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

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. The test pyramid model does not provide information about test priorities
b) Is correct. The test pyramid model shows that different tests have different levels of granularity
c) Is not correct. The test pyramid model is independent of coverage criteria
d) Is not correct. Test pyramid model does not show any relations between different tests

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The rule-oriented format includes formats like bullet point verification lists or tabulated forms of input-output mappings, explicitly showing the rules to be followed. Given/When/Then is a scenario-oriented format because it describes a scenario to be verified
b) Is correct. This is a Given/When/Then format, which is scenario-oriented
c) Is not correct. There no "product-oriented" format of acceptance criteria
d) Is not correct. There is no "process-oriented" format of acceptance criteria

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. For a complex configuration item (e.g., a test environment), CM records the items it consists of, their relationships, and versions
b) Is not correct. CM tools do not execute test cases and do not calculate coverage
c) Is not correct. A CM tool is not a license management tool
d) Is not correct. CM tools do not generate test data

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. This is something that can (and should) be checked before the code is submitted to version control
b) Is not correct. This is something that can be checked after step (2) is performed, because merge conflict reporting can be done after the code is submitted and merged
c) Is not correct. This fits better as the entry criterion for step (3)
d) Is not correct. This fits better as the exit criterion for step (3)

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 not correct. Early review is an example of the shift left approach
b) Is not correct. TDD is an example of the shift left approach
c) Is not correct. Early non-functional testing is an example of the shift left approach
d) Is correct. Test scripts should be subject to configuration management, so it makes no sense to create the test scripts before this process is set up

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 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 not correct. Component testing (also called unit testing) involves testing individual components in isolation and is mostly verification against a specification, rather than validation against user needs. However, this testing is not normally performed by testers, as developers usually carry out this testing in their development environment
b) Is not correct. Component integration testing involves testing the interfaces and interactions between components and is mostly verification against a specification, rather than validation against user needs. However, this testing is not normally performed by testers, as developers usually carry out this testing
c) Is not correct. System integration testing examines the interfaces with other systems and external services and is mostly verification against a specification, rather than validation against user needs. This type of testing is also most often performed by testers
d) Is correct. Acceptance testing focuses on validating that the system meets the user's business needs and is ready for deployment. Ideally, this testing is carried out by the end users

Explanation / Rationale

Consider:

i. It is a Project risk
ii. It is a Product risk
iii. It is a Product risk
iv. It is a Project risk
v. It is a Product risk

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

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

The following three transitions:

“REQUESTING -> CONFIRMED”
“WAITING LIST -> CONFIRMED”
“WAITING LIST -> END”

cannot appear in the same test case, which suggests that at least three test cases are required. All the other transitions can appear in combination with one or more of these three transitions, so we need a minimum of three test cases. In fact, only three sequences are possible:

TC1: START (Room request) → REQUESTING (Available) → CONFIRMED (Pay) → END
TC2: START (Room request) → REQUESTING (Not available) → WAITING LIST (Available) → CONFIRMED (Pay) → END
TC3: START (Room request) → REQUESTING (Not available) → WAITING LIST (Cancel) → END

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

Explanation / Rationale

The equivalence partitions are: {…, 99, 100}, {101, 102, …, 198, 199}, {200, 201, …}.
Thus, there are 4 boundary values, which are: 100, 101, 199 and 200.
In 2-value BVA, for each boundary value there are two coverage items (the boundary value and its closest neighbor belonging to the adjacent partition). As the closest neighbors are also boundary values in the adjacent partition, then there are just four coverage items.

Thus:
a) Is not correct. Only 100 and 200 are valid coverage items for 2-value BVA, so we achieve 50% coverage
b) Is not correct. Only 100 and 200 are valid coverage items for 2-value BVA, so we achieve 50% coverage
c) Is not correct. Only 100 and 101 are valid coverage items for 2-value BVA, so we achieve 50% coverage
d) Is correct. 101, 199 and 200 are valid coverage items for 2-value BVA, so we achieve 75% coverage

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Traceability between the mitigated risks and passing test cases provides little information, because to be mitigated (by testing) the risks would need to have a corresponding passing test case. To be able to assess residual risk, traceability between all risks and test results needs to be available, so that the risks that do not have a corresponding passing test can be identified as the residual risks
b) Is correct. Traceability between user requirements and test execution results provides an indication of which user requirements have been tested and so provides a means of measuring project progress (in the context of testing) against business goals
c) Is not correct. It is not clear that failing test cases provide an indication of tester skills any more than passing test cases. It would partly depend on the test objective (e.g., building confidence or causing failures). Also, such measurement of testers based on passing and failing test cases can be counter-productive as it could cause the testers to optimize their testing based on that metric rather than the test objective
d) Is not correct. Traceability between the identified risks and written test conditions provides a means of determining which further test conditions need to be written. Determining which risks are worth testing is part of risk management, and risk mitigation in particular

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Testing quadrants group test levels and test types separately according to several criteria. They do not represent any combinations of test levels and test types and they are not related to any location within a software development lifecycle. Both test levels and test types are treated separately in the testing quadrants model
b) Is not correct. Testing quadrants group test levels and test types according to several criteria. They do not describe the degree of granularity of individual test types performed at each test level. Such a model, regarding the test levels, is called the test pyramid
c) Is not correct. The statement is wrong, because in general any test type can be performed at any test level
d) Is correct. The testing quadrants group test levels, test types, activities, test techniques and work products in Agile software development. In this model, tests can be business facing or technology facing. Tests can support the team (i.e., guide the development) or critique the product (i.e., measure its behavior against expectations). The combination of these two viewpoints determines the four quadrants

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Decision table testing is a black-box test technique, so it is specification-based, not structure-based – the test cases are not based on the decisions in the source code. In branch testing, the test cases are derived from knowledge of the control flow of the test object
b) Is not correct. Anticipation of potential defects is used in error guessing (an experience-based test technique), not in branch testing (a structure-based technique). In decision table testing, the test cases are derived from the specification that describes the business logic
c) Is not correct. If a test case is based on the knowledge of the control flow of the test object, it is a white-box test technique. Decision table testing is typically based on an analysis of business logic, so it is a black-box test technique. In branch testing, test cases are not derived from the specification – this would make it a black-box test technique. Branch testing is a white-box test technique, where test cases are derived based on the source code structure
d) Is correct. Decision table testing is a black-box test technique, so it is based on an analysis of the specified behavior of the test object without reference to its internal structure. Therefore, the test cases are independent of how the software is implemented. Branch testing is a white-box test technique, so test cases are based on an analysis of the test object’s internal structure and processing. As the test cases are dependent on how the software is designed and coded, they can only be created after the design or implementation of the test object

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

Error guessing is about anticipating the errors, defects and failures based on the tester’s knowledge.
a) Is not correct. This is an example of anticipating the developer’s error
b) Is not correct. This is an example of anticipating the defect
c) Is correct. This is an example of a potential root cause of a defect, which is neither an error, defect nor failure, and difficult for the tester to anticipate
d) Is not correct. This is an example of anticipating a failure, perhaps based on experience of previous systems in this application domain

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 testware under consideration is a test charter

Test charters are the output from test design
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Most work products can be examined using some form of static testing, and a contract must be interpretable by humans and so could be reviewed, which is a form of static testing
b) Is not correct. Most work products can be examined using some form of static testing, and a test plan must be interpretable by humans and so could be reviewed, which is a form of static testing
c) Is correct. Most work products can be examined using some form of static testing; however it is not suitable for work products that are too complex for human interpretation and should not be analyzed by tools, and encrypted code is too complex for humans and if it is properly encrypted it will not be analyzable by most tools
d) Is not correct. Most work products can be examined using some form of static testing, and a test charter must be interpretable by humans and so could be reviewed, which is a form of static testing

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

Considering each of the listed testware, and the test activity that produces it:

i. The test completion report is an output of the test completion activity
ii. Data held in a database used for test inputs and expected results is the test data - output of test implementation activity
iii. The list of elements needed to build the test environment is the test environment requirements - output of test design activity.
iv. Documented sequences of test cases in execution order are the test procedures - output of test implementation activity
v. Test cases - output of test design activity

Test implementation produces the following outputs: test procedures (iv), automated test scripts, test suites, test data (ii), test execution schedule, and test environment elements such as stubs, drivers, simulators, and service virtualizations.

Thus:
a) Is correct. Items ii and iv in the list are produced as a result of test implementation
b) Is not correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. When a user reports a software failure, thanks to the unique identification of commits, it is possible to reassemble the files from the software version which was used by the user (as well as the corresponding versions of the test scripts) and thus reproduce the failure and locate the defect faster
b) Is not correct. If a change to the test environment causes unexpected issues during testing, configuration management allows testers to roll back to a previous version of the environment. This ensures that testing can continue without being affected by the change
c) Is not correct. Configuration management ensures that all identified documentation (e.g., requirement specifications) and software items are referenced unambiguously in test documentation (e.g., test plans)
d) Is correct. This is ensured by the defect management, not configuration management process

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

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

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. Usability testing is business facing testing that critiques the product (Q3)
b) Is not correct. Functional testing is business facing testing (Q2)
c) Is not correct. User acceptance testing is business facing testing that critiques the product (Q3)
d) Is correct. Component integration testing is technology facing testing that supports the team (guides the development) (Q1)

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is correct. This principle means that if the same tests are repeated over and over again, eventually these tests no longer find any new defects. This is probably why the tests all passed in this release as well
b) Is not correct. This principle says about the mistaken belief that just finding and fixing a large number of defects will ensure the success of a system
c) Is not correct. This principle says that a small number of components usually contain most of the defects
d) Is not correct. This principle states that testing all combinations of inputs and preconditions is not feasible

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The approval of the budget is an example of an entry criterion. It would make no sense to approve the budget for some activity that has already been done
b) Is correct. Running out of budget can be viewed as a valid exit criterion
c) Is not correct. Availability of resources is an example of an entry criterion for testing
d) Correct. Coverage is a measure of thoroughness, so it is a typical exit criterion
e) Is not correct. This is an example of an entry criterion, checked before the project starts

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

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. The whole-team approach allows any team member with the requisite skills and knowledge to undertake any task, however that does not mean that team members can take on any role at any time. Typically, they only take on roles in which they are competent, and there is no suggestion that every team member can do every role
b) Is not correct. The whole-team approach applies to how a single team (typically in Agile software development) works; it does not cover how multiple teams are supposed to work on larger projects, and it does not suggest that only one ‘whole’ team is needed for a complete project
c) Is not correct. The whole-team approach does not expect every team member to be involved in every important decision. For instance, there is no need for the business representative (i.e. the Product Owner) to be involved in every technical decision that does not affect the business outcome and implementing such an approach would unnecessarily slow down the team’s progress
d) 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 team synergy that benefits the entire project

Explanation / Rationale

a) Is not correct. Testers should review work products as soon as drafts are available to enable early testing as part of a shift-left approach. If they waited until the next development phase, then unnecessary development (and test) work could be started on unreviewed, flawed work products
b) Is correct. Testers should review work products as soon as drafts are available to enable early testing as part of a shift-left approach
c) Is not correct. Testers typically review work products that form the test basis as part of test analysis, not before test analysis and design
d) Is not correct. Testers should review work products as soon as drafts are available to enable early testing as part of a shift-left approach. Waiting until they are published means that any defects that could be found by tester review will be in the published document

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 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

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

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

There are five columns in the decision table. Each test case covers one of them.

TC1 and TC2 both cover Rule 4
TC3 and TC4 both cover Rule 2
TC5 covers Rule 5

So, these five test cases cover three out of five columns, achieving a coverage of (3/5)*100% = 60%. Therefore, option b) is the CORRECT option.
Thus:
a) Is not correct
b) Is correct
c) Is not correct
d) Is not correct