iSQI CTFL-AuT Exam - Topic 4 Question 55 Discussion

Actual exam question for iSQI's CTFL-AuT exam

Question #: 55
Topic #: 4

Your company produces electric windows and corresponding control units. The newest control unit for electric windows has repeatedly been problematic, which you think result from issues In the requirements, in particular, you noticed Bee following requirements in your first review.

Which of the following requirements for the system test violates at least one of the quality criteria of the ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2011 ?

ID; 12. When the central lock is activated, then all windows are automatically closed.

ID; 37 Given: the ignition q activated. When the button tor a window is pressed down, then the window moves down.

ID; 85: Given: the window moves up. When the window encounters resistance, then the window ttng motor stops.

ID; 142; Given: a door is open When the button for a window is pressed then the message M-85 is sent to the control unit

AThe requirement 85 is not atomic

BThe requirement 37 is Inconsistent on system level.

CThe requirement 12 is ambiguous.

DThe requirement 142 is not verifiable on system level

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: C

https://www.automotivespice.com/fileadmin/software-download/Automotive_SPICE_PAM_30.pdf

by Renea at Sep 15, 2024, 09:37 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

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

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Georgiann

3 months ago

Requirement 12 is a classic case of poor wording.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ocie

3 months ago

Wait, how can requirement 142 not be verifiable? That sounds off.

upvoted 0 times

...

Katlyn

3 months ago

Requirement 85 seems fine to me, not sure what the fuss is about.

upvoted 0 times

...

Whitney

4 months ago

I think requirement 37 is inconsistent too.

upvoted 0 times

...

Sarah

4 months ago

Requirement 12 is definitely ambiguous.

upvoted 0 times

...

Louvenia

4 months ago

I'm leaning towards requirement 142 being non-verifiable, but I need to double-check what makes a requirement verifiable at the system level.

upvoted 0 times

...

Elenore

4 months ago

Requirement 12 seems ambiguous to me; I recall that ambiguity can lead to different interpretations, which isn't good.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tamera

4 months ago

I think requirement 37 could be inconsistent at the system level, especially if the ignition isn't always on when the button is pressed.

upvoted 0 times

...

Launa

5 months ago

I remember discussing how requirement 85 might not be atomic, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the main issue here.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tien

5 months ago

Requirement 142 has me a bit stumped. How can we verify that on the system level? Might need to do some deeper analysis there.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dante

5 months ago

Requirement 85 seems a bit complex. Is it really atomic, or is there more going on there? I'll need to break that one down.

upvoted 0 times

...

Vivan

5 months ago

Requirement 37 is interesting. I wonder if there could be some inconsistencies on the system level, like if the ignition is off but the window still moves down. Gotta think that through.

upvoted 0 times

...

Aaron

5 months ago

Okay, let's see here. Requirement 12 seems a bit ambiguous to me - what exactly does "automatically closed" mean? I'll need to dig into that one.

upvoted 0 times

...

Avery

5 months ago

Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'll need to carefully review each requirement and think about how they align with the ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2011 quality criteria.

upvoted 0 times

...

Delsie

5 months ago

Okay, let me think this through. I believe the key is using the --new option with either a device path or an NFS path. I'll double-check the other options just to be sure.

upvoted 0 times

...

Julie

10 months ago

Looks like the developers were having a bit too much fun with their requirements. 'M-85' - is that some kind of secret code for 'windows not working'?

upvoted 0 times

...