BCS Exam CTFL4 Topic 1 Question 12 Discussion

Actual exam question for BCS's CTFL4 exam

Question #: 12
Topic #: 1

For the same financial institution in Question 12, with the same requirements and expectations, what would be the most likely investment values used in testing if two-point boundary value analysis is used to design test cases specific to the 13% interest rate equivalence partition?

AR100 000, R100 001, R500 000, R500 001.

BR99 999, R100 000, R499 999, R500 000.

CR100 000. R500 000.

DR99 000, R500 001.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: C

The state transition diagram provided shows three distinct states:

Waiting for fingerprint

Waiting for PIN

Valid PIN/ask menu selection

Each state represents a different stage in the system's operation, with transitions based on user actions and system responses.

by Florinda at Sep 08, 2024, 05:45 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CTFL4 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Leah

2 days ago

I agree, B seems right for the edge cases.

upvoted 0 times

...

Meaghan

8 days ago

Definitely think it's B, those boundaries make sense.

upvoted 0 times

...

Marilynn

14 days ago

I’m a bit confused about whether we should consider values just above R500 000. I thought we only needed the exact limits for testing.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lettie

19 days ago

I practiced a similar question, and I feel like the two-point boundary values should definitely include the exact limits.

upvoted 0 times

...

Genevive

24 days ago

I think option B looks familiar since it includes values right around the boundaries, like R100 000 and R499 999.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ranee

1 month ago

I remember we discussed boundary value analysis, but I'm not sure if we should include values just below and above the thresholds.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dallas

1 month ago

I'm not entirely sure about this one. The wording of the question is a bit confusing to me. I'll need to take some time to really understand the concepts of equivalence partitioning and boundary value analysis before I can confidently answer this. Better to be thorough than guess.

upvoted 0 times

...

Soledad

1 month ago

I've got this! The most likely investment values would be R99,999, R100,000, R499,999, and R500,000. Those represent the lower and upper boundaries of the 13% interest rate equivalence partition, using two-point boundary value analysis. Easy peasy!

upvoted 0 times

...

Juan

1 month ago

Okay, let me think this through step-by-step. We need to find the investment values that would be used in testing for the 13% interest rate equivalence partition, using two-point boundary value analysis. I'll need to review my notes on that technique to make sure I approach this properly.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lizbeth

1 month ago

This question seems straightforward, but I want to make sure I understand the requirements correctly. The key seems to be the 13% interest rate equivalence partition and using two-point boundary value analysis.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rolf

1 month ago

Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm a bit confused about how to apply two-point boundary value analysis here. I'll need to carefully re-read the question and think through the logic. Maybe I can find some examples in my study materials to help guide me.

upvoted 0 times

...

Luisa

1 month ago

Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about the difference between material requirements planning and master production scheduling. I'll need to review those concepts before answering.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lashawnda

1 month ago

I'm a bit confused on this one. Is the Playbook running on Prism Element or Prism Central? That's going to determine where I need to look for the issue.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lewis

6 months ago

In this exam, the correct answer is hidden behind a paywall. You have to pay extra to unlock it. It's called the 'Financial Transparency DLC'.

upvoted 0 times

...

Gene

6 months ago

Ah, the joys of financial testing! Where every penny counts and the boundaries are as elusive as a unicorn. I'm going with D, just for the sheer audacity of it.

upvoted 0 times

Brice

4 months ago

I agree, B seems like a solid choice for testing the 13% interest rate equivalence partition.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lawrence

5 months ago

Hmm, I hadn't considered B. It does make sense for the boundaries. What do you think?

upvoted 0 times

...

Selma

5 months ago

Interesting, I see your point. But I believe B might be the safer bet for this scenario.

upvoted 0 times

...

Letha

5 months ago

I think D is a bold choice, but I'm leaning towards A for more coverage.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jerry

6 months ago

This question is a real head-scratcher! I feel like I need to dust off my old textbooks and relearn two-point boundary value analysis from scratch. Wish me luck!

upvoted 0 times

Annmarie

4 months ago

Let's hope for the best outcome with our test cases!

upvoted 0 times

...

Mira

5 months ago

I agree, those values seem to fit the criteria for two-point boundary value analysis.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jacquelyne

5 months ago

Good luck! I think the answer might be B) R99 999, R100 000, R499 999, R500 000.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annice

7 months ago

I'm not sure about this one. Isn't two-point boundary value analysis all about testing the edges of the valid input range? If that's the case, then I'd say the answer is C.

upvoted 0 times

Winfred

6 months ago

I disagree, I believe it's A. It includes values just above and below the boundaries.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ollie

6 months ago

I think it's B. It covers the lower and upper boundaries of the valid input range.

upvoted 0 times

...

Kattie

7 months ago

Hmm, I think the answer is B. The boundaries for the 13% interest rate equivalence partition would be the values just below and just above the 100,000 and 500,000 marks.

upvoted 0 times

...