callicon +1 210 504 8191
whatsAppIcon +1 210 415 9856
emailIcon info@koenig-solutions.com
koenig-logo
Login
whatsAppIcon +1 210 415 9856
phoneIcon +1 210 504 8191
koenig-logo
All Courses

ISTQB Certified Tester Advanced Level Test Analyst (CTAL-TA) Quiz Questions and Answers

Answer :
  • 5 test cases

Explanation :

There are three conditions: before 6AM after 9AM Railcard This results in a non-collapsed decision table with 8 decision rules (columns). Two of the decision rules are infeasible because the conditions after 9AM and before 6AM cannot both be true. This reduces the number of decision rules to 6. There are 4 actions: Super-Saver price Saver price Standard Price 25% discount given. The following two decision rules result in identical (redundant) actions where the only action which is true is “Super-Saver price”: 1. before 6AM = false, after 9AM = true, Railcard = true, Action = Super-Saver price, other actions = false 2. before 6AM = false, after 9AM = true, Railcard = false, Action = Super-Saver price, other actions = false One of these decision rules can be eliminated. The result is 5 non-redundant and feasible decion rules (i.e. 5 test cases).
Answer :
  • C AND E

Explanation :

C: not accepting to participate = 500 in premium, accepting to participate but failing to show up for some reason = (500 – 25) = 475. Participating with any combination of 1, 2, 3, or 4 tests will add 4 more test cases with different outcomes. See attached decision table. E: 1 test case for not accepting to participate at all + 2*2*2*2 to cover the possibilities of yes and no in participating in the 4 tests, see decision table also in spreadsheet. (It makes no sense to do 15 more tests for people not accepting to participate since they will all result in the same negative result of not participating in any test, so they are not done due to the restriction. If this restriction had not been introduced, then the result would be 32 test cases).
Answer :
  • The Agile team will use Exploratory testing and defect-based testing as the primary testing techniques for stories 1-4. For story 1 decision table testing will also be used, automated configuration testing for story 3 and attack-based testing using a chec

Explanation :

this is the most likely proposal blending a number of techniques: It mentions both exploratory and defect-based testing, the latter of which is directly supported by the scenario, that states “the team …has as part of their retrospectives built check lists of common defects…” and because the organization should have experience with the types of defects this type of application will exhibit. Further decision table testing is proposed which matches what is written in the scenario for no 1. Automated configuration testing is supported by the scenario for no 3 and so is checklist-based attacks for security testing in no 4.
Answer :
  • A AND C

Explanation :

A : State transition testing is appropriate because it will test for the correct navigation between the various screens. It will also enable management of the waiting list to be evaluated (e.g. transitions between application approved and waiting list) C : The specification mentions that an objective is to manage the numbers of players who can register for a particular team. Limits (i.e. numbers of registered players which a team can have) are to be enforced which may result in applicants being placed on a waiting list. The use of boundary value analysis is relevant for testing these limits.
Answer :
  • Low-level test cases should be written with detailed test procedures and documentation. Traceability from the low-level test cases to the requirements should be also assured

Explanation :

The syllabus says: “Concrete test cases are useful when the requirements are well-defined, when the testing staff is less experienced and when external verification of the tests, such as audits, is required. Concrete test cases provide excellent reproducibility (i.e., another tester will get the same results), but may also require a significant amount of maintenance effort and tend to limit tester ingenuity during execution”.
Answer :
  • B AND C

Explanation :

B : This test condition relates to usability aspects of requirement 1. “The user must be provided with an interface with which they can easily (do things) with the minimum number of steps” – this targets in particular the efficiency aspects of usability. C: This test condition addresses the functional accuracy of the app’s efficiency function, as stated in requirement
Answer :
  • A AND D

Explanation :

A: This is the best recommendation for project HIPPOS, the team has experience in testing and in Agile development and the application is an online marketing application where experience-based testing at a high level makes a lot of sense. D: This is a good recommendation because there are demands for traceability, and the testers do not have much test experience.
Answer :
  • interoperability

Explanation :

clearly, the system must work in different environments: Each part must cooperate with the other one, client applications must work under Android and iOS, client and scooter applications must cooperate with GPS, and the server application must serve different type of payments. Therefore interoperability is very important for this system.
Answer :
  • If the testers are experienced and have good knowledge of the system under test, experience-based techniques are a viable alternative to more formal techniques if there are problems with the quality of the documentation or if the project is under a tight

Explanation :

Experience-based techniques can be used as an option of more formal techniques, if the testers have enough experience and information about the system under test. Typically, this can happen in situations when there is time pressure, or the quality of documentation is poor or there is no documentation available.
Answer :
  • 0.5

Explanation :

The six values to test are 40 and 41 for the lower boundary of the Regular partition, 150 and 151 which cover both the upper boundary for Regular and the lower boundary for Frequent, and 300 and 301 for the upper boundary of Frequent. Existing test cases have already covered 3 from the 6 values (i.e., 50%)