ISTQB CT-AI Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

The ISTQB CT-AI syllabus defines these two concepts clearly inSection 2.1 – Flexibility and Adaptability. Flexibility is described as the ability of a system to operate in situationsnot explicitly covered in its original requirements, while adaptability refers to how easily the system can bemodifiedto handle new environments or conditions. The syllabus stresses that both flexibility and adaptability are crucial, particularly inself-learning AI systemsthat may need to respond to changes in their environment and adjust their behavior accordingly. It states that systems must be capable of determiningwhenandhowto adjust behavior in evolving situations, especially when the operational environment is not fully known at deployment time . This directly aligns with OptionA.

Option B reverses definitions—the syllabus states flexibility (not adaptability) relates to unspecified situations. Option C is incorrect: self-learning systems requirebothflexibility and adaptability; they are not categorized as one or the other. Option D incorrectly defines flexibility; the syllabus defines adaptability—not flexibility—as ease of modification.

Thus,Option Acorrectly reflects the syllabus.

The syllabus explicitly mentions challenges of handling personal data and ensuring privacy when testing AI-based systems:

"The management of personal data and sensitive data is often a concern during testing, as testing typically requires realistic data and it is difficult to fully anonymize data."

(Reference: ISTQB CT-AI Syllabus v1.0, Section 7.3, page 52 of 99)

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.