CT-AI Exam Dumps - ISTQB AI Testing Questions and Answers

According to the ISTQB CT-AI syllabus,metamorphic testingworks by applyingmetamorphic relations (MRs): predictable input transformations that should lead to predictable output changes. From the initial test data, clear relations emerge for defensive driving scoring. The score increases when:

v_mean decreases,

a_pos decreases,

a_neg becomes less negative,and decreases when the opposite occurs.

A valid metamorphic follow-up test must modify inputs in a direction consistent with at least one MR while keeping the expected output direction predictable.

Test Alowers v_mean compared to Test 1, with similar acceleration values. This directly satisfies the MR that lower speed → higher score.

Test Cincreases both acceleration and braking intensity compared to Test 2, making the reduced score range (30–70) consistent with more aggressive driving.

Test Dmodifies acceleration and braking magnitudes in ways consistent with Test 3’s defensive-driving scoring boundaries.

Test B, however, changes multiple variables in contradictory directions:

v_mean increases (worse)

a_pos increases (worse)

a_neg becomes less negative (better)

Because these changes conflict,the expected score trend becomes unpredictable, violating the premise of a metamorphic follow-up test.

ThusTest B cannot be considered a metamorphic follow-up, which makesOption Ccorrect.

The syllabus explains that input changes that arein the same domainas what was used for training are expected to be handled with adaptability:

"Adaptability refers to the ability of a system to adjust its behavior in response to changes in its environment or inputs. This includes changes to the inputs which are still within the expected operational range of the system, such as resolution changes in images or sensor data."

(Reference: ISTQB CT-AI Syllabus v1.0, Section 7.6 and 8.2)

The syllabus defines back-to-back testing as a method to compare a modified AI system to the previous version, which is ideal in this scenario:

"Back-to-back testing is performed by comparing the outputs of two systems that are supposed to provide the same outputs, one being a known and trusted system and the other being the test system. This approach can be used to test ML systems after re-training to verify that improvements have not introduced regressions."

(Reference: ISTQB CT-AI Syllabus v1.0, Section 9.3, page 67 of 99)

TheAI Effectis clearly defined in theISTQB Certified Tester AI Testing Syllabus v1.0under Section1.1 – Definition of AI and AI Effect. The document explains that society’s understanding of what qualifies as “AI” changes over time. Technologies once considered AI—such as expert systems from the 1970s and 1980s or early chess-playing systems—are no longer viewed as AI today. This phenomenon is explicitly labeled the“AI Effect,”described as“the changing perception of what constitutes AI.”The syllabus states that as AI capabilities become routine or widely implemented, they often stop being perceived as true artificial intelligence .

Options B, C, and D do not capture this definition. While AI learning from data (B) is a property of ML, it does not describe the shifting perception of AI. Option C describes a technological achievement, not a perceptual shift. Option D references a historical AI milestone (Deep Blue defeating Kasparov) that the syllabus specifically uses as an example of technology that is no longer considered AI due to the AI Effect. Therefore, onlyOption Aaccurately reflects the AI Effect as defined by the ISTQB syllabus.

The ISTQB CT-AI syllabus explains supervised learning under Section1.6 – Machine Learning Approaches. It definesclassificationas predictingcategorical labels, whereasregressionpredictscontinuous numerical values. OptionB—deciding whether an object is a bicycle or a motorcycle—fits the definition of classification precisely because the model chooses between discrete categories. The syllabus also uses similar examples to illustrate classification tasks, reinforcing that this is the correct interpretation .

Option A is incorrect because image recognition of a dog is aclassificationtask, not regression. Option C is incorrect because predicting a 10% price rise involves forecasting anumerical value, which is aregressionproblem. Option D is incorrect because classification can involveany number of classes, not only two. Multiclass classification is explicitly mentioned in the syllabus.

Therefore, OptionBis the only answer aligned with the syllabus’ definitions.

A. Identifying suitable tests by looking at the complexity of the test cases.

While complexity analysis can help in selecting important test cases, it does not directly address the issue of optimizing the entire regression suite effectively.

B. Using a random subset of tests.

Randomly selecting test cases may miss critical tests and does not ensure an optimized regression suite. This approach lacks a systematic method for ensuring comprehensive coverage.

C. Automating test scripts using AI-based test automation tools.

Automation helps in running tests efficiently but does not inherently optimize the selection of tests to prevent the suite from growing too large.

D. Using an AI-based tool to optimize the regression test suite by analyzing past test results.

This is the most effective approach as AI-based tools can analyze historical test data, identify patterns, and prioritize tests that are more likely to catch defects based on past results. This method ensures an optimized and manageable regression test suite by focusing on the most impactful test cases.

Therefore, the correct answer isDbecause using an AI-based tool to analyze past test results is the best option to optimize regression test selection and manage the size of the regression suite effectively​​.

The question asks which deficiency is most likely to be discovered by the test expert given the scenario of poor real-world performance despite good isolated accuracy.

A lack of similarity between the training and testing data (A): This is a common issue in ML where the model performs well on training data but poorly on real-world data due to a lack of representativeness in the training data. This leads to poor generalization to new, unseen data.

The input data has not been tested for quality prior to use for testing (B): While data quality is important, this option is less likely to be the primary reason for the described issue compared to the representativeness of training data.

A lack of focus on choosing the right functional-performance metrics (C): Proper metrics are crucial, but the issue described seems more related to the data mismatch rather than metric selection.

A lack of focus on non-functional requirements testing (D): Non-functional requirements are important, but the scenario specifically mentions issues with detecting real cancer cases, pointing more towards data issues.

The question asks which combination of tests would be most appropriate to include in the strategy for optimal detection in a workflow system using multiple ML models.

Pairwise testing of combinations (I): This method is useful for testing interactions between different components in the workflow to ensure they work well together, identifying potential issues in the integration.

Testing each individual model for accuracy (II): Ensuring that each model in the workflow performs accurately on its own is crucial before integrating them into a combined workflow.

A/B testing of different sequences of models (III): This involves comparing different sequences to determine which configuration yields the best results. While useful, it might not be as fundamental as pairwise and individual accuracy testing in the initial stages.

The question asks which characteristic is least likely to cause safety-related issues for an AI system. Let's evaluate each option:

Non-determinism (A): Non-deterministic systems can produce different outcomes even with the same inputs, which can lead to unpredictable behavior and potential safety issues.

Robustness (B): Robustness refers to the ability of the system to handle errors, anomalies, and unexpected inputs gracefully. A robust system is less likely to cause safety issues because it can maintain functionality under varied conditions.

High complexity (C): High complexity in AI systems can lead to difficulties in understanding, predicting, and managing the system's behavior, which can cause safety-related issues.

Self-learning (D): Self-learning systems adapt based on new data, which can lead to unexpected changes in behavior. If not properly monitored and controlled, this can result in safety issues.

The ISTQB CT-AI syllabus (Section5.2 – AI for Testing) explains that various AI approaches can support testing activities. Probabilistic methods—one of the three major AI technique groups—are used topredict system failures, especially when dealing with uncertainty, likelihood estimation, and reliability analysis. This aligns precisely with OptionB.

Option A is incorrect because regression test optimization is typically performed usingsearch-based optimization, not classification. Option C is incorrect because fuzzy logic is more suited to reasoning under vagueness, not generating test cases. Option D is incorrect: defect prediction relies on statistical learning or classification models, not computational optimization.

Thus,Option Bis the most syllabus-consistent mapping of AI techniques to testing tasks.