Latest and Valid 2B0-104 Practice Test updated this week

killexams.com provides the most current and 2022 current Pass4sure 2B0-104 Practice Test with boot camp intended for new subject areas regarding Enterasys 2B0-104 Exam. Practice the 2B0-104 boot camp and Answers to be able to Improve your comprehension and pass your current test with Substantial Marks. We assurance your pass in the Test Centre, covering all the subject areas of 2B0-104 ensure of which you improve your current Knowledge of typically the 2B0-104 exam. Pass with these actual 2B0-104 questions.

Exam Code: 2B0-104 Practice test 2022 by Killexams.com team
Enterasys Certified Internetworking Engineer(ECIE)
Enterasys Internetworking testing
Killexams : Enterasys Internetworking testing - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/2B0-104 Search results Killexams : Enterasys Internetworking testing - BingNews https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/2B0-104 https://killexams.com/exam_list/Enterasys Killexams : Testing Chips For Security

Supply chains and manufacturing processes are becoming increasingly diverse, making it much harder to validate the security in complex chips. To make matters worse, it can be challenging to justify the time and expense to do so, and there’s little agreement on the ideal metrics and processes involved.

Still, this is particularly important as chip architectures evolve from a single chip developed by one vendor to a collection of chips in a package from multiple vendors. The ability to identify security risks early in the design flow can save time, effort, and money on the back end of the flow. And in theory, this should be the same as any other test or debug process. But hardware quality, reliability, and security have very different track records in terms of testing.

“We’ve done tests for quality for the past 50 years,” said Mark Tehranipoor, chair of the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) at the University of Florida. “We’ve done tests for reliability for the past 25 years. And now we’re talking about tests for security.”

One of the key challenges on the security side is clarifying exactly what you’re testing for. While a chip may have been manufactured to detailed specifications, its security has to be assessed through the mindset of a smart and determined attacker rather than through predictable metrics.

“You have to think about the intelligence of an adversary,” Tehranipoor said, he said. “We can model a defect, but it’s extremely hard to model an intent. That’s where security becomes difficult to test for.”

No matter how many best practices are applied during the design phase, the real world often presents security challenges that are hard to anticipate. “Once you’re out in the field, all bets are off,” said Adam Cron, distinguished architect at Synopsys. “You’re at the whims of any hacker around the world and what his best practices are, and what the new thing is coming down the line.”

Tehranipoor and Cron are two of the authors of a accurate paper examining these issues, “Quantifiable Assurance: From IPs to Platforms.” The paper lists more than 20 different metrics for different aspects of security, which points to the complexity of the challenge. “Generally, measuring security is still at a nascent place,” Cron said. “All companies are just getting off the ground from a measurement standpoint for security in particular.”

Finding consensus around those metrics won’t be easy. “Over the past several years, the [hardware security] community has been talking about developing metrics, but we’re not quite there yet, and we’re not going to be there any time soon,” Tehranipoor said. “Why? Because by the time we figure out a good metric for some attacks, a new attack comes in, and we’re behind again.”

Agreeing on metrics
Just about any security metric could be rendered irrelevant by the right attack. A hypothetical device certified for high security could be breached by a highly intelligent adversary who happened to spot something others hadn’t. “If we all missed looking at it from the angle that this particular attacker looked it – we thought it was a really good, secure device, but this guy showed up and he looked at it in a certain way that we all missed – then suddenly, there’s an easy attack,” Tehranipoor said.

Texplained CTO and founder Olivier Thomas said any testing of IC security has to consider three classes of attacks – non-invasive, semi-invasive, and fully invasive. But testing for the latter often falls short. “Testing the first two classes is usually done pretty well, as this does not require too much equipment, resources, and time. But when it comes to the fully invasive class, the evaluations, if conducted, are really far from what pirates or organized groups are capable of,” he said.

Moreover, the wide range of ways any chip can be attacked presents a fundamental challenge. “I have to think about whether this chip is going to leak information through the pin, through the software, through the firmware, through the JTAG, or can it deliver it to me through power, or EM, or timing, or optical, or laser,” said Tehranipoor. “There are so many ways, and there is no single metric for all of them, because laser is fundamentally different than power, power is fundamentally different than EM. So how many different metrics are we going to have?”

Still, Cron said, there is a real push for a ratings system for consumer products as well as high-security solutions. This is akin to a UL listing for consumer appliances, likely with a date stamp to indicate how up to date a chip’s security is. “You’ll know that, at the time it was checked, you achieved a certain level, and there won’t be infinite levels,” he said. “But if you buy that same product and it’s been sitting on the shelf for two years, you have to ask yourself, ‘Is it still good?’”

A range of approaches
In the meantime, there are several ways to get a sense of a chip’s security. One involves Joint Interpretation Library (JIL) scoring. “JIL scoring tells you how ‘expensive’ it is to initially figure out an attack (identification), and how expensive it is to subsequently do the attack (exploitation),” said Maarten Bron, managing director at Riscure. “This method was initially developed for expressing the security of smart cards (bank cards, public transit cards, SIM cards), and has recently gained wider traction in the domain of MCUs and SoCs.”

Cron noted that NIST has standards for certifying encryption or cryptographic IP, and Synopsys’ RTL Architect can look at differential power analysis. “But there’s still no metric per se,” he said. “Those tools are giving you areas where you should look. But whether or not you do look, or whether or not, while you look, you detect the thing that the hacker is going to be looking at, as well, who’s to say?”

Scott Best, senior director of security products at Rambus, said that while each individual chip manufacturer approaches this with the best of intentions, they all do things differently. “There is no one standard adopted for industrywide practice commercially,” he said. “In U.S. Defense, there are some early-stage guidelines coming together for Microelectronic Quantified Assurance (MQA), for example as part of the RAMP program.”

The diverse range of evaluation methods in use today, according to Texplained’s Thomas, includes analysis by researchers who publish at conferences and online, independent analysis requested by OEMs and integrators seeking more information than that offered by vendors, and Common Criteria security evaluations that only focus on some types of attacks “and therefore are not fully exhaustive.”

But that hasn’t diminished the need for this kind of standardization. “There are two broad key business drivers here,” said Jason Oberg, CTO at Cycuity. “One is obviously standardization. It’s very clear that if you can check a box, someone is more likely to buy. If you sell in a certain market, and if you have to do it, that’s what’s standardization can help drive. The other component is really driven by customer demand for, ‘I want a secure product.’ Or maybe they’ve had that crisis where it actually happened to them. And if you think about defining the systematic process when you have security requirements that are defined up front, part of those security requirements are actually driven by standards.”

Shifting left
This is why there is an increasing amount of focus on security earlier in designs, and testing as early as possible is always better, as with any other portion of the chip design process. It improves efficiency and minimizes cost.

“Catch the security problem earlier and it’s going to cost you 10 times less,” Tehranipoor said. “Go left. Don’t do it post-silicon if you can do it at layout level. Don’t do it at the layout level if you can do it at gate level. Don’t do it at gate level if you can do it at the RTL level.”

Performing security validation pre-silicon allows for far faster remediation of any issues that may come up, and is increasingly becoming an expected part of the process. “At some point, having a simulation-driven pre-silicon security signoff process will become table stakes for makers of security chips,” said Riscure’s Bron. “Put differently, I can see this becoming a competitive disadvantage for those companies that don’t.”

Lang Lin, Ansys principal product manager, noted that testing virtually has other benefits, as well. “In simulation, you don’t have the noisy environment faced by the post-silicon chip,” he said. “You’re living in a digital world, a virtual world, so you can clearly see where the leakage path is from simulation, which might not be that clear in silicon.”

However, it’s crucial to keep in mind that from a security point of view, a design and its implementation are two very different things. “A cryptographic algorithm can be secure on paper (the ‘design’), yet the implementation of it can deliver rise to side-channel leakage that renders the overall product insecure,” Bron said. “What I like about the notion of pre-silicon security is that it allows developers to design security into their design, design vulnerabilities out of their design, and to see how this security carries over into the implementation of the design.”

Anticipating complex environments
Complexity always has been a big challenge for security experts, and it becomes even more difficult to safeguard a chip if it’s being included in a heterogeneous design with multiple components that are not developed by the same company. That makes testing all the more important, and how that testing is done can make a big difference.

Chips ideally should be tested in a worst-case scenario, with all countermeasures disabled — “without redundancy, without security measures and so on, so the chip is operated in the worst condition for security and we see the pure hardware security features,” said Peter Laackmann, distinguished engineer for the Connected Secure Systems (CSS) Division at Infineon. “This means if you bring the chip into another environment, then the situation should not get worse.”

Still, complex environments can introduce vulnerabilities in other ways. For example, consider a crypto wallet that’s breached despite the presence of a security chip, because that security chip happens to be controlled by a standard microcontroller. “With electrical glitches on the standard microcontroller, hardware wallets were successfully broken, although they have security chips certified according to Common Criteria inside which were not harmed at all,” Laackman said.

Robert Ruiz, director of product marketing at Synopsys, said utilizing PCIe or USB ports to test for defects can introduce vulnerabilities as well. “That technique itself kind of opens up the chip, if not the whole system, to hack, because you’re basically giving hackers entry points into the system through a standard plug-in port… so these new techniques, they’re improving efficiency on design and manufacturing, yet they may actually open up the door a bit,” he said.

Ongoing validation
Testing chips, both on their own and as part of package, is essential. “A die should always be tested in isolation first, and chip makers are doing this,” said Bron. “The testing of all components ‘together’ is what evaluation methods like Common Criteria tackle very well, and we see chipmakers that understand these evaluation processes well enough to be able to derive benefit from this during chip design/package design.”

At the same time, nothing done pre-silicon eliminates the need for validation after the fact. “You would not just build a vehicle without computing the needed functions and the needed safety, and just testing it afterwards,” Laackmann said. “So testing is always mandatory for hardware, and for software, and also in combination. But you can spare some time, and make your results more reliable if you have pre-silicon tests in advance.”

Testing engineering samples or final commercial samples can offer significant benefits, even if it’s too late to fix some potential issues. “Some security vulnerabilities that are discovered this way can be (partly) mitigated in firmware still,” Bron said. “Others cannot, and these are typically learning opportunities to make the next generation of chips more secure.”

Increasing demand for security
Interest in security is trending upward, driven by customers with greater security concerns for everything from smart cards to automotive applications. “The priority is based on the application,” Ansys’ Lin said. “For applications with secret data, with confidential data, of course, security is prioritized higher than the other metrics.”

In the future, it will be possible to test for specific security concerns that are most important for a specific application or user. “You’ll say, ‘My application is this,’ Tehranipoor said. “And the tool automatically will be intelligent enough to say, ‘Okay, got it – I’m going to choose x, y, and z, I’m going to optimize it for you for that – and I’m going to deliver you a report based on that optimization.”

That kind of specificity is essential for security, which can’t be pinned down to a straightforward, universal metric. “And we’re going to get there,” he said. “We’re not there yet. But we will get there.”

Related
Semiconductor Security Knowledge Center
Security Risks Widen With Commercial Chiplets
Choosing components from a multi-vendor menu holds huge promise for reducing costs and time-to-market, but it’s not as simple as it sounds.
Chip Backdoors: Assessing The Threat
Steps are being taken to minimize problems, but they will take years to implement.
Why It’s So Difficult — And Costly — To Secure Chips
Threats are growing and widening, but what is considered sufficient can vary greatly by application or by user. Even then, it may not be enough.


Wed, 05 Oct 2022 12:00:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://semiengineering.com/testing-chips-for-security/
Killexams : 3 Experiments To Run For Responsive Search Ads Testing

Responsive search ads (RSA) testing can be daunting yet rewarding.

Google sending the expanded text ad (ETA) the way of the dinosaur disappointed many advertisers and marketers.

But the opportunities that await those willing to test RSAs are considerable, especially when paired with the intelligence of broad match.

However, if you haven’t been keeping a close eye on these changes – or if running Google Ads campaigns is just one of your job responsibilities – it can be confusing to know what to do.

So today, I’m going to walk you through three RSA experiments you can run the next time you create a search campaign.

But first, let’s ensure you have the context you need for RSA testing.

What You Need To Know About Responsive Search Ads Testing

Testing with ETAs was fairly straightforward.

You’d run two (or more) ads with fixed headlines and descriptions, compare their click-through rates (CTRs), and possibly keep an eye on conversions from the landing page.

This approach was possible because ETAs mostly:

  • Showed up the same way to every user, every time.
  • Served for the same queries as each other.
  • Impressions didn’t play as significant a role in testing.

All other considerations being equal, an RSA gets 4X more impressions than an ETA.

This requires using a metric called conversions per impression, which you can calculate by multiplying an ad’s CTR by its conversion rate.

In other words:

  • RSAs serve for considerably more queries due to higher Ad Rank.
  • The increase in impressions leads to a typical dip in conversion rate.
  • That same increase also leads to a lift in overall conversions.
  • Marketers should monitor for conversions per impression (manual bidding) or conversions within a target cost per acquisition (CPA)/return on ad spend (ROAS).

Read: How to A/B Test Responsive Search Ads.

Experiment 1: Pinning Vs. Mix-And-Match

Background

The first test you should consider running is to see the effects of pinning on your campaigns.

By default, RSAs mix and match headlines and descriptions to test and find the combinations that people respond to best.

Pinning lets you tell Google which headline and description positions should appear exactly where you put them.

The Experiment

Create two identical RSAs. You can fill in as many of the 15 headlines and four descriptions as you like; make sure it’s the same in both ads.

Then, pin a few of the headlines and descriptions in one ad, while leaving the other one unmodified.

What You’ll Learn

Studies have shown that RSAs with all elements pinned can still get great CTR and conversion rates, but these go up when you don’t pin (or pin sparingly).

Running identical ads with one having pinned elements is a great way to learn just how much of a gap Google will create between the two, all else being equal.

Experiment 2: Segmenting By Message

Background

Next is arguably the most important aspect of RSA testing – and, as a copywriter, my personal favorite.

With ad platforms handling more campaign management through their automation, messaging is more important than it’s been in some time.

The Experiment

You can create up to three RSAs per ad group, so for this experiment, you might want to consider maxing out.

Each ad group should have a distinct theme centered around a group of keywords and utilize broad match. You might address different personas, pain points, or even offers for topics.

What You’ll Learn

This experiment should show you what subjects get a response and what queries they show for.

There’s no substitute for knowing what your customers are looking for and want to hear.

And, when everyone is using the same base automations in Google, it’s one of the ways you can unlevel the playing field to capture a competitive edge.

Experiment 3: Pseudo-ETAs With A Control RSA

Background

While an argument can be made that re-creating ETAs via pinning defeats the purpose of RSAs, some advertisers still crave (or need) that control.

Credit for this approach goes to Chris Ridley, who identified it as a way to cope with the limit of three RSAs per ad group.

The Experiment

Create two pseudo-ETAs by pinning three headlines and two descriptions (no other copy).

The third ad is a true RSA where you leave everything unpinned, instead using the space to test out new messaging.

What You’ll Learn

This experiment allows you to benchmark the performance (in particular CTR) of pseudo-ETAs.

This can be helpful for advertisers who need to display certain information at all times, such as those operating in regulated industries.

Read: 4 Reasons Click Volume Decreases & What To Do.

There Is Opportunity With RSAs If You Use Them Right

Unfortunately, Google still doesn’t show you which ad showed for a search term (the report limits this connection to the ad group level).

It also doesn’t show you performance based on headlines and descriptions.

While there’s a certain element of guesswork involved with deciphering RSA performance, you can still structure your campaigns according to the data Google does show.

Here are a few more things to keep in mind as you test your next RSA campaign:

  • Ad strength is one of the ways Google provides feedback to advertisers about the quality of its ads. While it’s not something you want to dismiss out of hand, don’t feel the need to make Google-suggested changes to your ads to get a higher ad strength score.
  • RSAs allow you space for up to 15 headlines and four descriptions. While it might be tempting to pack your ad and see the results, remember that more elements mean more guesswork.
  • The structure and messaging of your RSAs account for half of your results. Put in the work ahead of time, don’t skip the fundamentals (like positioning and a good website experience), and work with your clients and stakeholders to set reasonable expectations.

RSAs are one of the best examples of Google’s automation changes that require a shift in mindset.

Optimize the periphery of your campaigns – structure, creative, and data – and exercise a degree of patience.

There is space for creative, clever advertisers to win big.

More resources:


Featured Image: Shaiith/Shutterstock

Wed, 05 Oct 2022 00:53:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.searchenginejournal.com/responsive-search-ads-testing/463538/
Killexams : Performance Testing Should Focus on Trends

Performance testing starts by setting a baseline and defining the metrics to track together with the development team. Nikolay Avramov advises executing performance tests and comparing the results frequently during development to spot degrading performance as soon as possible.

Avramov, an automation lead at Automate The Planet, spoke about performance testing at QA Challenge Accepted 2022

One of the common approaches that Avramov is seeing is to develop a product, do functional testing on it, pass it through user acceptance, and then check if it works "fine" under the expected loads. By starting to test at the end of the development process, we are missing out on opportunities to get more information we could use, Avramov stated.

According to Avramov, having a trend of results over time is crucial for performance testing:

Performance testing should be planned before and executed during development. Knowing the types of performance tests that need to be developed, the team should identify metrics to track over the course of the project and define a baseline for their system. Over the course of development there is always a way to measure the product.

During a project, bottlenecks could be chained together and become harder and harder to fix. And even if we do, this could introduce regression issues all over the system, Avramov mentioned.

Each application has its limits and specifics, Avramov said. According to him, the first goal for performance testing is to define what those limits are, and what the "idle" performance is, looking from the client’s standpoint:

The question is, what are we trying to improve?

  • If it’s the load time of a home page, there is a set of metrics and tests that we can start running and track its results.
  • If it’s the number of concurrent users it could withstand, then we need to configure a set of load tests to perform and analyse the results after each change.
  • If it’s a business scenario that takes too much time, the problem-solving might require profiling a database query, or a series of web requests.

Finding performance bottlenecks is always related to teamwork across multiple roles, departments, and system components, Avramov said. No one has all the answers in one place, so part of the job is to connect all these people and channel their knowledge and energy to solve the problem.

Performance testing is an iterative process where constant improvements need to be made - on the software side and the tests themselves, Avramov concluded.

InfoQ interviewed Nikolay Avramov about performance testing.

InfoQ: How would you define performance testing?

Nikolay Avramov: Performance Testing is about asserting the system works efficiently and meets the expectations in terms of reliability, speed, responsiveness, and ability to withstand peak loads.

This type of testing can be done on multiple layers of the system to uncover different problems with the setup, configuration, client-side code and bottlenecks when exposed to higher loads.

Performance testing is not only about the server response time of our managed system. It’s also about the experience of the user while working with the software. Client-side performance tests can uncover issues with third-party systems or integrations that can harm the overall look and feel of the system.

InfoQ: How are performance testing and load testing related?

Avramov: Load testing is actually Performance Testing under simulated load. The goal is to capture performance metrics, while the system is near or over its expected load levels.

Load testing has its own sub-types like Spike, Soak, and Endurance testing. We can reconfigure parameters of the load applied to the system to simulate different real-world scenarios.

We can do performance testing even without applying load. This would be capturing the performance metrics from the server and from the web requests execution.

InfoQ: What’s your advice to teams that want to Strengthen the way that they are doing performance testing?

Avramov: There are many types of performance testing that can be performed, and they all could be beneficial if we know how to use them and what to expect. So my advice is to educate yourself on the purpose of each of these, sit together with the team and decide what is applicable in your case. The implementation comes next - it can be done in many different ways, but the most important work is done within the team.

Most of the teams that have performance tests focus only on load testing. My advice is to think about the users. Each point of your graph could be a potential customer we would lose because of lousy performance. Do not forget about the client-side performance during load testing.

Thu, 13 Oct 2022 04:34:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.infoq.com/news/2022/10/performance-testing-trends/
Killexams : Testing solutions

Martin Varga, Wireless and Custom Engineering Team Leader, Anritsu talks to Neil Tyler about the challenges associated with testing IoT devices.

Over the past few years intelligent connectivity has proliferated and the Internet of Things is seen as helping to accelerate the drive towards greater business insights boosted by the growing deployment of applications and the use of sensor-driven analytics.

Artificial intelligence models and edge computing architectures are being used across a wide group of sectors, linking IoT networks to the Cloud and providers such as Amazon Web Services and Azure are helping to reduce the cost of implementing edge-driven IoT.

The growth in users and the insights derived from the IoT are now extending into a whole new range of applications from the factory floor to better understanding and protecting the environment around us.

As this trend accelerates so companies will produce more IoT devices and, as they do so, they will need additional tools to test them. The growing impact of 5G on IoT technology is also expected to trigger an unprecedented growth in test & measurement.

When it comes to the IoT, network connectivity comprises of four core layers: the physical layer (sensors and controllers); network layer (gateways and communication units); data management layer (local or cloud services at the backend), and the application layer (software for user interaction), so it’ll be critical for devices to be able to exchange sensitive information easily before entering the market, so testing tools will be required to spot any defect in IoT devices. 

So, IoT testing is vital if companies are to validate the performance, reduce the security issues, and boost the functionality of their IoT devices.

The complexity and variability of IoT testing makes planning crucial when it comes to testing and a thorough testing process is recommended to ensure a quality IoT product and high customer satisfaction.

So, what are the issues confronting companies when it comes to IoT testing – is it the number of IoT platforms, the communications protocols, or security?

Addressing the testing issues

According to Martin Varga, Wireless and Custom Engineering Team Leader, Anritsu, “The IoT itself brings not just one communication technology but multiple technologies such as cellular (LTE, 5G) and short- range wireless technologies (WLAN, Bluetooth). Naturally, an IoT device must support both in order to provide various services and hence the major challenge when it comes to IoT testing is to test various aspects of each communication technology.

“Besides multiple communication technologies there is also the challenge of testing various layers in an IoT device. Where testing is focused on the physical layer of communication technology the aim is to ensure trouble-free connectivity; application layer testing is important to identify issues around the user-experience or to correct the functionality of services which IoT devices offer,” explained Varga.

When it comes to testing developers often think IoT technologies are already mature and are designed to provide trouble-free connectivity and communication.

According to Varga, while that may be true, “Each IoT device will have a unique design and deploy components differently. These will naturally influence each other and may also interfere with each other, so unless the IoT device is properly tested, you will never know how the design and the components used in a device work whatever the maturity of the technology.”

Varga also made the point that many developers think that testing is complicated, complex and expensive which he suggested was not the case.

“There are plenty of test and measurement systems that are able to provide easy, effective and cost balanced solutions which at the end of the day will save costs in the IoT device design process.”

There are certainly a wide range of issues that need to be considered when it comes to testing for the IoT, from RF design testing under specified conditions to performance measurements, such as power consumption and battery life, as well as compliance with applicable regulatory standards and operator-specific requirements before wireless devices can enter the market.

So, what makes for a good IoT test strategy?

“Simply put, a good IoT test strategy is just to have one,” Varga suggested. “That means you need to implement concrete testing and measurement in each phase of the IoT device’s design and development cycle. To develop an IoT device without any testing and measurement during the development cycle may result in costly mistakes with a device that does not work as expected or one that provides only partial or no service to the end user.”

Varga also made the point that it is important to differentiate between development IoT testing and production testing.

“The key difference is in the speed of measurement. IoT testing in the development phase usually requires full simulation of the network and involves the protocol stack for signalling which requires time to establish communication links for measurement.

“Manufacturing testing ensures products are of the highest quality, but this requires fast and accurate measurement hence production line testing does not involve protocol stack and signalling to establish an active communication link between IoT devices and the test instrument.

“Production line test works purely in the non-signalling mode where devices either transmit certain waveform signals and the test instrument measures it, or the test instrument transmits certain waveform signals and the IoT device measures the received signal.”

IoT test equipment can be categorised as cellular test equipment supporting cellular technologies like 5G, 4G, 3G and 2G and short range wireless equipment that supports technologies like Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, explained Varga.

“This type of equipment usually serves as a network or device simulator to test the IoT device to correct measurement states using protocol stack signalling and perform measurements.

“Such an operation naturally requires the setting of various parameters which makes measurement more complex, however on the other side measurements are done in real life conditions making sure that IoT devices will work correctly in commercial deployment and use. Another type of test equipment is focused on non-signalling testing where only the physical layer is tested without engagement with the higher layers of the protocol or application. Such measurements deliver less complex parametrisation and fast speed of measurements, although they are measuring only a limited part of the whole IoT device and so could leave some nasty surprises in terms of performance and operation once the IoT device is deployed and is use,” Varga warned.

The best types of IoT test equipment should offer multiple measurement types such as RF or/and application type measurements, according to Varga.

“It also should offer enough accuracy and quality in signal generation and analyses to accurately measure the performance of an IoT device,” said Varga. “Easy parametrisation and intuitive operation are also important factors. IoT test equipment needs to offer effective simulation and measurement capabilities where the developer has an environment under full control, which will enable them to verify and measure expected behaviour and performance through the whole development cycle so there are no delays caused by having to re-design or fix design faults.

“Pre-compliance testing before going to full certification will save time and money and accelerate the commercial launch of an IoT device.”

According to Varga, set up time is important in production line testing where speed of measurement is critical as well as capacity, due to the high number of devices that will be manufactured. He suggested that allowing parallel testing of multiple devices simultaneously would increase capacity and overall production line volume.

“Anritsu is able to offer multi-technology high volume production line test solutions allowing parallel testing of multiple devices with high levels of accuracy, but we are also able to offer other test and measurement solutions for cellular and short range wireless IoT devices, whether used in prototyping, design or development.

“Our solutions come with unique functions and are both easy and quick to set up, delivering effective and complex measurements.”

Critically, it’s important that companies like Anritsu understand the needs of engineers and developers who perform or require various types of measurement.

“The technology itself, whether it is cellular or short-range wireless, brings a certain level of complexity in terms of the measurement environment setup. Therefore, engineers need test equipment that is easy, intuitive, and provides a stable measurement setup to bridge the complexity of the technology and to deliver better and more understandable test results.

“While Anritsu is a test and measurement company it is also, and has to be, a partner for all its customers.”

Mon, 10 Oct 2022 23:02:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.newelectronics.co.uk/content/features/testing-solutions
Killexams : Reliable Continuous Testing Requires Automation

Automation makes it possible to build a reliable continuous testing process that covers the functional and non-functional requirements of the software. Preferably this automation should be done from the beginning of product development to enable quick release and delivery of software and early feedback from the users.

Alexander Velinov spoke about continuous testing and automation at QA Challenge Accepted 2022.

We see more and more organizations trying to adopt the DevOps mindset and way of working. Velinov stated that software engineers, including the QA engineers, have to care not only about how they develop, test, and deliver their software, but also about how they maintain and Strengthen their live products. They have to think more and more about the end user.

Velinov mentioned that a significant requirement is and has always been to deliver software solutions quickly to production, safely, and securely. That’s impacting the continuous testing, as the QAs have to adapt their processes to rely mainly on automation for quick and early feedback, he said. They also have to develop and introduce more automated validations like performance, security, and accessibility, he argued.

Automated testing in the continuous delivery process has always been the key to delivering quickly and with high confidence, Velinov said; we cannot respond to the market needs competitively if we don’t have a continuous testing process in place.

Velinov advised to start building all the repetitive and reliable processes sooner rather than later, preferably at the beginning of their product development:

It requires a great level of discipline where the team can simultaneously complete the development of both features and the required automated tests. It’s not an easy thing to do, but in the end, it will make a difference and enable the quick release process.

Of course, to deploy with confidence requires having a good and mature delivery pipeline, Velinov concluded.

InfoQ interviewed Alexander Velinov about continuous testing and automation.

InfoQ: What are the trends that are impacting continuous testing in the enterprise world?

Alexander Velinov: Nowadays we see more and more enterprises trying to solve complex issues with their products. A lot of companies are migrating to microservices, micro-frontends, and as a whole to an event-driven architecture, so that they can decouple their code, manage it in smaller chunks, and Strengthen the maintainability, development, and delivery.

All this requires a very good level of automation, and this automation is now part of every single step in the process of development, testing, delivery, and operations.

InfoQ: What’s your view on continuous testing? What’s needed, and why?

Velinov: I’ve worked with organizations that needed months to deliver new relatively simple features for their live products. A high percentage of this time was spent on the testing process, which was taking weeks, due to a lack of proper automation testing coverage of both functional and non-functional requirements. The mature automated delivery process and pipelines were also partially or completely missing. These organizations typically were losing competitive advantage and some market share, because of this.

InfoQ: What’s your advice for building mature delivery pipelines?

Velinov: Maturity comes with time and experience. But implementing most functional and non-functional tests as part of the delivery pipelines helps you get closer.

Of course, this is not enough. I know companies that have a lot of automated jobs, but don’t have the continuous process set up. My recommendation is to identify your must-have tests and checks for each environment (try shifting to the left of course) and enforce them in your pipeline (fail your pipeline if the corresponding tests/scans are failing).

Prevent deploying to a higher environment without having a 100% pass rate of your automated test if your quality gates are not met, if you have a performance degradation, or if you have new security vulnerabilities and issues. In time, this will make your process mature and will help you release with confidence.

Sat, 08 Oct 2022 07:49:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.infoq.com/news/2022/10/continuous-testing-automation/
Killexams : Global Efficacy Testing Market to Reach $866.3 Million by 2027

ReportLinker

Abstract: What’s New for 2022?? Global competitiveness and key competitor percentage market shares. Market presence across multiple geographies - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial.

New York, Oct. 13, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Global Efficacy Testing Industry" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p05798446/?utm_source=GNW

Online interactive peer-to-peer collaborative bespoke updates

Access to our digital archives and MarketGlass Research Platform

Complimentary updates for one yearGlobal Efficacy Testing Market to Reach $866.3 Million by 2027
- In the changed post COVID-19 business landscape, the global market for Efficacy Testing estimated at US$425.4 Million in the year 2020, is projected to reach a revised size of US$866.3 Million by 2027, growing at a CAGR of 10.7% over the analysis period 2020-2027. Consumables, one of the segments analyzed in the report, is projected to record a 11.4% CAGR and reach US$503.4 Million by the end of the analysis period. Taking into account the ongoing post pandemic recovery, growth in the Instruments segment is readjusted to a revised 9.6% CAGR for the next 7-year period.
- The U.S. Market is Estimated at $132.2 Million, While China is Forecast to Grow at 12.3% CAGR
- The Efficacy Testing market in the U.S. is estimated at US$132.2 Million in the year 2020. China, the world`s second largest economy, is forecast to reach a projected market size of US$118.4 Million by the year 2027 trailing a CAGR of 12.3% over the analysis period 2020 to 2027. Among the other noteworthy geographic markets are Japan and Canada, each forecast to grow at 8% and 9.9% respectively over the 2020-2027 period. Within Europe, Germany is forecast to grow at approximately 10.4% CAGR. Led by countries such as Australia, India, and South Korea, the market in Asia-Pacific is forecast to reach US$78.1 Million by the year 2027.
- Services Segment to Record 10.1% CAGR
- In the global Services segment, USA, Canada, Japan, China and Europe will drive the 10.1% CAGR estimated for this segment. These regional markets accounting for a combined market size of US$50.9 Million in the year 2020 will reach a projected size of US$98.1 Million by the close of the analysis period. China will remain among the fastest growing in this cluster of regional markets. Latin America will expand at a 11.2% CAGR through the analysis period.

Select Competitors (Total 70 Featured)
Eurofins Scientific SE
Merck KGaA
WuXi AppTec
SGS S.A
bioMérieux
Charles River Laboratories Inc.
Pacific Biolabs Inc.

Read the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p05798446/?utm_source=GNW

I. METHODOLOGY

II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. MARKET OVERVIEW
Influencer Market Insights
Efficacy Testing - Global Key Competitors Percentage Market
Share in 2022 (E)
Competitive Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial for
Players Worldwide in 2022 (E)
A Prelude to Efficacy Testing
Global Efficacy Testing Market Poised for Steady Growth
US Dominates, Asia-Pacific to Witness Rapid Growth
Anti-microbial/Preservative Efficacy Testing to Register Rapid
Growth
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing Dominates

2. FOCUS ON SELECT PLAYERS

3. MARKET TRENDS & DRIVERS
Rising Importance of Preservative Efficacy Testing
Challenge Organisms
Testing Techniques
Challenges
Conclusion
Preservation Technique for Paraben-Free Cosmetics
Development of Alternative Techniques of Preservation
Adoption of Hurdle Technology
Preservative Systems in Liquid Dietary Supplements
Preservative Efficacy Test (PET) for Cosmetics
Efficacy Testing for Cosmetics
Techniques Employed for Demonstrating Effectiveness of
Disinfectants
Categorization of Test Types
Surface Testing
Additional Tests Mandated for the Pharmaceuticals Industry by
the USP
Contact Time Defined
Strong Rise in Pharmaceutical Sales to Drive Demand for
Efficacy Testing
Global Prescription Drug Sales (In US$ Billion) for the Years
2017, 2019, 2021, 2023 & 2025
Rapid Growth of Generic Drugs Drives Demand for Pharma Efficacy
Testing
Global Generic Drugs Market Size (in $ Billion) for the Years
2016, 2019, 2020 & 2025
Aging Population Propels the Demand for Ethicacy Testing in
End-use Applications
Global Aging Population Statistics for the 65+ Age Group in
Million by Geographic Region for the Years 2019, 2025, 2035
and 2050
Increasing Healthcare Expenditure to Foster Growth
World Healthcare Expenditure (In US$ Trillion) for the Years
2016 & 2018
Persistent Increase in Pharmaceutical R&D Bodes Well for
Efficacy Testing
Rising Incidence of Chronic Diseases Fuels Demand for Efficacy
Testing
Global Cancer Incidence by Region: 2018
Global Cancer Incidence by Type: 2018
Fatalities by Heart Conditions: Estimated Percentage Breakdown
for Cardiovascular Disease, Ischemic Heart Disease, Stroke,
and Others
Rising Diabetes Prevalence Presents Opportunity for Cell
Harvesting: Number of Adults (20-79) with Diabetes
(in Millions) by Region for 2017 and 2045

4. GLOBAL MARKET PERSPECTIVE
Table 1: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Consumables by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 2: World Historic Review for Consumables by Geographic
Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin
America, Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis
of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and
% CAGR

Table 3: World 15-Year Perspective for Consumables by
Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa for Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 4: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Instruments by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 5: World Historic Review for Instruments by Geographic
Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin
America, Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis
of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and
% CAGR

Table 6: World 15-Year Perspective for Instruments by
Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa for Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 7: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Services by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 8: World Historic Review for Services by Geographic
Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin
America, Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis
of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and
% CAGR

Table 9: World 15-Year Perspective for Services by Geographic
Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for USA, Canada,
Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East
and Africa for Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 10: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing by Geographic Region - USA,
Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 11: World Historic Review for Disinfectant Efficacy
Testing by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 12: World 15-Year Perspective for Disinfectant Efficacy
Testing by Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value
Sales for USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific,
Latin America, Middle East and Africa for Years 2012, 2021 &
2027

Table 13: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing by Geographic Region - USA,
Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 14: World Historic Review for Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 15: World 15-Year Perspective for Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing by Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value
Sales for USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific,
Latin America, Middle East and Africa for Years 2012, 2021 &
2027

Table 16: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing by Geographic Region - USA,
Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 17: World Historic Review for Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 18: World 15-Year Perspective for Pharmaceutical
Manufacturing by Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of
Value Sales for USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe,
Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa for Years
2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 19: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products by Geographic Region - USA,
Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 20: World Historic Review for Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China,
Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa
Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 21: World 15-Year Perspective for Cosmetics & Personal
Care Products by Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of
Value Sales for USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe,
Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa for Years
2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 22: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Medical Devices by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan,
China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and
Africa Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 23: World Historic Review for Medical Devices by
Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe,
Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 24: World 15-Year Perspective for Medical Devices by
Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa for Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 25: World accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan,
China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and
Africa Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 26: World Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Geographic Region - USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe,
Asia-Pacific, Latin America, Middle East and Africa Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 27: World 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
USA, Canada, Japan, China, Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America,
Middle East and Africa Markets for Years 2012, 2021 & 2027
Consumables Segment Leads the Market

III. MARKET ANALYSIS

UNITED STATES
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in the United States for 2022 (E)
Table 28: USA accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 29: USA Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Segment -
Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets - Independent
Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through
2019 and % CAGR

Table 30: USA 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 31: USA accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 32: USA Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 33: USA 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant Efficacy
Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the Years 2012,
2021 & 2027

Table 34: USA accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 35: USA Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 36: USA 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

CANADA
Table 37: Canada accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 38: Canada Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 39: Canada 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 40: Canada accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 41: Canada Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 42: Canada 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 43: Canada accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 44: Canada Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 45: Canada 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

JAPAN
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in Japan for 2022 (E)
Table 46: Japan accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 47: Japan Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Segment -
Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets - Independent
Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through
2019 and % CAGR

Table 48: Japan 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 49: Japan accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 50: Japan Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 51: Japan 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 52: Japan accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 53: Japan Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 54: Japan 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

CHINA
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in China for 2022 (E)
Table 55: China accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 56: China Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Segment -
Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets - Independent
Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through
2019 and % CAGR

Table 57: China 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 58: China accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 59: China Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 60: China 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 61: China accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 62: China Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 63: China 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

EUROPE
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in Europe for 2022 (E)
Table 64: Europe accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 65: Europe Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 66: Europe 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 67: Europe accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 68: Europe Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 69: Europe 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 70: Europe accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 71: Europe Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 72: Europe 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 73: Europe accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Geographic Region - France, Germany, Italy,
UK, Spain, Russia and Rest of Europe Markets - Independent
Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2020 through
2027 and % CAGR

Table 74: Europe Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Geographic Region - France, Germany, Italy, UK, Spain, Russia
and Rest of Europe Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 75: Europe 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Geographic Region - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
France, Germany, Italy, UK, Spain, Russia and Rest of Europe
Markets for Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

FRANCE
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in France for 2022 (E)
Table 76: France accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 77: France Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 78: France 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 79: France accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 80: France Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 81: France 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 82: France accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 83: France Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 84: France 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

GERMANY
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in Germany for 2022 (E)
Table 85: Germany accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 86: Germany Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 87: Germany 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 88: Germany accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 89: Germany Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 90: Germany 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 91: Germany accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 92: Germany Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 93: Germany 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

ITALY
Table 94: Italy accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 95: Italy Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Segment -
Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets - Independent
Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through
2019 and % CAGR

Table 96: Italy 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 97: Italy accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 98: Italy Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 99: Italy 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 100: Italy accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 101: Italy Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 102: Italy 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

UNITED KINGDOM
Efficacy Testing Market Presence - Strong/Active/Niche/Trivial -
Key Competitors in the United Kingdom for 2022 (E)
Table 103: UK accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 104: UK Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Segment -
Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets - Independent
Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years 2012 through
2019 and % CAGR

Table 105: UK 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 106: UK accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 107: UK Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 108: UK 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant Efficacy
Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the Years 2012,
2021 & 2027

Table 109: UK accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 110: UK Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 111: UK 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics & Personal Care
Products and Medical Devices for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

SPAIN
Table 112: Spain accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Segment - Consumables, Instruments and
Services - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand
for the Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 113: Spain Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Consumables, Instruments and Services Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years
2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 114: Spain 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Segment - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Consumables,
Instruments and Services for the Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 115: Spain accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Type - Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and
Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing - Independent Analysis of Annual
Sales in US$ Thousand for the Years 2020 through 2027 and %
CAGR

Table 116: Spain Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by Type -
Disinfectant Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy
Testing Markets - Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$
Thousand for Years 2012 through 2019 and % CAGR

Table 117: Spain 15-Year Perspective for Efficacy Testing by
Type - Percentage Breakdown of Value Sales for Disinfectant
Efficacy Testing and Antimicrobial Efficacy Testing for the
Years 2012, 2021 & 2027

Table 118: Spain accurate Past, Current & Future Analysis for
Efficacy Testing by Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing,
Cosmetics & Personal Care Products and Medical Devices -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for the
Years 2020 through 2027 and % CAGR

Table 119: Spain Historic Review for Efficacy Testing by
Application - Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, Cosmetics &
Personal Care Products and Medical Devices Markets -
Independent Analysis of Annual Sales in US$ Thousand for Years

Please contact our Customer Support Center to get the complete Table of Contents
Read the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p05798446/?utm_source=GNW

About Reportlinker
ReportLinker is an award-winning market research solution. Reportlinker finds and organizes the latest industry data so you get all the market research you need - instantly, in one place.

__________________________

CONTACT: Clare: clare@reportlinker.com US: (339)-368-6001 Intl: +1 339-368-6001
Wed, 12 Oct 2022 23:09:00 -0500 en-US text/html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/global-efficacy-testing-market-reach-110600023.html
Killexams : University Testing Center Killexams : Testing Center

Appointment availability at all UNG Testing Centers varies by campus location. Our testing center staff are following strict cleaning regimens after each test admission session that includes disinfecting all items and surfaces that candidates encounter. Please review our testing center’s Procedures and FAQs prior to your scheduled appointment for information on what to expect during your visit. With safety measures in place, we are working together to ensure a clean and hygienic testing environment.

Mask Update: Individuals are not required to wear face coverings in the Testing Center. Face coverings are still permitted and may be inspected during check-in procedures.

Please be mindful: Testing staff may use latex free gloves when handling test materials. If you have an allergy that may impact your testing experience, please notify testing staff of your concern.

The mission of the Testing Center at the University of North Georgia (UNG) is to provide a professional testing environment for the campus and community that enables test takers to perform at their maximum ability and provide services to assist students, faculty, staff and the community in maintaining the university’s goal of academic excellence and leadership.  In order to provide professional standards in testing services that reflect positively on the university, the Testing Center maintains membership with and adheres to the National College Testing Association (NCTA) Professional Standards and Guidelines.

BBlue Ridge

DDahlonega

GGainesville

OOconee

BBlue Ridge

DDahlonega

GGainesville

OOconee

Establishing Connection...

Thu, 13 Aug 2020 22:30:00 -0500 en text/html https://ung.edu/testing/
Killexams : Testing Services

We provide testing services and resources to the NIU community. If you're new to NIU, you'll take tests to help place you into courses that match your skill levels. You can also take exams to show your knowledge of certain subjects, giving you course credit or allowing you to skip certain classes.

We also:

Sat, 28 Apr 2012 08:00:00 -0500 en text/html https://www.niu.edu/testing/index.shtml
Killexams : The ‘Age of P.C.R. Prosperity’? China’s Covid-Testing Strategy Comes Under Strain. No result found, try new keyword!By testing every citizen several times a week, the authorities hoped to isolate cases more quickly and avoid future crippling lockdowns. But in accurate months that approach has failed to slow some ... Wed, 12 Oct 2022 08:07:00 -0500 text/html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/business/china-covid-testing.html Killexams : What is the window period for HIV testing?

Key points

  • This page gives information on how soon HIV can be detected by a blood test and when you can be confident in the result.
  • The window period of modern laboratory HIV tests is 45 days.
  • The window period of rapid, point-of-care tests and self-tests is 90 days.

The window period refers to the time after infection and before seroconversion, during which markers of infection (p24 antigen and antibodies) are still absent or too scarce to be detectable. Tests cannot always detect HIV infection during the window period.

All tests have a window period, which varies from test to test. It also depends on the specimen that is being tested: window periods are usually reported based on a demo of blood plasma, but are longer when the specimen tested is fingerprick blood or oral fluid.

(Plasma is the colourless fluid part of blood, separated from whole blood using laboratory equipment. Fingerprick blood is produced by pricking the finger with a lancet, whereas oral fluid is obtained by swabbing the gums.)

There are two key questions to ask about a specific HIV test: 

  • How soon after someone is exposed to HIV can the test detect whether they have HIV? (Some, but not all, infections may be detected at this stage).
  • How soon after exposure to HIV can an individual be confident that a negative test indicates they do not have HIV? 

The information given in UK testing guidelines about window periods is based on answers to the second question – specifically, how long after exposure to HIV 99% of infections will be detected by a specific type of test. At this stage, it is highly likely that a negative result is accurate.

How long are the window periods of different HIV tests?

It is hard to say exactly how long the window period lasts, as there are variations between individuals and it is a difficult course to research (recently infected people would need to know exactly when they were exposed to HIV and then deliver multiple blood samples over the following days and weeks).

Nonetheless, a study by Dr Kevin Delaney and colleagues calculated window periods for a range of HIV testing assays. All these analyses were based on plasma samples. Window periods are likely to be several days longer when testing samples of fingerprick blood or of oral fluid, as will be normal when using rapid, point-of-care tests and self-testing devices. Unfortunately, precise figures for how much longer the window periods are have not yet been published.

NAM aidsmap's Matthew Hodson explains about window periods for HIV testing.

The researchers’ analysis confirms that fourth-generation laboratory tests (which detect both antibodies and p24 antigen) detect HIV infections between one and three weeks earlier than older antibody-only tests. Moreover, their data suggest that some countries’ guidelines which recommend retesting 90 days after a possible exposure to HIV are more cautious than they need to be.

A fourth-generation laboratory test is recommended in UK and US guidelines. It uses a demo of blood plasma or serum and can detect immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies and p24 viral antigen (a protein contained in HIV's viral core that can be detected sooner than antibodies). Commonly used tests of this type include Abbott Architect HIV Ag/Ab, GS Combo Ag/Ab EIA and Siemens Combo HIV Ag-Ab.

UK guidelines state that 45 days is the window period for fourth-generation laboratory tests.

A fourth-generation rapid test is available (Determine HIV Early Detect or Determine HIV-1/2). While results for this assay when testing plasma were broadly similar to those of equivalent laboratory tests, the window period is likely to be several days longer when testing fingerprick blood, as the test is normally used.

A few third-generation rapid, point-of-care tests are available. They can detect immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies. Examples include the INSTI HIV-1/HIV-2 and Uni-Gold Recombigen HIV tests. The estimated window period for INSTI when testing plasma are as follows:

However, those estimates were based on testing plasma. In practice, tests are usually done on fingerprick blood and the window period is likely to be several days longer.

UK guidelines state that 90 days is the window period for all rapid, point-of-care tests.

Third-generation laboratory tests are no longer recommended for use. They can detect immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies and immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies, but not p24 viral antigen. Their window periods are similar to those of the INSTI third generation rapid test (plasma samples), but a little shorter (median 23 days).

UK guidelines state that 60 days is the window period for third-generation laboratory tests.

Many rapid, point-of-care tests are described as second generation. They can detect immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, but not immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies or p24 viral antigen. As these two substances are detectable sooner after HIV infection than IgG antibodies, second-generation tests have longer window periods. Examples include OraQuick Advance Rapid HIV 1/2, Clearview HIV 1/2 STAT-PACK and SURE CHECK HIV 1/2.

However, those estimates were based on testing plasma. In practice, tests are usually done on fingerprick blood or oral fluid and the window period is likely to be several days longer.

UK guidelines state that 90 days is the window period for all rapid, point-of-care tests.

Glossary

window period

In HIV testing, the period of time after infection and before seroconversion during which markers of infection are still absent or too scarce to be detectable. All tests have a window period, the length of which depends on the marker of infection (HIV RNA, p24 antigen or HIV antibodies) and the specific test used. During the window period, a person can have a negative result on an HIV test despite having HIV.

antibody

A protein substance (immunoglobulin) produced by the immune system in response to a foreign organism. Many diagnostic tests for HIV detect the presence of antibodies to HIV in blood.

plasma

The fluid portion of the blood.

immunoglobulin

Another name for antibodies. An antibody is a protein substance produced by the immune system in response to a foreign organism (such as bacteria, virus or parasite).

point-of-care test

A test in which all stages, including memorizing the result, can be conducted in a doctor’s office or a community setting, without specialised laboratory equipment. Sometimes also described as a rapid test.

No self-testing devices were included in this study. However, most self-tests are modified versions of rapid, point-of-care test kits that were originally designed for healthcare professionals. Most are based on second- generation tests, so are likely to have relatively long window periods. A few, including the INSTI HIV Self Test, are based on a third-generation test.

Similarly, self-sampling was not included. In the UK, this usually involve the user sending a demo of fingerprick blood to be tested in a laboratory with a fourth-generation antibody/antigen test. Plasma is extracted from the demo using centrifugation. In theory, the test will be as accurate with plasma from a self-collected demo of fingerprick blood as from venous blood, including in relation to acute (recent) infection.

Are these figures always accurate?

In some situations, these figures should be interpreted with caution:

Mon, 14 Dec 2020 13:39:00 -0600 en text/html https://www.aidsmap.com/about-hiv/what-window-period-hiv-testing
2B0-104 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List