Provide ISQI CTFL_Syll_4.0 Dumps Updated Dec 06, 2024 With 153 QA's
Latest CTFL_Syll_4.0 Dumps for Success in Actual ISQI Certified
NEW QUESTION # 34
The following 4 equivalence classes are given:
Which of the following alternatives includes correct test values for x. based on equivalence partitioning?
- A. -99; 99:101; 1001
- B. -500; 0; 100; 1000
- C. -1000; -100; 100; 1000
- D. -100; 100:1000; 1001
Answer: C
Explanation:
* The question is about selecting the correct test values for x based on equivalence partitioning.
Equivalence partitioning is a software test design technique that divides the input data of a software unit into partitions of equivalent data from which test cases can be derived. In this case, the given equivalence classes are:
* (x \leq -100)
* (-100 < x < 100)
* (100 \leq x < 1000)
* (x \geq 1000)
Option D provides a value from each of these partitions:
* For (x \leq -100), it gives -1000.
* For (-100 < x < 100), it gives -100 and 100.
* For (100 \leq x < 1000), it gives 500.
* For (x \geq 1000), it gives 1500.
So, option D covers all four given equivalence classes with appropriate values.
References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 documents available at ISTQB and ASTQB.
* 1: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 38
* 2: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 39
* : ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus 2018, Version 4.0, p. 40
NEW QUESTION # 35
Which of the following statements about error guessing is true?
- A. Error guessing refers to the ability of a system or component to continue normal operation despite the presence of erroneous inputs
- B. Experienced testers, when applying error guessing, rely on the use of a high-level list of what needs to be tested as a guide to find defects
- C. Error guessing is a system that adopts artificial intelligence to predict whether software components are likely to contain defects or not
- D. Experienced testers, when applying error guessing technique, can anticipate where errors, defects and failures have occurred and target their tests at those issues
Answer: D
Explanation:
This answer is correct because error guessing is a test design technique where the experience and intuition of the tester are used to anticipate where errors, defects and failures have occurred or are likely to occur, and to design test cases to expose them. Error guessing can be based on factors such as the complexity of the system or component, the known or suspected weaknesses of the system or component, the previous history of defects, or the common types of errors in the domain or technology. Error guessing can be used as a complementary technique to other more systematic or formal techniques, or when there is insufficient information or time to apply them. Reference: ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.2.5
NEW QUESTION # 36
A software company decides to invest in reviews of various types. The thought process they have is that each artifact needs to be reviewed using only one of the review methods depending on the criticality of the artifact.
- A. The thought process is correct. It wastes time to review same artifact using efferent review methods
- B. The thought process is incorrect. Same artifact can be reviewed using different review methods
- C. The thought process is correct. The whole company should decide or the review method based on their CMM level.
- D. The thought process is incorrect. The whole company should adopt same standard for review of all artifacts.
Answer: B
Explanation:
The thought process of the software company is incorrect, because it assumes that each artifact can be reviewed using only one review method, and that the review method depends solely on the criticality of the artifact. This is a simplistic and rigid approach that does not consider the benefits and limitations of different review methods, the context and purpose of the review, and the feedback and improvement opportunities that can be gained from multiple reviews. According to the CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, the selection of review methods should be based on several factors, such as the type and level of detail of the artifact, the availability and competence of the reviewers, the time and budget constraints, the expected defects and risks, and the desired outcomes and quality criteria. Moreover, the same artifact can be reviewed using different review methods at different stages of the development lifecycle, to ensure that the artifact meets the changing requirements, standards, and expectations of the stakeholders. For example, a requirement specification can be reviewed using an informal review method, such as a walkthrough, to get an initial feedback from the users and developers, and then using a formal review method, such as an inspection, to verify the completeness, correctness, and consistency of the specification. Therefore, the software company should adopt a more flexible and context-sensitive approach to selecting and applying review methods for different artifacts, rather than following a fixed and arbitrary rule. Reference = CTFL 4.0 Syllabus, Section 3.2.1, page 31-32; Section 3.2.2, page 33-34; Section 3.2.3, page 35-36.
NEW QUESTION # 37
Which of the following statements is true?
- A. A defect does not always produce a failure, while a bug always produces a failure
- B. A defect may cause a failure which, when occurring, always causes an error
- C. Bugs are defects found during component testing, while failures are defects found at higher test levels
- D. Failures can be caused by defects, but also by environmental conditions
Answer: D
Explanation:
Failures can be caused by defects, but also by environmental conditions. A failure is an event in which the software system does not perform a required function or performs a function incorrectly, according to the expected behavior. A defect is a flaw in the software system or a deviation from the requirements or the specifications, that may cause a failure. However, not all failures are caused by defects, as some failures may be caused by environmental conditions, such as hardware malfunctions, network interruptions, power outages, incompatible configurations, etc. Environmental conditions are factors that affect the operation of the software system, but are not part of the software system itself. The other statements are false, because:
A defect does not always produce a failure, while a bug always produces a failure. This statement is false, because a defect may or may not produce a failure, depending on the inputs, the outputs, the states, or the scenarios of the software system, and a bug is just another term for a defect, so it has the same possibility of producing a failure as a defect. For example, a defect in a rarely used feature or a hidden branch of the code may never produce a failure, while a defect in a frequently used feature or a critical path of the code may produce a failure often. A bug is not a different concept from a defect, but rather a synonym or a colloquial term for a defect, so it has the same definition and implications as a defect.
A defect may cause a failure which, when occurring, always causes an error. This statement is false, because an error is not a consequence of a failure, but rather a cause of a defect. An error is a human action or a mistake that produces a defect in the software system, such as a typo, a logic flaw, a requirement misunderstanding, etc. An error is not observable in the software system, but rather in the human mind or the human work products, such as the code, the design, the documentation, etc. A failure is not a cause of an error, but rather a result of a defect, which is a result of an error. For example, an error in the code may cause a defect in the software system, which may cause a failure in the software behavior.
Bugs are defects found during component testing, while failures are defects found at higher test levels. This statement is false, because bugs and failures are not different types of defects, but rather different terms for defects and their manifestations. As mentioned before, bugs are just another word for defects, and failures are the events in which the software system does not perform as expected due to defects. Bugs and failures can be found at any test level, not only at component testing or higher test levels. Test levels are the stages of testing that correspond to the levels of integration of the software system, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. Defects and failures can occur and be detected at any test level, depending on the test objectives, the test basis, the test techniques, and the test environment. Reference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:
ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.1.2, Testing and Quality1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.1, Testing Principles1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.3.1, Testing in Software Development Lifecycles1 ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Failure, Defect, Bug, Environmental Condition, Error, Test Level2
NEW QUESTION # 38
An e-commerce site accepts credit cards for processing the payment. The payment processing form has a field for the amount of money to be deducted. The minimum amount of money that can be processed is $10. The credit cards have a limit of $5,000 (Five Thousand). Assume that only integers can be accepted as inputs.
Which of the following set of boundary values you will choose for EFFICIENT testing for the amount of money that can be spent?
- A. 10,5000
- B. 9,5001
- C. 9,10,11,4999,5000,5001
- D. 9,10,5000,5001
Answer: C
Explanation:
Boundary value analysis involves testing at the boundaries between partitions. The most efficient boundary values to test are those at the edge of the input ranges:
* Just below the minimum value (9)
* At the minimum value (10)
* Just above the minimum value (11)
* Just below the maximum value (4999)
* At the maximum value (5000)
* Just above the maximum value (5001)
Testing these values ensures that the program handles the boundaries correctly, covering both valid and invalid input scenarios.
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
NEW QUESTION # 39
Confirmation testing is performed after:
- A. a defect is fixed, and if such testing is successful then the regression tests that are relevant for such fix can be executed
- B. a defect is fixed and after other tests do not find any side-effect introduced in the software as a result of such fix
- C. the execution of an automated regression test suite to confirm the absence of false positives in the test results
- D. a failed test, and aims to run that test again to confirm that the same behavior still occurs and thus appears to be reproducible
Answer: A
Explanation:
Confirmation testing is performed after a defect is fixed, and if such testing is successful then the regression tests that are relevant for such fix can be executed. Confirmation testing, also known as re-testing, is the process of verifying that a defect has been resolved by running the test case that originally detected the defect.
Confirmation testing is usually done before regression testing, which is the process of verifying that no new defects have been introduced in the software as a result of changes or fixes. Therefore, option D is the correct answer.
References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.01, Section 2.4.1, page 28; ISTQB Glossary v4.02, page 15.
NEW QUESTION # 40
Which of the following is a factor that contributes to a successful review?
- A. The author of the work product to be reviewed leads the review meeting
- B. All participants to the review are trained to deal with the review type and its objectives
- C. All participants to the review will be evaluated based on the defects they will find
- D. Review metrics must be collected to improve the review process
Answer: B
Explanation:
A factor that contributes to a successful review is ensuring that all participants are trained to understand the review type and its objectives. This training helps participants to effectively contribute to the review process, identify issues, and suggest improvements. Proper training also fosters a constructive and collaborative review environment.
NEW QUESTION # 41
A typical objective of testing is to ensure that:
- A. testing is used to drive the development of a software
- B. a software has been properly covered
- C. there are no defects in a software that is about to be released
- D. a software has been tested using a combination of test techniques
Answer: D
Explanation:
This answer is correct because a typical objective of testing is to ensure that a software has been tested using a combination of test techniques, such as black-box, white-box, or experience-based techniques, that are appropriate for the test objectives, test levels, and test types. Testing using a combination of test techniques can increase the effectiveness and efficiency of testing, as different techniques can target different aspects of the software quality, such as functionality, usability, performance, security, reliability, etc. Testing using a combination of test techniques can also reduce the risk of missing defects that could be detected by one technique but not by another. References: ISTQB Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Section 2.3.1.1, Section
2.3.2
NEW QUESTION # 42
Which of the following statements about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products is not true?
- A. Traceability can be useful for determining how many test basis items are covered by the corresponding tests
- B. Traceability can be useful for assessing the impact of a change to a test basis item on the corresponding tests
- C. Traceability can be useful for determining the most suitable test techniques to be used in a testing project
- D. Traceability can be useful to support the needs required by the auditing of testing
Answer: C
Explanation:
Traceability is the ability to trace the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Traceability can provide various benefits for the testing process, such as improving the test coverage, the test quality, the test efficiency, and the test communication. However, not all the statements given are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products. The statement that is not true is option C, which says that test objectives should be the same for all test levels, although the number of tests designed at various levels can vary significantly. This statement is false, because test objectives are the goals or the purposes of testing, which can vary depending on the test level, the test type, the test technique, the test environment, the test stakeholder, etc. Test objectives can be defined in terms of the test basis, the test coverage, the test quality, the test risk, the test cost, the test time, etc. Test objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound, and they should be aligned with the project objectives and the quality characteristics. Test objectives should not be the same for all test levels, as different test levels have different focuses, scopes, and perspectives of testing, such as component testing, integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing. The other statements are true about the value of maintaining traceability between the test basis and test work products, such as:
Traceability can be useful for assessing the impact of a change to a test basis item on the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to identify which tests are affected by a change in the test basis, such as a new requirement, a modified design, a revised risk, etc., and to determine the necessary actions to update, re-execute, or re-evaluate the tests. Traceability can also help to estimate the effort, the cost, and the time needed to implement the change and to verify its impact on the software system.
Traceability can be useful for determining how many test basis items are covered by the corresponding tests: This statement is true, because traceability can help to measure the test coverage, which is the degree to which the test basis is exercised by the test cases. Traceability can help to identify which test basis items are covered, partially covered, or not covered by the tests, and to evaluate the adequacy, the completeness, and the effectiveness of the testing process. Traceability can also help to identify the gaps, the overlaps, or the redundancies in the test coverage, and to prioritize, optimize, or improve the test cases.
Traceability can be useful to support the needs required by the auditing of testing: This statement is true, because traceability can help to provide evidence, documentation, and justification for the testing activities, results, and outcomes. Traceability can help to demonstrate that the testing process follows the standards, the regulations, the policies, and the best practices that are applicable to the software system, the project, or the organization. Traceability can also help to verify that the testing process meets the expectations, the needs, and the satisfaction of the users and the stakeholders. Reference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:
ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 1.2.2, Testing Policies, Strategies, and Test Approaches1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.1, Test Planning1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.2, Test Monitoring and Control1 ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.1.3, Test Analysis and Design1 ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Traceability, Test Basis, Test Artifact, Test Objective, Test Level, Test Coverage, Test Quality, Test Risk, Test Cost, Test Time2
NEW QUESTION # 43
Which of the following types of bug are more likely to be found by static testing then by dynamic testing?
- A. A sub-system that does not perform the intended functionality
- B. Crashes of the application
- C. Variables that were declared in the code without initialization
- D. Functions that take much longer time to complete than expected
Answer: C
Explanation:
Static testing involves reviewing the code, requirements, and design documents without executing the code. It is effective in finding certain types of bugs that do not require the code to be run. One common example of such a bug is variables that are declared but not initialized. These issues can be detected through code inspections or static analysis tools, which can identify uninitialized variables, missing declarations, and other coding standard violations without the need to execute the code.
NEW QUESTION # 44
Which of the following statements about exploratory testing is true?
- A. In exploratory testing, testers usually produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis
- B. When exploratory testing is conducted following a session-based approach, the issues detected by the testers can be documented in session sheets
- C. Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code
- D. Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements
Answer: B
Explanation:
Explanation
Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers dynamically design and execute tests based on their knowledge, intuition, and learning of the software system, without following predefined test scripts or test cases. Exploratory testing can be conducted following a session-based approach, which is a structured way of managing and measuring exploratory testing. In a session-based approach, the testers perform uninterrupted test sessions, usually lasting between 60 and 120 minutes, with a specific charter or goal, and document the issues detected, the test coverage achieved, and the time spent in session sheets.
Session sheets are records of the test activities, results, and observations during a test session, which can be used for reporting, debriefing, and learning purposes. The other statements are false, because:
Exploratory testing is not a test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements, but rather a test technique in which testers explore the software system to detect functional and non-functional defects, as well as to learn new information, risks, or opportunities. Non testable requirements are requirements that are ambiguous, incomplete, inconsistent, or not verifiable, which can affect the quality and effectiveness of the testing process. Non testable requirements can be detected by applying static testing techniques, such as reviews or inspections, to the requirements specification, before the software system is developed or tested.
Exploratory testing is not a test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code, but rather a test technique used by testers during dynamic testing to find defects by exploring the behavior and performance of the software system, without examining the source code. Informal code reviews are static testing techniques, in which the source code is analyzed by one or more reviewers, without following a formal process or using a checklist, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Informal code reviews are usually performed by developers or peers, not by testers.
In exploratory testing, testers usually do not produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis, but rather produce unscripted tests and adapt them based on the feedback and the findings of the testing process. Scripted tests are tests that are designed and documented in advance, with predefined inputs, outputs, and expected results, and are executed according to a test plan or a test procedure. Bidirectional traceability is the ability to trace both forward and backward the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, therisks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc.
Scripted tests and bidirectional traceability are usually associated with more formal and structured testing approaches, such as specification-based or structure-based test techniques, not with exploratory testing. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:
ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques1 ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Exploratory Testing, Session-based Testing, Session Sheet, Non Testable Requirement, Static Testing, Informal Review, Dynamic Testing, Scripted Testing, Bidirectional Traceability2
NEW QUESTION # 45
Which of the following statements about exploratory testing is true?
- A. In exploratory testing, testers usually produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis
- B. When exploratory testing is conducted following a session-based approach, the issues detected by the testers can be documented in session sheets
- C. Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code
- D. Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements
Answer: B
Explanation:
Exploratory testing is an experience-based test technique in which testers dynamically design and execute tests based on their knowledge, intuition, and learning of the software system, without following predefined test scripts or test cases. Exploratory testing can be conducted following a session-based approach, which is a structured way of managing and measuring exploratory testing. In a session-based approach, the testers perform uninterrupted test sessions, usually lasting between 60 and 120 minutes, with a specific charter or goal, and document the issues detected, the test coverage achieved, and the time spent in session sheets. Session sheets are records of the test activities, results, and observations during a test session, which can be used for reporting, debriefing, and learning purposes. The other statements are false, because:
Exploratory testing is not a test technique in which testers explore the requirements specification to detect non testable requirements, but rather a test technique in which testers explore the software system to detect functional and non-functional defects, as well as to learn new information, risks, or opportunities. Non testable requirements are requirements that are ambiguous, incomplete, inconsistent, or not verifiable, which can affect the quality and effectiveness of the testing process. Non testable requirements can be detected by applying static testing techniques, such as reviews or inspections, to the requirements specification, before the software system is developed or tested.
Exploratory testing is not a test technique used by testers during informal code reviews to find defects by exploring the source code, but rather a test technique used by testers during dynamic testing to find defects by exploring the behavior and performance of the software system, without examining the source code. Informal code reviews are static testing techniques, in which the source code is analyzed by one or more reviewers, without following a formal process or using a checklist, to identify defects, violations, or improvements. Informal code reviews are usually performed by developers or peers, not by testers.
In exploratory testing, testers usually do not produce scripted tests and establish bidirectional traceability between these tests and the items of the test basis, but rather produce unscripted tests and adapt them based on the feedback and the findings of the testing process. Scripted tests are tests that are designed and documented in advance, with predefined inputs, outputs, and expected results, and are executed according to a test plan or a test procedure. Bidirectional traceability is the ability to trace both forward and backward the relationships between the items of the test basis, such as the requirements, the design, the risks, etc., and the test artifacts, such as the test cases, the test results, the defects, etc. Scripted tests and bidirectional traceability are usually associated with more formal and structured testing approaches, such as specification-based or structure-based test techniques, not with exploratory testing. Reference: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:
ISTQB® Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques1 ISTQB® Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Exploratory Testing, Session-based Testing, Session Sheet, Non Testable Requirement, Static Testing, Informal Review, Dynamic Testing, Scripted Testing, Bidirectional Traceability2
NEW QUESTION # 46
After being in operation for many years, a document management system must be decommissioned as it has reached its end of life. This system will not be replaced by any other new system. A legal obligation provides that all documents within the system must be kept for at least 20 years in a state archive.
Which of the following statements about maintenance testing for decommissioning of this system is true?
- A. Confirmation testing is required as part of maintenance testing
- B. Data migration testing is required as part of maintenance testing
- C. No maintenance testing is required as this system will not be replaced
- D. Regression testing is required as part of maintenance testing
Answer: B
Explanation:
When a document management system is decommissioned, maintenance testing must include data migration testing to ensure that all documents are correctly transferred to a state archive, meeting legal requirements for long-term storage. This process verifies that data integrity is maintained during migration.
References:
* ISTQB CTFL Syllabus 4.0, Chapter 2.3, page 29: Maintenance Testing and Data Migration
NEW QUESTION # 47
Which of the following statements about how different types of test tools support testers is true?
- A. The support offered by a test data preparation tool is often leveraged by testers to run automated regression test suites
- B. The support offered by a continuous integration tool is often leveraged by testers to automatically generate test cases from a model
- C. The support offered by a performance testing tool is often leveraged by testers to run load tests
- D. The support offered by a bug prediction tool is often used by testers to track the bugs they found
Answer: C
Explanation:
The support offered by a performance testing tool is often leveraged by testers to run load tests, which are tests that simulate a large number of concurrent users or transactions on the system under test, in order to measure its performance, reliability, and scalability. Performance testing tools can help testers to generate realistic workloads, monitor system behavior, collect and analyze performance metrics, and identify performance bottlenecks. The other statements are false, because:
* A test data preparation tool is a tool that helps testers to create, manage, and manipulate test data, which are the inputs and outputs of test cases. Test data preparation tools are not directly related to running automated regression test suites, which are test suites that verify that the system still works as expected after changes or modifications. Regression test suites are usually executed by test execution tools, which are tools that can automatically run test cases and compare actual results with expected results.
* A bug prediction tool is a tool that uses machine learning or statistical techniques to predict the likelihood of defects in a software system, based on various factors such as code complexity, code churn, code coverage, code smells, etc. Bug prediction tools are not used by testers to track the bugs they found, which are the actual defects that have been detected and reported during testing. Bugs are usually tracked by defect management tools, which are tools that help testers to record, monitor, analyze, and resolve defects.
* A continuous integration tool is a tool that enables the integration of code changes from multiple developers into a shared repository, and the execution of automated builds and tests, in order to ensure the quality and consistency of the software system. Continuous integration tools are not used by testers to automatically generate test cases from a model, which are test cases that are derived from a representation of the system under test, such as a state diagram, a decision table, a use case, etc. Test cases can be automatically generated by test design tools, which are tools that support the implementation and maintenance of test cases, based on test design specifications or test models.
References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:
* ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 3.4.1, Types of Test Tools
* ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Performance Testing Tool, Test Data Preparation Tool, Bug Prediction Tool, Continuous Integration Tool, Test Execution Tool, Defect Management Tool, Test Design Tool
NEW QUESTION # 48
Which of the following statements is true?
- A. Experience-based test techniques rely on the experience of testers to identify the root causes of defects found by black-box test techniques
- B. The primary goal of experience-based test techniques is to design test cases that can be easily automated using a GUI-based test automation tool
- C. Experience-based test techniques are often useful to detect hidden defects that have not been targeted by black-box test techniques
- D. Some of the most common test basis used by white-box test techniques include user stories, use cases and business processes
Answer: C
Explanation:
Explanation
Experience-based test techniques are test design techniques that rely on the experience, knowledge, intuition, and creativity of the testers to identify and execute test cases that are likely to find defects in the software system. Experience-based test techniques are often useful to detect hidden defects that have not been targeted by black-box test techniques, which are test design techniques that use the external behavior and specifications of the software system as the test basis, without considering its internal structure or implementation.
Experience-based test techniques can complement black-box test techniques by covering aspects that are not explicitly specified, such as usability, security, reliability, performance, etc. The other statements are false, because:
Experience-based test techniques do not rely on the experience of testers to identify the root causes of defects found by black-box test techniques, but rather to identify the potential sources of defects based on their own insights, heuristics, or exploratory testing. The root causes of defects are usually identified by debugging or root cause analysis, which are activities that involve examining the code or the development process to find and fix the errors that led to the defects.
Some of the most common test basis used by white-box test techniques include the source code, the design documents, the architecture diagrams, and the control flow graphs of the software system.
White-box test techniques are test design techniques that use the internal structure and implementation of the software system as the test basis, and aim to achieve a certain level of test coverage based on the code elements, such as statements, branches, paths, etc. User stories, use cases, and business processes are examples of test basis used by black-box test techniques, as they describe the functional and non-functional requirements of the software system from the perspective of the users or the stakeholders.
The primary goal of experience-based test techniques is not to design test cases that can be easily automated using a GUI-based test automation tool, but rather to design test cases that can reveal defects that are not easily detected by other test techniques, such as boundary value analysis, equivalence partitioning, state transition testing, etc. Test automation is the use of software tools to execute test cases and compare actual results with expected results, without human intervention. Test automation can be applied to different types of test techniques, depending on the test objectives, the test levels, the test tools, and the test resources. However, test automation is not always feasible or beneficial, especially for test cases that require human judgment, creativity, or exploration, such as those designed by experience-based test techniques. References: ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level (CTFL) v4.0 sources and documents:
ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.1, Black-box Test Design Techniques ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.2, White-box Test Design Techniques ISTQB Certified Tester Foundation Level Syllabus v4.0, Chapter 2.2.3, Experience-based Test Design Techniques ISTQB Glossary of Testing Terms v4.0, Experience-based Test Technique, Black-box Test Technique, White-box Test Technique, Test Basis, Test Coverage, Test Automation
NEW QUESTION # 49
......
Changing the Concept of CTFL_Syll_4.0 Exam Preparation 2024: https://exam-labs.exam4tests.com/CTFL_Syll_4.0-pdf-braindumps.html