulty requirements

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. This is done by the testers
b) Is not correct. The product backlog is built and maintained by the product owner
c) Is not correct. This is done by the development team
d) Is not correct. This is a managerial role
e) Is correct. This is done by the testers

Explanation / Rationale

Considering each of the listed roles:

1. Scribe (or Recorder) - responsible for gathering feedback from reviewers and documenting review information, such as decisions made, and any new anomalies identified during the review meeting. (Records review information, such as decisions and new anomalies found during the review meeting - B)
2. Review Leader - responsible for overseeing the review process, such as selecting the review team members, scheduling review meetings, and ensuring that the review is completed successfully.
(Takes overall responsibility for the review such as organizing when and where the review will take place - D)
3. Facilitator (or Moderator) - responsible for ensuring that the review meetings run effectively, including managing time, mediating discussions, and creating a safe environment where everyone can voice their opinions freely. (Ensures the effective running of review meetings and the setting up of a safe review environment - A)
4. Manager - responsible for deciding what needs to be reviewed and allocating resources, such as staff and time, for the review. (Decides what is to be reviewed and provides resources, such as staff and time for the review - C)

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct. The correct match is: 1B, 2D, 3A, 4C
d) Is not correc

Explanation / Rationale

Considering:

• The test basis for acceptance testing is the user’s business needs (1D)
• Communication between components is tested during component integration testing (2B)
• Failures in logic can be found during component testing (3A)
• Business rules are the test basis for system testing (4C)

Thus:
a) Is correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

The average development effort is $900,000 and the average test effort is $90,000 (calculated from the four projects).
The average test-to-development effort ratio is 1:10 ($90,000 : $900,000), which means that historically, on average, the test effort is 10% of the development effort.
So if the development effort is estimated to be $800,000, the estimated test effort is estimated as:

10% * $800,000 = 0.1 * $800,000 = $80,000.

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Exploratory testing uses test charters, not a list of possible defects/failures. Although exploratory testing can incorporate the use of other test techniques, in this case fault attack is the most likely option
b) Is correct. This is a list of possible failures. Fault attacks are a methodical approach to the implementation of error guessing and require the tester to create or acquire a list of possible errors, defects and failures, and to design tests that will identify defects associated with the errors, expose the defects, or cause the failures
c) Is not correct. The tester is using a checklist of items to support their testing. Both error guessing and checklist-based testing use such lists, however, the list here is of possible failures, not test conditions, and so the MOST PROBABLE test technique is fault attack, which focuses on errors, defects and failures
d) Is not correct. BVA is based on an analysis of boundary values of equivalence partitions. The above list does not mention equivalence partitions or their boundaries

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Estimating the test effort is part of test planning
b) Is correct. This is an example of defining test conditions which is a part of test analysis
c) Is not correct. Using test techniques to derive coverage items is a part of test design
d) Is not correct. Reporting defects found during dynamic testing is a part of test execution

Explanation / Rationale

Test cases TC1, TC2, TC3 and TC4 cover, respectively, rules R2, R3, R7 and R6 in the decision table.
a) Is correct. The conditions “66-year-old”, “unregistered” and “no experience” match rule R4, which is not covered by the existing test cases, so after adding this test case, the decision table coverage will increase
b) Is not correct. The conditions “55-year-old”, “unregistered” and “2 years of experience” match rule R2, already covered by TC1. So adding this test case will not increase the coverage
c) Is not correct. The conditions “19-year-old”, “registered” and “5 years of experience” match rule R6, already covered by TC4. So adding this test case will not increase the coverage
d) Is not correct. The existing test cases cover only 4 out of 7 columns of the decision table. The coverage can be increased by adding test cases that cover yet uncovered columns, that is, R1, R4 and R5

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. This should be a team activity and not overruled by one team member
b) Is correct. If test estimates are not the same, but the variation in the results is small, applying rules like “accept the number with the most votes” can be applied
c) Is not correct. There is no consensus yet as some say 13, others say 8
d) Is not correct. A feature should not be removed only because the team cannot agree on the test estimates

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The basic concept behind error guessing is that the tester tries to guess what errors may have been made by the developer and what defects may be in the test object based on past experience (and sometimes checklists)
b) Is not correct. Although a testers who used to be a developer may use their personal experience to help them when performing error guessing, the test technique is not based on prior knowledge of development
c) Is not correct. Error guessing is not a usability technique for guessing how users may fail to interact with the test object
d) Is not correct. Duplicating the development task has several flaws that make it impractical, such as the tester having equivalent skills to the developer and the time involved to perform the development. It is not error guessing

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Traceability is the relationship between two or more work products, not between different versions of the same work product
b) Is not correct. Maintenance testing is about testing changes; it is not related closely to versioning
c) Is correct. To support testing, configuration management may involve the version control of all test items
d) Is not correct. Requirements engineering is the elicitation, documentation, and management of requirements; it is not closely related to test script versioning

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Component Test-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
b) Is not correct. Integration Test-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
c) Is not correct. System Test-Driven Development is not a correct example of a test-first approach to development
d) Is correct. Acceptance Test-Driven Development (ATDD) is a well-known example of a test-first approach to development

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The test case is related to viewing previous orders in the order history
b) Is not correct. The test case is related to viewing previous orders
c) Is not correct. The test case is related to viewing previous orders in the order history
d) Is correct. The test case is related to the registration process, which is not discussed in the user story. The user story is about viewing previous orders

Explanation / Rationale

Considering:

Testing and quality assurance are not the same. Testing is the process consisting of all software development lifecycle (SDLC) activities, both static and dynamic, concerned with planning, preparation and evaluation of a component or system and related work products to determine that they satisfy specified requirements, to demonstrate that they are fit for purpose and to detect defects. Quality assurance is focused on establishing, introducing, monitoring, improving, and adhering to the quality-related processes.

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Checklists should contain test conditions to be verified. This is an example of an error, not a test condition; even if the tester was able to deduce some potential test conditions from the examples of errors, this error description is too general
b) Is not correct. Checklists should not contain items that are better suited as exit criteria. This is an example of an exit criterion
c) Is not correct. Checklists should not contain items that are too general. This is a very general item, which practically describes the goal of testing
d) Is correct. This is an example of a test condition that can be checked by a human

Explanation / Rationale

There are three equivalence partitions: {…, –2, –1}, {0, 1, 2}, {3, 4, …}.
For 2-value BVA all the boundary values for all the equivalence partitions must be covered.
The boundary values are –1 (for the “temperature too low” partition), 0, 2 (for the “temperature OK” partition) and 3 (for the “temperature too high” partition).

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct. The correct option is: –1, 0, 2, 3
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Confirmation testing to check that the updates have resulted in a correct implementation is necessary, however, it would then be sensible to perform regression testing to ensure that no defects have been introduced or uncovered in unchanged areas of the system
b) Is correct. Confirmation testing will check that the updates have resulted in a correct implementation, and then regression testing will be used to ensure that no defects have been introduced or uncovered in unchanged areas of the system
c) Is not correct. Regression testing should be used to ensure that no defects have been introduced or uncovered in unchanged areas of the system when the update was made, however it is also necessary to perform confirmation testing that will check that the updates have resulted in a correct implementation
d) Is not correct. Confirmation testing will check that the updates have resulted in a correct implementation, and regression testing will be used to ensure that no defects have been introduced or uncovered in unchanged areas of the system. However, when performed (i.e., when an update needs to be tested), confirmation testing precedes regression testing

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. This test covers two acceptance criteria: one about editing the document and one about saving changes
b) Is not correct. Acceptance criteria cover the editor activities, not the content owner activities
c) Is not correct. Scheduling the edited content for publication may be a nice feature, but it is not covered by the acceptance criteria
d) Is not correct. Acceptance criteria state about reassigning from an editor to the content owner, not to another editor

Explanation / Rationale

The ‘absence-of-defects fallacy’ is concerned with the idea that ensuring correctness in accordance with the requirements (i.e., verifying the absence of implementation defects) does not guarantee user satisfaction with the system. To address this it is also necessary to validate that the system meets users' needs and expectations, fulfills business objectives, and outperforms competing systems.
a) Is not correct. The ‘testing shows the presence, not the absence of defects’ principle explains that while testing can detect the existence of defects in the test object, it is not possible to demonstrate that there are no defects and, therefore, guarantee its correctness. Therefore, explaining that it is not possible for testing to show the absence of defects would partially address this principle, not the ‘absence-of-defects’ fallacy
b) Is correct. By supporting the end user to perform acceptance testing it should be possible to validate that the system meets users' needs and expectations
c) Is not correct. It is not possible to ensure that no implementation defects remain in the delivered system as the ‘testing shows the presence, not the absence of defects’ principle explains that while testing can detect the existence of defects in the test object, it is not possible to demonstrate that there are no defects and, therefore, guarantee its correctness
d) Is not correct. Modifying tests that cause no failures to ensure few defects remain is one way to address the ‘tests wear out’ principle. This principle is concerned with the idea that repeating identical tests on unaltered code is unlikely to uncover novel defects and therefore, modifying tests may be essential. This will not validate that the system meets users' needs and expectations

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. It is impossible to prove that there are no defects anymore in the system under test. See testing principle 1
b) Is not correct. See testing principle 7
c) Is correct. Testing finds defects and failures which reduces the level of risk and at the same time gives more confidence in the quality level of the test object
d) Is not correct. It is impossible to test all combinations of inputs (see testing principle 2)

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Obtaining feedback from stakeholders early and often in the software development process can be highly beneficial. It facilitates early communication of potential quality issues, can prevent misunderstandings about requirements, and ensures that any changes in stakeholder requirements are understood and implemented sooner
b) Is not correct. The feedback is from stakeholders, and them providing feedback is unlikely to improve their understanding of their own user requirements
c) Is not correct. Obtaining feedback from stakeholders early and often in the software development process can be highly beneficial. It facilitates early communication of potential quality issues, can prevent misunderstandings about requirements, and ensures that any changes in stakeholder requirements are understood and implemented sooner. However, because changes in requirements can be understood and implemented sooner, it does not mean that unlimited changes to requirements are encouraged
d) Is not correct. The feedback is from stakeholders and does not cover communication to them. Communications to end users could include them being told about which requirements will not be implemented prior to release, but ideally this should not happen at all

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The document does not refer to the test object’s internal structure but specifies the desired behavior of the test object. Therefore, white-box test techniques will not be helpful in designing test cases
b) Is correct. The document is a requirement that specifies the desired behavior of the test object. Therefore, the most suitable test techniques in this case are the black-box test techniques (e.g., Boundary Value Analysis or Decision Table Testing)
c) Is not correct. Although experience-based test techniques can be used to design test cases based on this document, black-box test techniques will be more suitable. The document describes a precise business rule and, in addition, wording like "exceeds $100" suggests the existence of important equivalence partition boundaries that should be tested using black-box test techniques like boundary value analysis
d) Is not correct. Risk-based test techniques are not a recognized type of test technique

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The test plan may include test data requirements (as part of the test approach), but not the detailed test data for test cases. Test data is part of the test cases, not the test plan. Also, it is usually impossible to define such data when the test plan is created, because it is not exactly known what the components will look like
b) Is not correct. One of the purposes of a test plan is to help ensure that the performed test activities will meet the established criteria, by including entry criteria and exit criteria. The code coverage criteria are an example of such criteria for the component test level
c) Is not correct. Documentation templates are typical content of a test plan. This helps to facilitate communication between the stakeholders by defining a standard way of communicating or reporting
d) Is not correct. One of the purposes of a test plan is to demonstrate that testing will adhere to the existing test policy and test strategy, or to explain why the testing will deviate from them. This is an example of explaining the deviation, regarding the test levels that will be (or will not be) followed

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Adding this information allows the developer to use the same input data, so it is more likely they will be able to reproduce the failure quickly and so identify the defect faster
b) Is not correct. Adding the value of Priority will not help in reproducing the defect itself
c) Is not correct. Although some of this information may be of value, adding the memory dumps and database snapshots after each step will be too much, because most of these artefacts will contain useless information for the developer, and make the report less readable. It will also require the developer to spend a lot of time analyzing this information, which will lengthen the repair process
d) Is not correct. The question was about helping the developer to reproduce the defect observed for a specific environment configuration

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. 19 covers the “no discount” partition, 20 covers the “50% discount” partition, and 30 covers the “10% discount” partition. These three values cover all three of the valid equivalence partitions
b) Is not correct. 11 and 12 cover the “no discount” partition, while 20 covers the “50% discount” partition, so covering two of the three valid equivalence partitions
c) Is not correct. 1 covers the “no discount” partition, while 10 and 50 cover the “10% discount” partition. The “50% discount” partition is not covered, so overall two of the three valid equivalence partitions are covered
d) Is not correct. 29 and 31 cover the “no discount” partition, while 10 and 30 cover the “10% discount” partition. The “50% discount” partition is not covered, so overall two of the three valid equivalence partitions are covered

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. We want to check that Special users have the rights of Regular users, so we need to test access rights for a Special user, not for a Regular user
b) Is not correct. We want to check that Special users have the rights of Regular users, so we need to test access rights for a Special user, not for a Regular user
c) Is not correct. There is no floor 5 described in the acceptance criteria. The test cases should not extend the scope of the user story. But even if we would like to perform negative testing, this test is not directly related to AC3
d) Is correct. This way we can check if a Special user can access floors which are accessible to a Regular user

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Test automation can provide measures that are too complicated for humans to derive, such as white-box test coverage measures for all but the most trivial code
b) Is not correct. By using test tools the responsibility for the testing is NOT shared with the tool vendor as the vendor is not involved in the testing, and it is the tester’s responsibility. The only possible responsibility that could be assigned to the tool vendor is if the tool fails to work as expected and provides incorrect test results
c) Is not correct. Testers still need to perform critical thinking when analyzing anomalies in the test results to determine their likely cause
d) Is not correct. Neither testers nor tools can generate test cases simply from an analysis of the program code as the code is the implementation and provides no information on the expected results, which will need to come from another part of the test basis, such as the design specification

Explanation / Rationale

Let us refer to the transitions with E1, …, E5 as in the picture. The variable N denotes the number of elements currently stored. Each “Add” event increases it by 1, and each “Remove” event decreases it by 1. Notice, that when the “Add” event occurs while being in the NOT FULL state, the state changes to FULL only if N=2. If N<2, the system stays in the NOT FULL state. If N=0, no “Remove” action is possible. Similarly, if N=3, no “Add” action is possible.

Test a) can be written as E1, E3, E3, E2, E4 (so covers 4 out of 5 valid transitions, achieving 80% valid transitions coverage).
Test b) is infeasible, because after the first three “Add” actions the system is in the FULL state and there is no valid transition going from FULL triggered by the “Add” event. After the first three transitions only 60% of valid transitions coverage is achieved.
Test c) can be written as E1, E2, E4, E5, E3 (so covers 5 out of 5 valid transitions, achieving 100% valid transitions coverage).
Test d) can be written as E1, E2, E4, E5, E4 (so covers 4 out of 5 valid transitions, achieving 80% valid transitions coverage).

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

In branch testing the coverage items are branches, which are represented by the edges of a control flow graph. There are 8 edges in the control flow graph.
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. Product quality metrics measure quality characteristics. Mean time to failure measures maturity, so it is a product quality metric
b) Is not correct. This is an example of a defect metric, not a product quality metric
c) Is not correct. This is an example of a coverage metric, not a product quality metric
d) Is not correct. This is an example of a defect metric, not a product quality metric

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The detection of additional high-severity defects would be a benefit of test automation, rather than a risk
b) Is not correct. The provision of measures that are too complicated for humans to derive themselves is normally considered to be a benefit of test automation
c) Is correct. If the test automation is incompatible with the development platform, then it will not be able to integrate them, and, for instance, pass test inputs to the test object and receive test results from the test object
d) Is not correct. Substantially reduced test execution times would normally be considered a benefit that is provided by test automation

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Testing quadrants have nothing to do with describing the relationships between test levels
b) Is not correct. Testing quadrants cannot help in assessing any type of coverage
c) Is correct. Testing quadrants allow managers and other stakeholders to understand the relationships between test types, the activities they support (team support or product critique), and the viewpoint they are focused on (business- or technology-facing)
d) Is not correct. Testing quadrants is not a psychological model

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. A fundamental strength that all white-box test techniques share is that the entire software implementation is taken into account during testing, which facilitates defect detection even when the software specification is vague, outdated or incomplete. This means white-box testing can find defects such as an extra feature added to the code (either accidentally or deliberately) that is not supposed to be there, which black-box testing cannot detect
b) Is not correct. The fact that the coverage can be precisely defined is not the right reason. The achieved level of coverage would have much more impact than the possibility to measure the coverage
c) Is not correct. If the software does not implement one or more requirements, white-box testing is unlikely to detect the resulting defects of omission
d) Is not correct. While this is true, this is not the right answer, because there is no connection between the capability to be used in both static testing and dynamic testing and the claim that white-box testing facilitates defect detection with poor specifications

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Performing the impact analysis will not give information about completeness of tests. Analyzing the impact analysis of changes will help to select the right test cases for execution
b) Is not correct. Traceability does not give information about the estimated level of residual risk if the test cases are not traced back to risks
c) Is correct. Performing the impact analysis of the changes helps in selecting the test cases for the regression test
d) Is not correct. Analyzing the traceability between the test basis, test objects and test cases does not help in selecting test data to achieve the assumed coverage of the test object. Selecting test data is more related to test analysis and test implementation, not traceability