Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The number of defects found is related to the test object quality
b) Is not correct. This is the measure of the test efficiency not the test object quality
c) Is not correct. The number of test cases executed does not tell us anything about the quality; test results might do
d) Is correct. defect density is related to the test object quality
e) Is not correct. Time to repair is a process metric. It does not tell us anything about the product quality

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Test progress reports are mostly used during test monitoring and control, and test completion, not during test design
b) Is correct. A test completion report is prepared during test completion, when a project, test level, or test type is complete and when, ideally, its exit criteria have been met. This report uses information from test progress reports and other data
c) Is not correct. Test progress reports are mostly used during test monitoring and control, and test completion, not during test analysis
d) Is not correct. Test progress reports are most used during test monitoring and control, and test completion, not during test planning

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is taken into account during testing, which facilitates defect detection even when the software specification is vague, outdated or incomplete.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

The domain for the password length has three equivalence partitions:

• passwords too short {0, 1, …, 4, 5}
• passwords OK {6, 7, …, 11, 12}
• passwords too long {13, 14, …}

To achieve full coverage for 3-value BVA we need to test the following values:

0, 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14.

Since 2-value BVA is already covered, this means that we have already tested the passwords of length:

0, 5, 6, 12 and 13.

This means that the additional lengths that need to be covered to move from 2-value to 3-value are:

1, 4, 7, 11 and 14.

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

Explanation / Rationale

“Small garden” and “large garden” can go only with “ground floor”, so we need two test cases with “ground floor” which cover these two “garden type” partitions.
We need two more test cases to cover the two other “floor” partitions and a remaining ”garden type” partition of “no garden”.
We need a total of four test cases:

TC1 (ground floor, small garden)
TC2 (ground floor, large garden)
TC3 (first floor, no garden)
TC4 (second or higher floor, no garden)

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

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Risk management consists of risk analysis and risk control. Neither of these activities supports the reassembly of the files that made up the release, because these activities deal with risks, not with configuration items
b) Is not correct. Test monitoring is concerned with gathering information about testing. This information is used to assess test progress and to measure whether the test exit criteria or the test tasks associated with the exit criteria are satisfied, such as meeting the targets for coverage of product risks, requirements, or other acceptance criteria. Test control uses the information from test monitoring to provide, in the form of control directives, guidance and the necessary corrective actions to achieve the most effective and efficient testing. None of these activities deal with the management of configuration items
c) Is not correct. The whole-team approach builds on the tester’s skill to work effectively in a team context and to contribute positively to the team goals. So, it focuses on team-related issues, not on configuration items
d) Is correct. Configuration management provides a discipline for identifying, controlling, and tracking work products. Configuration management keeps a record of changed configuration items when a new baseline is created. Using configuration management, it is possible to revert to a previous baseline in order to reproduce previous test results

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. In the whole-team approach, testers play a vital role by sharing their testing expertise with the team and guiding product development. They collaborate with other team members to achieve the desired quality levels and work with business representatives to create acceptance tests. Testers also partner with developers to determine the optimal test strategy and automation approaches
b) Is correct. By leveraging the diverse skill sets of each team member most effectively, the whole-team approach fosters superior team dynamics, promotes robust communication and collaboration, and generates a synergistic effect that benefits the entire project
c) Is not correct. The whole-team approach allows any team member with the requisite skills and knowledge to undertake any task, thus specialist team members are not an advantage of this approach
d) Is not correct. There is no specific guidance on the optimum size of teams using the whole-team approach, and there is no suggestion that larger teams are better

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Tracking test progress and identifying areas that require further attention is an example of supporting the ongoing control of testing. This is one of the purposes of test reports
b) Is not correct. Providing information on the tests executed, their results, and any issues or defects found is an example of summarizing the test activities performed at a given test level. This is one of the purposes of test reports
c) Is correct. Providing information about defects is the purpose of a defect report, not a test report
d) Is not correct. Providing information on testing planned for the next period is one of the purposes of test reports

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. One of the purposes of retrospectives is to identify potential process improvements, which, if put into practice, should result in the quality of future outputs of the development process (test objects) being higher. So, this is likely to occur as a result of a retrospective
b) Is not correct. A benefit of retrospectives for testing includes increased test efficiency through process improvements. So, this is likely to occur as a result of a retrospective
c) Is correct. Participants at retrospectives typically include testers, developers, architects, product owners, and business analysts, but end users are rarely invited or attend these meetings – and they are also unlikely to receive any reports from these meetings. So, it is very unlikely that they will learn and understand more about the development and test processes through retrospectives
d) Is not correct. A benefit of retrospectives for testing includes improved quality of testware (including automated test scripts) through joint reviews with developers. So, this is likely to occur as a result of a retrospective

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 not correct. Retrospectives are used to capture lessons learned and to improve the development and testing process, not to document the acceptance criteria
b) Is correct. This is the standard way to document acceptance criteria
c) Is not correct. Verbal communication does not allow to physically document the acceptance criteria as part of a user story (”card” aspect in the 3C’s model)
d) Is not correct. Acceptance criteria are related to a user story, not a test plan. Also, acceptance criteria are the conditions that have to be fulfilled to decide if the user story is complete. Risks are not such conditions

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Impediments to testing can be high level and business-related, so this is an important piece of information for business stakeholders
b) Is correct. Branch testing is a technical metric used by developers and technical testers. This information is of no interest to business representatives
c) Is not correct. Test progress is project related, so it may be useful for business representatives
d) Is not correct. Risks impact product quality, so it may be useful for business representatives

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. This is important, but not as important as test environment elements
b) Is correct. The important thing that is missing is the identification of the browser and device used for the testing. The browser and device information are important because such a defect can be browser- or device-specific. For example, a login button may work fine on one browser (or one version of a specific browser) but not on another. Therefore, the browser and device information can help the developers to reproduce the issue and find the root cause of the problem more quickly
c) Is not correct. The test object is identified (WebShop v0.99)
d) Is not correct. The impact is included – this is severity (high)

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The organization’s marketing team is unlikely to perform much testing (although in some organizations they may be involved with acceptance testing), so their average level of experience (most of which would be in marketing) is not likely to impact how testing is performed for a given test object
b) Is not correct. The level of knowledge of users that a new system is being built for them is unlikely to affect how testing is performed. Any user involvement that could affect how testing is performed is more likely to be as a result of decisions made by the testers, customer and project manager
c) Is correct. The number of years’ experience of the members of the performance testing team will help to determine the capabilities and knowledge (e.g., of different tools and defect types) that the team members will apply when they are testing
d) Is not correct. The organizational structure of the different end users (who may be varied) will change between users. So, it may not even be known when the application is being tested, and the end user’s organizational structure can thus have little effect on how the testing is performed

Explanation / Rationale

Considering each of the listed risks and their mitigations:

1. Long system responses (1) can be tested in performance testing (B)
2. Changes of consumers’ preferences (2) are usually out of our control, so usually we accept this risk (A)
3. Flooding of the server room (3) can cause significant loss, so we should transfer the risk, e.g., by buying an insurance policy (D)
4. That patients above a certain age receive inaccurate reports (4) suggests a potential boundary problem, which can be effectively detected with techniques like BVA (C)

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is correct. The correct combinations of risk and mitigation are: 1B, 2A, 3D and 4C
d) Is not correct

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

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. This is a new product. You probably do not have a checklist yet and test conditions might not be known due to missing requirements
b) Is not correct. This is a new product. You probably do not have enough information to make correct error guesses
c) Is correct. Exploratory testing is most useful when there are few known specifications and/or there is a pressing timeline for testing
d) Is not correct. Branch testing is time-consuming, and your management is asking about some test results now. Also, branch testing does not involve domain knowledge

Explanation / Rationale

Branch testing is a white-box test technique in which the coverage items are branches. A branch is a transfer of control between two nodes in the control flow graph, which shows the possible sequences in which source code statements are executed in the test object. Each transfer of control can be either unconditional (i.e., straight-line code) or conditional (i.e., a decision outcome). Coverage is measured as the number of branches exercised by the test cases divided by the total number of branches, and is expressed as a percentage.
Thus:
a) Is not correct. A decision outcome is a conditional branch. For branch testing, X counts not only conditional, but also unconditional branches
b) Is not correct. Branch coverage counts not only conditional, but also unconditional branches
c) Is correct. Branch coverage is measured as the number of branches exercised by the test cases divided by the total number of branches, and is expressed as a percentage
d) Is not correct. Both X and Y count only conditional branches and do not take into account the unconditional branches

Explanation / Rationale

Risk assessment can use a quantitative or qualitative approach, or a mix of them. In the quantitative approach the risk level is calculated as the multiplication of risk likelihood and risk impact. So, Risk level = Risk likelihood * Risk impact
Then, Risk impact = Risk level / Risk likelihood.
In our case, Risk impact = $1,000 / 50% = $1,000 / 0.5 = $2,000.
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Coverage is always defined as the percentage of the covered elements. Therefore, it cannot exceed 100%
b) Is correct. If the statements executed by T1 and T2 were disjoint, the coverage of the test suite {T1, T2} would be 105%, which is impossible (see answer a). Therefore, at least 5% of executable statements must have been executed by both T1 and T2
c) Is not correct. Statement coverage does not tell us anything about the number of non-executable statements in the code
d) Is not correct. Even if a test suite achieves full statement coverage, this does not imply achieving full branch coverage

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. In exploratory testing, test cases are usually created during the exploratory testing session, alongside test analysis, test implementation and test execution
b) Is not correct. In exploratory testing, tests are simultaneously designed, executed, and evaluated while the tester learns about the test object
c) Is not correct. Exploratory testing results depend heavily on the tester’s experience, so even if the results of exploratory testing can be used as a predictor of risk and used to assess whether there will be fewer or more defects, for example, compared to the previous exploratory testing session, they are not a good example of reliable defect prediction models that can predict the number of remaining defects
d) Is correct. During exploratory testing, the testers can use any techniques that they find useful

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

Considering each of the listed review types:

1. Technical review - This type of review is performed by technically qualified reviewers and led by a moderator. The objectives are to gain consensus and make decisions on technical problems while also evaluating quality and building confidence in the work product, generating new ideas, motivating and enabling authors to improve, and detecting anomalies
2. Informal review - The main objective is to detect anomalies. The process is not defined and does not require formal documented output
3. Inspection - This is the most formal review type, and it follows the complete generic review process. The primary objective is to find the most anomalies, and other objectives include evaluating quality and building confidence in the work product, motivating and enabling authors to improve, and collecting metrics that can be used to enhance the software development life cycle (SDLC), including the inspection process. The author cannot act as the review leader or scribe
4. Walkthrough - Led by the author, this type of review serves various objectives such as evaluating quality and building confidence in the work product, educating reviewers, gaining consensus, generating new ideas, motivating and enabling authors to improve, and detecting anomalies. Reviewers might perform an individual review before the walkthrough, but this is not mandatory

A. Includes objectives such as gaining consensus, generating new ideas, and motivating authors to improve (A)
B. The main objective is detecting potential defects and it generates no formal documented output (D)
C. The main objective is detecting potential defects and it requires metrics collection to support process improvement (C)
D. Includes objectives such as educating reviewers, gaining consensus, generating new ideas and detecting potential defects (B)

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

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
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is correct. This rule holds for all SDLC models

Explanation / Rationale

Considering each of the listed benefits and drawbacks of the independence of testing:

i. Ideally, we want close collaboration between testers and developers, which is not increased by isolation. Thus, this is a disadvantage
ii. Testers and developers have varied backgrounds, technical viewpoints, and potential biases, allowing testers to usefully challenge assumptions made by stakeholders during system specification and implementation. Thus, this is an advantage
iii. The main disadvantage of independence in testing is that testers may become isolated from the development team, leading to communication problems, a lack of collaboration, and potentially an adversarial relationship, with testers being blamed for delays and bottlenecks in the release process. Thus, this is a disadvantage
iv. One of the disadvantages of independence in testing is that testers may become isolated from the development team, leading to developers feeling less accountable for quality. Thus, this is a disadvantage
v. The primary benefit of independence in testing is that testers are more likely to identify different types of failures and defects compared to developers, due to their varied backgrounds, technical viewpoints, and potential biases, including cognitive bias

Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct. The list entries showing benefits are ii and v
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. In this case one test case is still needed since there is at least one (unconditional) branch to be covered
b) Is not correct. Covering only unconditional branches does not imply covering all conditional branches
c) Is not correct. 100% branch coverage implies 100% statement coverage, not otherwise. For example, for an IF decision without the ELSE, one test is enough to achieve 100% statement coverage, but it only achieves 50% branch coverage
d) Is correct. Each decision outcome corresponds to a conditional branch, so 100% branch coverage implies 100% decision coverage

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 correct. Checking that the sort function puts the elements of the list or array in ascending order is evaluating the functional correctness of the sort function, which is part of functional testing
b) Is not correct. Assessing whether the sort function meets its non-functional requirement to complete within one second is part of testing its performance efficiency, which is part of non-functional testing
c) Is not correct. Evaluating the ease with which the sort function can be modified from sorting ascending to sorting descending is testing its modifiability, a form of non-functional maintainability testing, which is part of non-functional testing
d) Is not correct. Assessing that the sort function still functions correctly when moved from a 32-bit to a 64-bit architecture is testing its adaptability, a form of portability testing, which is part of non-functional testing

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. When a system is retired, this can require testing of data migration, which is a form of maintenance testing
b) Is not correct. Regression testing verifies whether a fix accidentally affected the behavior of other parts of the code, but now we are talking about data migration to a new system
c) Is not correct. Component testing focuses on individual hardware or software components, not on data migration
d) Is not correct. Integration testing focuses on interactions between components and/or systems, not on data migration

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The root cause is the distraction that the programmer experienced while programming
b) Is not correct. Accepting invalid inputs is a failure
c) Is not correct. The error is the mistaken thinking that resulted in putting the defect in the code
d) Is correct. The problem in the code is a defect

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. System testing examines the behavior and capabilities of the complete system and covers non-functional testing of quality characteristics, which includes security testing. This type of testing is often performed by an independent test team based on system specifications
b) Is not correct. System integration testing examines the interfaces with other systems and external services
c) Is not correct. Beta testing is a type of acceptance testing performed at an external site by roles outside the development organization
d) Is not correct. Component integration testing involves testing the (interfaces and) interactions between components of a system, such as the user interface and database

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The feedback is from stakeholders (e.g., business representative, end user), not from developers, so this feedback is not likely to inform managers which developers are more or less productive
b) Is not correct. Early and frequent feedback from stakeholders is not used by project managers to prioritize how they interact with the different stakeholders
c) Is correct. Obtaining feedback from stakeholders early and often in the software development process can be highly beneficial as 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
d) Is not correct. Early and frequent feedback can prevent the development of a product that does not meet stakeholder needs, and results in costly rework and missed deadlines, so, ideally there should be no delay. Also, the feedback is from stakeholders (not to them), which includes the end users, so the end users providing feedback will not aid the end users’ understanding

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

The ‘exhaustive testing is impossible’ principle is concerned with the fact that it is not feasible to test every possible variation of test inputs in all different circumstances, except in trivial cases. Instead, testing utilizes test techniques, test case prioritization, and risk-based testing to sample from the set of possibilities and focus testing efforts.
a) Is not correct. The principle states that it is not feasible to test everything except in trivial cases. Testing everything would require testing every possible variation of test inputs in all different circumstances, which is generally infeasible as there will be a practically infinite number. Testing every possible specified output will not address this problem as the relationship between inputs and specified outputs can be different for each test object. Sometimes there may be a practically infinite number of possible specified outputs (e.g., when there are several variables representing real numbers), whereas at other times there may be just two specified outputs, such as with a single variable that can be either true or false
b) Is not correct. The principle states that it is not feasible to test every possible variation of test inputs in all different circumstances. This is because for non-trivial systems there is a practically infinite number. Therefore, in practice, documenting all possible test input variations would be impractical as it would take an infinite length of time
c) Is not correct. Starting testing as early as possible with reviews and other static testing approaches will not address the problem of there being too many possible test cases. The ‘early testing saves time and money’ principle is concerned with fixing defects early on to prevent the occurrence of subsequent defects in derived work products, thereby reducing costs and the likelihood of failures
d) Is correct. The use of equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis to generate test cases is one way to address the principle as these test techniques provide a systematic way to derive a finite subset of all possible test cases

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. A line with a defect, when executed, does not have to cause a failure. For example, a line x := y / z will cause a failure only when z equals 0
b) Is not correct. 100% statement coverage does not guarantee 100% branch coverage. For example, a test case with x=0 for the code

1. IF (x=0) THEN
2. A;
3. ENDIF

achieves 100% statement coverage but does not cover the branch from 1 to 3
c) Is correct. 100% statement coverage means that each executable statement was executed at least once
d) Is not correct. The removed test case may provide coverage of some statements that are not covered by either of the other two test cases, in which case the remaining two test cases together will not achieve 100% statement coverage

Explanation / Rationale

Considering:

• Usability testing is in Q3 (1 – C)
• Component testing is in Q1 (2 – A)
• Functional testing is in Q2 (3 – B)
• Reliability testing is in Q4 (4 – D)

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

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. The ‘tests wear out’ 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. By using high-level test conditions to generate new tests each time, the tests will not be identical and should not ‘wear out’
b) Is not correct. The ‘absence-of-defects fallacy’ principle is concerned with ensuring that users’ needs are fulfilled even if lots of testing is done and no defects are found (i.e., validation is also necessary). The use of high-level test conditions to generate test cases and execute tests does not directly address this concern
c) Is not correct. The ‘early testing saves time and money’ principle is concerned with fixing defects early on to prevent the occurrence of subsequent defects in derived work products, thereby reducing costs and the likelihood of failures. This is typically addressed by starting testing (both static and dynamic) as early as possible, but this is not addressed by using high-level test conditions to generate test cases and execute tests
d) Is not correct. The ‘Defects cluster together’ principle is concerned with the distribution of defects in a system, which typically follows a Pareto distribution. The use of high-level test conditions to generate test cases and execute tests does not address this concern, which is typically addressed by risk-based testing