ISTQB CT-AI Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

Back-to-back testing is a method where the same set of tests are run on multiple implementations of the system to compare their outputs. This type of testing is typically used to ensure consistency and correctness by comparing the outputs of different implementations under identical conditions. Let's analyze the options given:

A. Comparison of the results of a current neural network model ML model implemented in platform A (for example Pytorch) with a similar neural network model ML model implemented in platform B (for example Tensorflow), for the same data.

This option describes a scenario where two different implementations of the same type of model are being compared using the same dataset. This is a typical back-to-back testing situation.

B. Comparison of the results of a home-grown neural network model ML model with results in a neural network model implemented in a standard implementation (for example Pytorch) for the same data.

This option involves comparing a custom implementation with a standard implementation, which is also a typical back-to-back testing scenario to validate the custom model against a known benchmark.

C. Comparison of the results of a neural network ML model with a current decision tree ML model for the same data.

This option involves comparing two different types of models (a neural network and a decision tree). This is not a typical scenario for back-to-back testing because the models are inherently different and would not be expected to produce identical results even on the same data.

D. Comparison of the results of the current neural network ML model on the current data set with a slightly modified data set.

This option involves comparing the outputs of the same model on slightly different datasets. This could be seen as a form of robustness testing or sensitivity analysis, but not typical back-to-back testing as it doesn’t involve comparing multiple implementations.

Based on this analysis, optionCis the one that describes a situation of back-to-back testing the least because it compares two fundamentally different models, which is not the intent of back-to-back testing.

The ISTQB CT-AI syllabus explains inSection 4.5 – Testing AI-Specific Risksthat adversarial testing is a structured test activity in which testers applyadversarial attacks—crafted or perturbed inputs—to intentionally expose weaknesses in the ML model. The purpose is to identify vulnerabilities that could be exploited throughdata poisoning,evasion attacks, orinput manipulation. OptionCcorrectly reflects this syllabus definition: adversarial testing is aboutusing attacks to locate weaknesses so they can be removed or mitigated.

Option A is incorrect because regression testing does not verify data sourcing policies; it verifies unchanged functionality after modifications. Option B is incorrect because adversarial examples are oftenaddedto training datasets to improverobustness(a practice called adversarial training), not excluded. Option D is incorrect because AIB testing is not described as superior to exploratory data analysis in outlier detection; both have different purposes, and EDA remains essential for data quality assessment.

Thus,Option Cis consistent with syllabus-defined adversarial testing.

The syllabus defines data acquisition as consisting of three steps:

“Data acquisition: The activity of acquiring data relevant to the business problem to be solved by an ML model, typically involving the activities of identifying, gathering and labelling data.”

(Reference: ISTQB CT-AI Syllabus v1.0, Section 4.1, page 33 of 99)