Salesforce Exam ANC-201 Topic 2 Question 49 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's ANC-201 exam

Question #: 49
Topic #: 2

A CRM Analytics consultant is reviewing results from an Einstein Discovery story with a business user. They agree with the findings but notice that none of the fields used in the story have a correlation value greater than 4%. The client is now concerned that the model

may not be good enough to deploy.

Which action should the consultant take?

AA Identify additional data that may have a stronger relationship with the outcome variable.

BEdit the model accuracy settings and rerun it to evaluate the correlation.

CUse the appropriate algorithm and update the model.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: A

by Timothy at Oct 24, 2024, 02:00 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium ANC-201 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Caitlin

5 months ago

Hmm, I'd say a combination of A and C. Get better data and try different algorithms. Kinda like a cuWynellry expert - can't make a delicious dish with mediocre ingredients!

upvoted 0 times

Gerald

3 months ago

That sounds like a solid plan. Better data and smarter algorithms could definitely improve the model.

upvoted 0 times

...

Melinda

4 months ago

That makes sense. Better data and smarter algorithms could definitely improve the model.

upvoted 0 times

...

Becky

4 months ago

C) Use the appropriate algorithm and update the model.

upvoted 0 times

...

Tayna

4 months ago

C) Use the appropriate algorithm and update the model.

upvoted 0 times

...

Chantay

4 months ago

B) Edit the model accuracy settings and rerun it to evaluate the correlation.

upvoted 0 times

...

Dorathy

4 months ago

A) Identify additional data that may have a stronger relationship with the outcome variable.

upvoted 0 times

...

Denny

4 months ago

A) Identify additional data that may have a stronger relationship with the outcome variable.

upvoted 0 times

...

Nobuko

5 months ago

I'd go for option B. Tweaking the model settings could unlock hidden insights that the consultant might have missed. Who knows, the correlation might just be higher than it seems.

upvoted 0 times

Reed

4 months ago

Business User: Agreed, let's give it a go and see if the model improves.

upvoted 0 times

...

Chandra

4 months ago

Consultant: It's worth a shot to uncover any hidden insights.

upvoted 0 times

...

Wynell

5 months ago

Business User: Sounds like a good idea, let's see if the correlation improves.

upvoted 0 times

...

Jules

5 months ago

Consultant: Let's try editing the model accuracy settings and rerun it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Wynell

5 months ago

Option C sounds promising. The consultant should try a different algorithm to see if that improves the model performance. Sometimes the default algo just doesn't cut it.

upvoted 0 times

...

Glory

5 months ago

Definitely option A. The model needs better input variables to make accurate predictions. Increasing the model accuracy settings won't help if the core data is weak.

upvoted 0 times

Ulysses

5 months ago

User 4: Updating the model with appropriate algorithm could also help in this situation.

upvoted 0 times

...

An

5 months ago

User 3: Let's focus on improving the input variables for better predictions.

upvoted 0 times

...

Salome

5 months ago

User 2: Agreed, increasing the model accuracy settings won't help if the core data is weak.

upvoted 0 times

...

Santos

5 months ago

User 1: I think we should identify additional data that may have a stronger relationship with the outcome variable.

upvoted 0 times

...

Fairy

5 months ago

I agree, we need stronger relationships for better results.

upvoted 0 times

...

Joni

6 months ago

I think the consultant should go for option A. We can't make a good model without strong predictors. The client is right to be concerned about the low correlation.

upvoted 0 times