A release candidate of a SUT, after being fully integrated with all other necessary systems, has successfully passed all required functional tests (90% were automated tests and 10% were manual tests). Now, it is necessary to perform reliability tests aimed at evaluating whether, under certain conditions, that release will be able to guarantee an MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) in the production environment higher than a certain threshold (expressed in CPU time). Which of the following test environments is BEST suited to perform these reliability tests?

• A. Build environment
• B. Preproduction environment
• C. Local development environment
• D. Integration environment

A SUT has an existing automated test suite.
Which of the following statements relating to the introduction of new features in the SUT is TRUE?

• A. The introduction of a new feature could require updates or additions to the testware components
• B. It is generally more difficult to automate test cases for a new feature as the development has not yet started
• C. Automated tests are not affected by the introduction of a new feature and running them against the new SUT is a waste of effort
• D. The test automation engineer should work with the business analysts to ensure the new feature is testable

Which of the following practices can be used to specify the active (i.e., actually available) features for each release of the SUT and determine the corresponding automated tests that must be executed for a given release?

• A. The use of feature files
• B. Feature-driven development
• C. The use of feature toggles
• D. Test-driven development

A TAS is used to run on a test environment a suite of automated regression tests, written at the UI level, on different releases of a web app: all executions complete successfully, always providing correct results (i.e., producing neither false positives nor false negatives). The tests, all independent of each other, consist of executable test scripts based on the flow model pattern which has been implemented in a three-layer TAF (test scripts, business logic, core libraries) by expanding the page object model via the facade pattern. Currently the suite takes too long to run, and the test scripts are considered too long in terms of LOC (Lines of Code).
Which of the following recommendations would you provide for improving the TAS (assuming it is possible to perform all of them)?

• A. Modify the TAF so that test scripts are based on the page object model, rather than the flow model pattern
• B. Split the suite into sub-suites and run each of them concurrently on different test environments
• C. Implement a mechanism to automatically reboot the entire web app in the event of a crash
• D. Modify the architecture of the SUT to improve its testability and, if necessary, the TAA accordingly

Consider A TAS for testing a desktop application via its GUI. All the test cases of the automated test suite contain the same identical sequences of steps at the beginning (to create the necessary objects when doing a preliminary configuration of the test environment and at the end (to remove everything created -specifically for the test itself during the preliminary configuration of the test environment). All automated test cases use the same set of assertion functions from a shared library, for verifying the values in the GUI fields ( e.g text boxes).
What is the BEST recommendation for improving the TAS?

• A. Adopting a set of standard verification methods for use by all automated tests
• B. Implementing keywords with higher level of granularity
• C. Implementing standard setup and teardown functions at test case level
• D. Improving the architecture of the application in order to improve its testability