{
  "example_kind": "original synthetic manual planning case",
  "slug": "pairwise-test-plan-audit",
  "title": "Inspect pairwise coverage in a small test plan",
  "scenario": "Synthetic planning case: An external toy test plan has three binary factors A,B,C. Its four rows are 000,011,101 and 110. Each pair of factors should include 00,01,10 and 11.",
  "layout": "evaluation",
  "dataset": {
    "heading": "Inspect the invented case records",
    "headers": [
      "Row",
      "Factor A",
      "Factor B",
      "Factor C"
    ],
    "rows": [
      [
        "1",
        "0",
        "0",
        "0"
      ],
      [
        "2",
        "0",
        "1",
        "1"
      ],
      [
        "3",
        "1",
        "0",
        "1"
      ],
      [
        "4",
        "1",
        "1",
        "0"
      ]
    ]
  },
  "derivation": "Pairs AB,AC and BC each contain four value combinations across these rows:3×4=12 pair obligations. The full binary triple space contains 2³=8 combinations, of which this plan lists four.",
  "result": "All twelve required pair-value combinations appear in the four-row plan. Four of eight full triples are present, so pairwise coverage is not exhaustive triple coverage or proof of fault detection.",
  "boundary": "This verifies a fully inspectable small combination plan, rather than giving a generic regression checklist.",
  "limitations": "The example is an external test-design worksheet. It does not configure a test runner or establish complete assurance.",
  "sources": [
    "nist"
  ],
  "tasks": [
    [
      "Define the actual factors and values",
      "Test planner",
      "A,B,C are three declared binary factors, not undocumented product fields."
    ],
    [
      "Enumerate pair coverage",
      "Reviewer",
      "Every pair has 00,01,10 and 11 in the authored rows."
    ],
    [
      "Retain higher-order limits",
      "Quality lead",
      "Missing triples and required targeted tests remain separate planning decisions."
    ]
  ],
  "faqs": [
    [
      "Does pairwise coverage test every triple?",
      "No. This plan has four of the eight triples."
    ],
    [
      "Does full pair coverage prove no defect remains?",
      "No. Higher-order interactions, state, timing and omitted requirements can still matter."
    ]
  ],
  "method_references": [
    {
      "id": "nist",
      "title": "NIST combinatorial testing",
      "url": "https://www.nist.gov/publications/combinatorial-testing",
      "scope": "Combination-coverage context. Invented review/state examples do not prove full fault coverage, certification or product behavior."
    }
  ]
}